APPLICATION NUMBER: WP/18/00403/OUT
APPLICATION SITE: LAND KNOWN AS WEYMOUTH PENINSULA, THE ESPLANADE, WEYMOUTH
PROPOSAL: Demolition of existing buildings (excluding Pavilion Theatre and Jurassic Skyline viewing tower) and redevelopment for a mix of leisure and commercial uses including hotels, mixed use pub/diner with guest accommodation, restaurants and cafes, indoor leisure buildings, public car parking, commercial fishing and mixed-use harbour buildings and harbour operation and storage areas together with associated landscaping, street furniture, structures, open space and access to and within the site. Outline Application with details of Access, all other matters reserved.
APPLICANT: Weymouth and Portland Borough Council
CASE OFFICER: Clare McCarthy
WARD MEMBER(S): Councillor Francis Drake, Councillor Jason Osborne, Councillor Tia Roos
RECOMMENDATION SUMMARY: Delegate to the Head of Planning to approve subject to completion of a s106 legal agreement to secure sustainable transport contributions and marine ecology mitigation and enhancements.
1.0 DESCRIPTION OF SITE
1.1 Weymouth Peninsula is a highly visible mass of land which projects into the English Channel at the mouth of the River Wey. It forms the gateway to the Weymouth harbour, with Brewers Quay on Nothe Peninsula to the south and Custom House Quay alongside the Peninsula on the north. The Peninsula can be seen clearly from the World Heritage Coast, The Weymouth Esplanade, Custom House Quay and Nothe Peninsula.
1.2 The Peninsula lies to the south of the Esplanade seafront and to the north of Nothe Peninsula, with Nothe Fort Ancient Monument and Grade 2 * listed building at its eastern end. Access to the Peninsula by road and footpath is directly from the southern end of the Esplanade leading to a surface car park and turning area on the Peninsula itself. Bus services currently stop at King’s Statue on the Esplanade and Weymouth Train Station is approx. twelve minute walk away.
1.3 The Peninsula has been extended several times and now has a site area of approximately 5 hectares consisting of man-made structure of 400m in length. In summary, the history of the Peninsula is as follows:
the original pile pier was constructed in the 1840s; The Peninsula was added to for the later Victorian tramway for passenger trains to Weymouth Quay station, to meet the Steam ships; and The Peninsula was substantially increased again in the 1970s to provide a ferry terminal and car parking, when the roll on roll off Ferries were in use carrying cars and passengers to the Channel Islands and Cherbourg.
1.4 Since the Ferry service terminated in 2015, the area has become underutilised and the ferry buildings have become redundant. The harbour walls are in need of repair, and the first section along Custom House Quay is currently the subject of a planning application. The key landmark buildings remaining in use on the Peninsula are the Pavilion Theatre rebuilt following a fire and opened in 1960, and the Jurassic Skyline Tower at its North-eastern corner, which marked the millennium.
1.5 The quayside of the Peninsula known as Weymouth Quay remains in use for fishing boats, angling and the mooring of boats. A ferry service also runs across the River Wey from the steps at Weymouth Quay across to North Quay. The Harbour is managed by Weymouth and Portland Borough Council as the Statutory Harbour Authority
1.6 The Esplanade, which is host to a renowned curved terrace, provides the setting for the Peninsula, and characterises Weymouth’s unique historic legacy as a seaside resort. Nearly all the buildings on the Esplanade are listed, and retain much of their Georgian and Victorian architectural style and detailing. Together the terraces form a cohesive linear group, with relatively consistent building heights and strong rhythmic vertical definitions provided by the windows and chimneys. No one structure dominates the terraces or overshadows the green backdrop of Nothe Fort and Peninsula.
1.7 The entrance to the Peninsula (referred to in some statutory consultee comments as ‘the neck’) lies within the Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area and the site is surrounded by World Heritage Coastline to north and south. The prominent Roundhouse Hotel and other Devonshire buildings at the neck of the Peninsula form the end of the curved Georgian Terracing on the Esplanade. There is a gap of approx. 80 metres between the Pavilion and the Roundhouse Hotel which offers views from Nothe Gardens through to the Esplanade and reciprocally from the Esplanade to the Nothe.
1.8 The site is identified as one of 5 key development sites in the Weymouth Town Centre Masterplan Supplementary Planning Document, a masterplan aimed at regenerating Weymouth Town Centre. The masterplan is discussed later in this report.
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF DEVELOPMENT
2.1 This application is an Outline Application for the demolition of existing modern harbour and ferry related buildings on the application site associated with the former ferry and tramway terminals, other than the ferry linkspan buildings. The Pavilion Theatre and the Jurassic Skyline buildings are the only leisure buildings to be retained on the application site. The application seeks outline permission for the redevelopment of the site to incorporate a mix of leisure and commercial uses. Illustrative plans are provided showing two hotels, three restaurants, two leisure buildings, car parking, enhanced landscaping and commercial fishing and harbour storage areas. The application seeks approval for the proposed access, with all other matters reserved.
2.2 The piled pleasure pier situated at the eastern end of the Peninsula, together with two 1930s buildings, (formerly public conveniences and bathing/diving club, recently used as a tearooms), remain outside the site boundary and do not form part of the current planning application.
2.3 A number of drawings and images have been submitted with the application to indicate how the site may be developed to incorporate the required mix of leisure and commercial uses. These documents include an illustrative site layout plan, an illustrative massing of buildings, a Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) in relation to heritage and a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) along with a landscape strategy report. All these plans and documents have been amended during the application process other than the illustrative site layout, which remains as submitted.
2.4 The scheme shown on the illustrative site layout plan and on the most recently submitted illustrative massing drawing shows flat roofed buildings comprising: An 11m high “Main Hotel” immediately to the east of the Pavilion Three, 10m high restaurants between the main Hotel and the Jurassic Skyline A large 10m high leisure unit on the eastern edge of the Peninsula A 10m high “Pub/Diner with Accommodation” in the gap between the Pavilion and the Devonshire Building, to the west of the Pavilion.
2.6 Importantly, the illustrative plans are just that, and no permission is sought to confirm building locations and/or design at this stage. What they do provide however is a context for imposing conditions to control heights and locations of buildings on the site, should the Committee be minded to do so.
2.5 The proposed development is of a mixed-use nature with a focus around recreation and leisure, indicatively showing a café, limited service hotel (100 rooms), boutique hotel (20 rooms) & restaurant, leisure units (which could include rock climbing, trampolining, adventure golf and children’s soft play area), a harbour building (which could include space for fisherman, business-
start up space and an information/learning centre for visitors) and an area for independent retailers to trade from (i.e. shipping containers).
2.7 During the course of the application other amended documents have also been submitted, including updated Transport Assessment and further survey work, Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage information, a revised Biodiversity Mitigation Plan and Addendum to the Landscape Visual Impact Assessment.
3.0 RELEVANT HISTORY
3.1 Prior to the recession in 2009 the Council had explored pre-application advice about the redevelopment of the Peninsula, including a replacement for the Pavilion Theatre, hotels commercial buildings and residential developments with associated marinas. Once the recession took hold the scale of the proposal no longer matched the market and an application was never progressed.
3.2 Since that time, the Council has progressed with its Local Plan, which was adopted in 2015. Policy WEY1 relates to all town centre developments and Policy WEY6 relates solely to the redevelopment of the Peninsula site. This was swiftly followed by a more detailed analysis of the town centre and Peninsula with the publication of the Weymouth Town Centre Masterplan Supplementary Planning Document (SPD), adopted by the Council in October 2015. This SPD document sets out a long term regeneration strategy for the town centre and includes a section with a comprehensive strategy for Weymouth Peninsula, based on identifying key objectives namely:
pedestrian public areas, public art and links to the town centre high quality, unique housing improve the harbour facilities for boats provision of strategic flood defence work mixed use activities focussed on café and restaurant, commercial and retail uses
3.3 The Ferry Service to the Channel Islands ceased in March 2015 and it has become clear that it is cost prohibitive for it to return in the foreseeable future. As a result, the Council has progressed towards a planning application based on the ideas of the Masterplan SPD. The only element of the SPD not being progressed at this stage is residential accommodation, due to housing being a more vulnerable use in relation to potential tidal and flooding issues, requiring costly flood prevention measures prior to development. The Council is therefore seeking to progress with a regeneration proposal to stimulate future investment on the Peninsula, which would not prevent residential development being reconsidered at a later stage through a separate planning application process.
3.4 A formal public consultation event was undertaken in March 2018 to help engage members of the public and inform the design evolution of the proposals. A
Statement of Community Engagement document has been submitted as part of this application.
3.5 A screening opinion in accordance with Regulation 5(5) of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Regulations) 2017 was undertaken in February 2018, which identified that the current proposals fall within Paragraph 10(b) of Schedule 2 the EIA regulations, as an urban development project because they include approximately 1.4ha of non-residential development. The screening assessment concluded that the proposed development is not likely to have significant environmental impacts subject to the mitigation being implemented in all the areas examined.
4.0 RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES:
4.1 The National Planning Policy Framework July 2018 contains the following sections which apply to the proposal under consideration
1. Introduction 2. Achieving sustainable development 4. Decision-making 6. Building a strong, competitive economy 7. Ensuring the vitality of town centre 8. Promoting healthy and safe communities 9. Promoting Sustainable transport 10. Supporting high quality communications 11. Making effective use of land 12. Achieving well-designed places 14. Meeting the challenge of climate, flooding and coastal change 15. Conserving and enhancing the natural environment 16. Conserving and enhancing the historic environment
Decision taking: Para 38 - Local planning authorities should approach decisions on proposed development in a positive and creative way. They should use the full range of planning tools available, including brownfield registers and permission in principle, and work proactively with applicants to secure developments that will improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. Decision-makers at every level should seek to approve applications for sustainable development where possible.
4.1 West Dorset, Weymouth & Portland Local Plan 2015
Relevant policies from the Local Plan are: Intel Presumption in favour of Sustainable Development ENV1 Landscape, Seascape and Sites of Geological Interest ENV2 Wildlife and Habitats ENV4 Heritage Assets
ENV5 Flood Risk ENV7 Coastal Erosion and Land Instability ENV9 Pollution and Contaminated Land ENV10 The Landscape and Townscape Setting ENV11 The Pattern of Streets and Spaces ENV12 The Design and Positioning of Buildings ENV15 Efficient and Appropriate Use of Land ENV16 Amenity SUS2 Distribution of Development ECON1 Provision of Employment ECON3 Protection of Other Employment Sites ECON4 Retail and Town Centre Sites ECON5 Tourism Attractions and Facilities ECON6 Built Tourist Accommodation COM1 Making sure new Development makes suitable provision for Community Infrastructure COM7 Creating a safe and efficient Transport Network COM8 Transport Interchanges and Community Travel Exchanges COM10 The Provision of Utilities Service Infrastructure WEY1 Weymouth Town Centre Strategy WEY6 Ferry Peninsula
Policy WEY6. FERRY PENINSULA i) The ferry peninsula should be re-developed to include leisure / tourist-related uses, supported by complementary town centre uses and which may include housing, and including provision for the continued operation of the ferry service. ii) A comprehensive scheme is required for the site which complements the scale, mass and rhythm of the terraces along the Esplanade so as to create a coherent seafront and does not detract from the dominance of the Nothe Fort in views from the North. An elegant landmark building may be permitted.
4.2 Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPD) - Weymouth Town Centre Masterplan
4.2.1 The Weymouth Town Centre Masterplan SPD provides a detailed planning strategy to guide development and investment in Weymouth Town Centre for 10 years from its adoption by Full Council on 4th June 2015. It provides site-specific policy, supporting the policy framework of the local plan, guidance for the consideration of planning applications in the town centre area and a steer to prospective developers about the sort of proposals that will be encouraged.
4.2.2 The SPD requires a full detailed assessment of the capacity of the Peninsula site, to demonstrate that a viable scheme can be accommodated with a mix of uses including residential.
4.2.3 Further work in the form of a traffic and movement study, public realm strategy and individual site development briefs, together with improved flood defences were all identified as necessary.
4.2.4 The Masterplan proposes the removal of the Pavilion Theatre and introduction of public open space in its place. It shows a strategic network of walkways between potential buildings on the site and a sustainable transport strategy with removal of the majority of parking. It also includes possible sites for buildings including one between the Pavilion and the Devonshire Buildings. An element of residential development is also promoted to assist with viability for supporting a range of leisure uses.
4.2.5 The Masterplan SPD for the Peninsula remains adopted policy, with its key objectives to provide high quality pedestrian public areas with art, sculpture, landscape and linkages to the town centre, improved harbour facilities, flood defence works, harbourside facilities for local fishing industry and mixed use activities focussed on café and restaurant commercial and retail uses.
4.2.6 Elements of this Masterplan have been overtaken by the decision of the Council to retain the Pavilion theatre and support it in its current position on the site. In June 2017, WPBC Management Committee agreed an update to the Weymouth Peninsula Masterplan to incorporate harbour integration into the development and to approach the development in two phases, the first phase would include a pub with rooms, a hotel, and a harbour quarter towards the town end of the peninsula and an active leisure offer towards the seaward end of the peninsula.
5.0 OTHER MATERIAL PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS:
Pre-Application Advice
As part of the applicant’s pre-application work, proposals for the Peninsula were submitted for pre-application advice. The principle of a comprehensive approach to development with all year round all-weather leisure facilities and of the development becoming integral with the town centre was supported. This application has sought to address comments from the pre-application advice received.
6.0 HUMAN RIGHTS:
Article 6 - Right to a fair trial. Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life and home. The first protocol of Article 1 Protection of property
This Recommendation is based on adopted Development Plan policies, the application of which does not prejudice the Human Rights of the applicant or any third party.
7.0 PUBLIC SECTOR EQUALITIES DUTY:
As set out in the Equalities Act 2010, all public bodies, in discharging their functions must have “due regard” to this duty. There are 3 main aims:- • Removing or minimising disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected characteristics • Taking steps to meet the needs of people with certain protected characteristics where these are different from the needs of other people • Encouraging people with certain protected characteristics to participate in public life or in other activities where participation is disproportionately low.
Whilst there is no absolute requirement to fully remove any disadvantage the Duty is to have “regard to” and remove OR minimise disadvantage and in considering the merits of this planning application the planning authority has taken into consideration the requirements of the PSED.
Given the public nature of this whole scheme consideration has been particularly been given to the opportunities for safe participation in public life through the preservation of gaps and quality public realm, to take account of all forms of mobility and visual and sensory design. Specific conditions are proposed in relation to landscape strategy and design to ensure safety and interaction by people with any protected characteristics.
8.0 CONSULTATION RESPONSES SUMMARY (see full responses at appendix at end of report):
8.1 Historic England – Concerns, which if addressed, could be controlled by amended plans or conditions:
Initially, Historic England raised two principle concerns, which if unaddressed, they believed would not satisfy the requirements of paragraphs 127, 130 and 200 of the NPPF. Those concerns are summarised as:
1. The heights of buildings on the site 2. The location of a building on the railway lines, between the Pavilion building and the Devonshire Buildings.
In response to those concerns, the applicant provided indicative plans showing reduced building heights across the site. Historic England commented that there would still be a degree of harm to the setting of the monument through the increase in built form beneath and ahead of it. However they are content that at the scale now proposed the right balance has been struck to facilitate development of the Peninsula and preserve the setting of the Nothe Fort.
Historic England request their concerns will be recognised, and this will be achieved by a condition at the end of this report to restrict building heights to those
shown on the amended plans, to protect the setting of historic views of Nothe’s gun platforms towards the Esplanade, allowing the fort and its associated gardens to remain a meaningful backdrop to the peninsula site.
To date, the applicant has not submitted any plans showing that the railways lines on the site will remain clear. On that basis, Historic England’s concerns remain that the proposed pub/diner building over the railway lines on the Peninsula does not respond to the character and appearance of the conservation area, as a building over the alignment of the original 1840s pier would sever the historic visual connection between the Pier and Custom House Quay.
Historic England consider that the pub/diner building will be the most challenging of all new structures on the Peninsula to design. It needs to respond to the bull- nosed corner of the Grade II* Devonshire buildings opposite, and to successfully address the Pavilion, to engage with the proposed shared surface to the north, and to stand clear of the historic pier alignment to its south.
Historic England considers that it would be preferable for the pub/diner building to be removed from this outline application and replaced by a full detailed planning application for this specific part of the scheme, which is within the conservation area. That would allow for detailed consideration of this critical component of the proposed development. However, if that is not achievable they state that they may be content with a planning condition that requires the proposed pub/diner building to be located at least 4 metres further to the north than is currently shown, to retain visual connection to the original alignment of the pier and tramway lines.
8.2 Natural England No objection, subject to conditions
Biodiversity: That a Biodiversity Mitigation and Enhancement Plan (BMEP) is made a condition of any permission.
SSSI sites: That a Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) is produced and implemented for the suppression of dust during construction to reduce air pollution affecting Portland Harbour and Shore SSSI Radipole Lake SSSI.
8.3 Sport England: No objection or conditions
8.4 Theatres Trust: Support subject to conditions:
i) To agree demolition and construction strategies with the theatre operator and Theatres Trust to ensure performances at the Pavilion are not unduly impacted by noise from works in close proximity to it. ii) Soundproofing of the hotel adjacent to the theatre in order to mitigate the risk of future noise complaints
They consider the proposals will benefit the theatre by enhancing the attractiveness of its surroundings and improving pedestrian access to and through the site. Through expansion of Weymouth’s leisure offer and efforts to make it more of a year-around attraction, this should also help enhance the theatre’s viability by expanding its potential market. In turn, the theatre can also continue to help draw people to the town which will help support the new uses on the Peninsula.
8.5 Environment Agency – No Objection subject to Conditions and informative notes.
Flood Risk
Based on the content of the updated Flood Risk Assessment we remove our objection, but remind the Borough Council of the need to have a legally binding agreement in place, to ensure delivery of its strategy to raise ground levels and the perimeter/quay walls, to mitigate flood risk from the sea. The site masterplan may need to be amended at reserved matters stage, for example the position of new buildings.
The site lies within a Flood Warning area. We strongly recommend that the applicant prepares a Flood Warning and Evacuation Plan for future occupants. The Local Planning Authority may wish to secure this through an appropriate condition. The Council’s Emergency Planners should be consulted in relation to flood emergency response and evacuation arrangements for the site.
Should the LPA be minded to approve this application we recommend they attach a condition to ensure the flood risk mitigation measures as set out in the FRA (perimeter/quay wall raising, raised finished floor levels, and flood resistance/resilience measures) are fully implemented.
Contaminated Land. We agree with conclusions that the historic uses of the proposed development site could present a high risk of contamination. This could be mobilised during construction to pollute controlled waters. The Phase 1 Desk Study provides us with confidence that it will be possible to suitably manage the risk posed to controlled waters by this development.
Waste Management. The applicant shall consider reduction, reuse and recovery of waste in preference to offsite incineration and disposal to landfill during site construction.
8.6 Wessex Water: No objection to sewerage, surface water or water supply
The site shall be served by separate systems of drainage.
Sewerage Infrastructure: Sewers can be offered for adoption. A connection to the public foul network can be agreed. The downstream sewer network has limited capacity Wessex Water may need to plan necessary improvements.
Any redundant on site sewers will require sealing at the point of connection to the public system
Surface Water Drainage: The most sustainable method of SW drainage is to discharge direct to sea with storage for tidal locking. Surface Water connections to the public foul sewer network will not be permitted.
Water Infrastructure: A water supply can be made available to the proposed development with new water mains installed under a requisition arrangement. Buildings above two storeys will require pumped storage.
8.7 DCC - Lead Local Flood Authority: No objection subject to conditions
Three consultation responses and amended surface water strategy have been provided by the applicants during the course of this application.
The applicant was asked to demonstrate how the site would be drained at a time when tidal flooding and surface water flooding arose together. They have demonstrated through an amended strategy that the storm water would be held on the site above ground level until the tide subsided and then released into the sea at a later stage.
At times when there is just rainfall, and no combined tidal event, the surface water will not be held but will be discharged directly into the sea.
Details of the strategy for holding water on site and the design of the tanks and their location will be subject to planning conditions.
8.8 DCC – Highways and Sustainable Transport
The proposal is an outline application with ACCESS to be considered in full.
Principle of development – Not sustainable transport but insufficient increase in traffic to object
The Highway Authority do not consider this proposal reduces the dominance of motor traffic in town centre streets. It should be focussing short stay car parking outside of the town centre, and contributing to traffic management along the Esplanade and King Street. As proposed, the public car parking element of the scheme, will be likely to continue to draw unnecessary traffic through this key part of Weymouth.
Consequently, while the resulting traffic distribution may be little worse than the current situation, this proposal would not contribute towards the aspiration for a more vibrant pedestrian and public realm along the esplanade as proposed in successive Town Centre plans.
Comments on the detail of the proposed development - Concerns to be addressed by conditions and S106
Cars The car parking is being reduced from 629 spaces to 280 and is considered to be sufficient to meet the needs of the development site. The development traffic on key junctions is predicted to increase by no greater than 3% concluding with no significant impact on the operation of the network. This is accepted by the County Highway Authority.
Cycles 62 cycle parking spaces will be provided on the site. Cycling is now permitted on the promenade in Weymouth, except during peak pedestrian flow periods between May and September. Cycling along the sea front with a dedicated cycle track located between the road and the promenade to minimise points of conflict would be a major engineering project beyond the scope of the current proposals to deliver.
Buses There are concerns over the bus stop and turning area (which have received many comments) and this should be looked at further by the LPA if this is to be progressed. Public comments received about the proposed extension of the bus route and particularly buses turning and the proposed bus stop in front of Devonshire Buildings are noted.
Recommended conditions and S106 contributions In the interests of promoting sustainability and active travel, the following measures secured should be secured by condition or a Planning Agreement.
• Section 106 contributions to be made available to provide a bus stop and associated facilities on the seaward side of the Esplanade adjacent to Alexandra Gardens. This will facilitate the future extension of a bus service to the Peninsula site if it becomes viable and removes the need for the bus facilities in front of Devonshire Buildings shown on the submitted drawings. • Cycle parking within the site. • A series of localised improvements to the pedestrian realm providing for improved pedestrian access from the north to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. • Improved signage for cyclists from the Rodwell Trail to the site (final locations and routing to be agreed). • Provision of a Variable Message Sign (VMS) signing in relation to car parking at the Peninsula car park. • Electric vehicle charging point(s) should be provided and maintained.
8.9 DCC Archaeologist – No objection With regard to impact on below-ground archaeology, I consider that the application’s Archaeological Impact Assessment has looked at the evidence in an appropriate manner, and its conclusion that it is unlikely that significant remains would be affected seems reasonable to me. Both the Archaeological Impact Assessment and the Heritage Impact Assessment also consider the buildings and structures on the site. I have no reason to doubt the accuracy here, and would simply add that more detailed recording of some of the buildings may be appropriate.
8.10 DCC Natural Environment Team – No objection subject to conditions and S106 contribution. Following initial consultation a revised Biodiversity Mitigation Plan was requested and in consultation with Natural England appropriate mitigation for marine life from a new lighting scheme is requested to protect the seahorses and sea grasses in the sea bed from light spill.
An 8 to10 metre set-back for all buildings is also required by condition alongside the sea walls to prevent shading of the sea grass beds.
Bird Boxes for sparrows, swifts and starlings will protect bird populations and appropriate plants for landscaping schemes are identified. Bug hotels will provide a habitat for birds and bats by way of condition.
The S106 agreement will include requirement for ecological interpretation boards and signage of locally significant habitats and species.
8.11 DCP Environmental Health – No objection subject to conditions Contamination Please refer the submitted Phase 1 Contamination report to a suitably qualified Contaminated land Consultant for review and suggestion of appropriate comments. In addition, Environmental Protection request that the Unexpected Contamination Condition is applied to any permission granted.
Demolition Due to the age of the buildings, it is likely that Asbestos Containing Material will be present within the structures. Please ensure that the Environment Agency and Health & Safety Executive are made aware of this application and proposed demolition and any formal guidance produced by either enforcing body is referred to during the demolition phase of the development
This demolition is likely to have significant effects upon the environment and residents. I strongly advise that the Developer produces a Method Statement for the demolition stage of the development.
Noise Once the reserved matters are submitted to the council for consideration, Environmental Protection require suitable noise assessments to also be provided in relation to any plant proposed to be installed within the development. Any noise
assessment should also consider the cumulative effect of the different plant and equipment to be used within the development area.
8.12 DCP Landscape Officer– No objection subject to conditions
Potential impact on landscape/townscape character
The landscape officer had two main concerns regarding:
a) Heights of buildings across the whole of the Peninsula due to dominating views to Nothe Fort and Gardens and reducing primacy of Pavilion and Devonshire buildings in views.
b) Introduction of a building in the gap between the Pavilion and Devonshire Buildings affecting the visual connection between the Esplanade, Harbour and Nothe Gardens
To address the heights, revised Drawing 23b was submitted, which showed the pitch roof’s removed and the heights of buildings reduced. Based on this information, the Landscape Officer agrees that any adverse impact on views between the Esplanade and the Nothe Gardens and Fort will not be significant and do not object to this aspect of the scheme (subject to the detailed design of the proposed buildings being of high quality). He now removes this concern subject to condition in relation to the eastern end of the site.
To address a building at the western end of the site, in the gap between the Pavilion and Devonshire Buildings, an LVIA addendum was submitted showing reduced height of the front of the proposed (indicative) pub-diner building to two storeys and leaving the remainder at three storeys.
The concerns of the Landscape Officer remains that the view between the Pavilion and the Devonshire Buildings is an important visual and physical connection between the Esplanade/Promenade and the harbour. This gap also provides an important separation between the historic end of the built form of the Esplanade (at the Devonshire Buildings) and the modern and contemporary proposals for the Peninsula.
The introduction of a building in this gap would break the visual connection between the different townscape character areas highlighted above and would impact on the character of the southern end of the Esplanade by blurring the boundary between the historic character and the new development.
Landscape strategy
The Landscape Officer has concerns that the landscape strategy does not adequately address this site and recommends a revised, more detailed design and access statement and landscape strategy be provided with key points included.
Landscape Strategy and Site Development Option Plan, does not provide any detailed recommendations for how the development requirement from the Weymouth Town Centre Masterplan could be achieved, due to the following -
failure to sufficiently reflect and enhance the existing landscape townscape character potential harmful impact/ loss of views of Heritage Coast and Nothe and the connecting visual ‘gap’ between the Devonshire buildings and the Pavilion. the dominance of proposed parking/roads limited benefit of development in terms of limited uses and low sustainably of design failure to meet explicit local plan policies/criteria
It is important that the landscape strategy provides greater detail before reserved matters applications are made, so that it is a useful document that can inform the detailed design stage.
This strategy should intrinsically inform and improve the development layout which should demonstrate how the proposed scheme will:
connect the peninsula to the town and maximise, outstanding historic and landscape qualities of the location. Be pedestrian focussed with limited access and parking Maintain a 60m gap in development between the Pavilion and esplanade to ensure visual connectivity of local landscape character. Include a major public open space between the esplanade and Pavilion to provide an exceptional quality place and setting to the Weymouth conservation area that connects the variety of local landscape characters. Be a sustainable scheme with a diverse mix of uses Respect the unique characteristics of Weymouth local landscape character, maritime history and architecture. These characteristics include, but are not limited to: the repetition of form and rhythm and continual roofline of the Georgian esplanade, the urban form within the town, the maritime heritage including WWII history, the dominance of the Nothe fort and gardens and World Heritage Coast, the on-site railway and harbour with tall ship mooring. Be at the same height or lower than the continuous roofline of the esplanade, maintaining the Nothe Fort scheduled monument, the Pavilion and the Sky tower as the prominent built form. Include a pedestrian only promenade circuit around the peninsula waterside of active public realm, with outdoor dining and access to the water. Provide suitable outdoor space to host public events such as the seafood festival. Demonstrate exceptional, sustainable and contemporary place making and architecture.
Use the highest quality materials in the buildings and public realm including paving materials, outdoor seating, sculpture, public art, signage and planting.
A Design and Access Statement and Landscape Strategy Plan are required by condition to inform detailed design before the reserved matters applications are submitted.
SUMMARY Given the comments above, I believe that the introduction of a large building in the gap between the Peninsula and the Devonshire buildings will result in visual and townscape impacts that are not in accordance with the following Local Plan policies.
· Policy ENV 10 – I
· Policy ENV 12 – I
· Policy WEY 1
· Policy WEY 6 – II
I do not have an objection to the proposed uses for the Peninsula, subject to the visual gap between the Devonshire Terrace and the Pavilion Theatre being preserved. To preserve the visual gap, a minimum clear distance of 60m should be maintained from the eastern extent of the Devonshire Buildings towards the Pavilion Building (See figure below).
8.13DCP Conservation Officer Comments – Support subject to conditions and further information and or modifications. Significance: This linear and open stretch of coastline is highly distinctive, lined with imposing Georgian and Regency terraces. Most are Listed Grade II but some are Grade II* and stand at 3 or 4 storeys tall. This important seaside town, with Royal connections to King George III enjoys Conservation Area status
Setting: The proposals create considerable impact on the setting of all the heritage assets outlined above and whilst the height of buildings have been reduced by the removal of pitched roofs, further work needs to be undertaken to retain important open spaces and sight lines within and around the site.
The space between Devonshire Buildings and Pavilion Theatre needs to be retained. A 60m distance between The Roundhouse Hotel and any new building (as suggested by the landscape officer) is appropriate and even then that any new building which starts at that distance, should be single storey and if necessary climb in height in a southerly direction (away from Devonshire Buildings).
Section 192 of the NPPF states that any new development should make a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. This would include retaining any existing open spaces, views or building styles and relationships that may form part of that character and distinctiveness.
Section 193 of the NPPF stipulates that when considering the impact of proposed development on the significance of a heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset's conservation. As identified above, a heritage asset's setting can be regarded part of the asset's significance. Harm to that setting should therefore be resisted and this is irrespective of whether any harm amounts to substantial harm or less than substantial harm.
Some well-designed public space, small community structure such as a bandstand or indeed some sensitively designed parking could be positioned between the Pavilion and Devonshire Buildings and allow the retention of this important open space.
The location of the theatre acted as stop-end and gateway to the peninsula, and this was achieved by setting it back a generous distance from the listed terrace. Whilst the current theatre has no historic/architectural value, the relationship between its position (and its historic predecessor) with Devonshire buildings is of value and also clearly defines a separation between buildings of domestic and public uses.
Nothe Fort is such an important landmark feature of the coastline, it should remain clearly visible from and connect to The Esplanade and Greenhill. Similarly, the striking coastal front of The Esplanade designed in part to emulate Georgian
terraces and the Royal Crescent in Bath by architect James Hamilton, should remain visible from Nothe Gardens.
Recommendation: Whilst the application is supported in principle, there are concerns as outlined above. I am unable to fully support the scheme as it stands and believe that the setting and views of Devonshire Buildings, The Nothe Fort, Gardens and The Esplanade need further consideration.
9.0 REPRESENTATIONS:
9.1 There have been 136 comments in total at the time of writing at 14 November 2018. Of these 121 are objections 2 are in support and the remaining 13 are comments on the proposals.
9.2 Objections: Structural instability of the Peninsula Significant potential for Contaminated land Harm to heritage assets Failure to preserve gap as view between Pavilion and Devonshire Buildings Failure to preserve landscape and townscape setting Inadequate parking proposed on the Peninsula Conflicts between different transport modes particularly cyclists and pedestrians Loss of parking at Devonshire Buildings and Alexandra Gardens for extended bus route and poor visual impact on them. Traffic Congestion to Parking not fully mitigated by Variable Messaging Boards Economic Impact Assessment only shows benefits not impact on Town Centre with crude out of date data on spending patterns Negative impact on existing hoteliers Fails to maintain cohesive character or thriving Town Centre Residential development should not have been excluded contrary to WEY6 Chain hotels do not reflect unrivalled position on World Heritage Coast Mid-range hotels do not meet the need in Weymouth. Removes opportunity for ferry service to Channel Islands to return Reduction in parking reduces viability of the Pavilion Theatre to remain Financially unsustainable low quality proposal Noise pollution Lack of transparency over viability and cost information Economic benefits would be more if residential included and profits fed into the town. Alternative proposals with ten times the profit should be considered No need to extend bus service from Kings Statue Should apply for funds for deep water berths Need to protect and preserve what is there
Provide marinas and more profit generating projects for economy of the town Loss of parking for new bus stops not needed Water park needed more than indoor recreation building Indoor recreation unimaginative and uninspiring Refer decision to Secretary of State and Council too involved
9.3 Support comments Support revitalizing Town Centre, but would like to see economic viability report in full
10. PLANNING ISSUES:
Principle of development Heritage and Landscape Impacts: - Development to the east of the Pavilion – heritage and landscape - Development to the west of the Pavilion – heritage and landscape Landscape Strategy for the future development Ecology Design Principles Highway Safety Flood Risk Amenity Economic Other Planning Considerations The Planning Balance
11. PLANNING ASSESSMENT:
11.1 Principle of Development
11.1.1 The Peninsula is a key town centre site, set at the end of the Esplanade and opposite the historic Nothe Fort at the gateway to the harbour. It lies within the defined policy area of the Town Centre and therefore the principle of development in this location is considered to be sustainable and therefore in accordance with Policy INT1 of the Local Plan.
11.1.3 The proposed mixture of uses for leisure and tourism are also considered to be acceptable in principle, without requiring a sequential test in relation its location or impact on the viability of other Town Centre uses, in accord with Local Plan Policies ECON4 and ECON5.
11.1.4 The loss of the ferry service and confirmation that there is no prospect of it returning, has removed significant economic benefits to the town and a large part
of the site and building have laid redundant since 2015. The area is now underutilised and provides an opportunity for regeneration with significant investment, to deliver a scheme that is appropriate for its setting and function. The principle of that investment as a financial stimulus to promote further investment on the site and in the Town Centre generally, has been accepted by the Council on 11th October 2018 at its Full Council meeting, and accords with the principle of re-development of the site set out in Planning Policies WEY1 and WEY6 of the West Dorset, Weymouth and Portland Local Plan 2015 and subsequent Supplementary Planning Document and Masterplan for the Peninsula.
11.1.5 Sufficient economic evidence has been provided to demonstrate that a mixed use development can be provided, in compliance with planning policy, although, as with all sites, this will be market dependant in terms of timing to find end users and delivery. The scheme costed would be a mixed development scheme with a focus on leisure and retail The development proposes: - Restaurants (1,050m2 ) - Café (80m2 ) - Limited service hotel (3,810m2 ) – 100 rooms - Boutique Hotel (1,680m2 ) – 20 rooms - Leisure Units (5,110m2 )– Trampolining (2,323m2 ), adventure Golf (1,393m2 ), children’s soft play area (697m2 ), and indoor rock climbing (697m2 ). - Harbour Building (660m2) – A multi- use facility consisting of space for fisherman, business-start up space and an information/learning centre for visitors. - A 280-space car park. The commercial and leisure elements of the proposed redevelopment would create 150 FTE jobs during the construction phase as well as 130 FTE jobs once the development is fully operational. It is estimated that the operational jobs would generate over £23.4m in GVA over the first ten years.
11.1.6 The Planning Policies have identified that a comprehensive approach needs to be taken to development of this site. This outline application contains flexibility of uses proposed within the description of development to allow for a comprehensive approach to development, with a mix of uses on the site, without pre-determining exact numbers, or sizes of proposed buildings and their specific leisure or tourist uses on the land at this stage.
11.1.7 Abnormal costs associated with the redevelopment of this site have also been identified by planning policy WEY6, which points out that it is important that a flexible and realistic approach is taken on the mix of uses allowed. This identified principle for development of the site has been adhered to in the outline nature of this scheme offering numerous options for site layout and design to be resolved when an end user is on board to obtain reserved matters with their specific site requirements.
11.1.8 Policy WEY6 suggests that although a leisure / tourism attraction would be supported, including a hotel, costs indicate that a scheme is unlikely to be economically deliverable without a significant element of housing. It states that a range of solutions that would ensure the future of a thriving theatre for Weymouth and Portland will need to be considered.
11.1.9 The outline planning application has been submitted encompassing a broad range of uses that could be possible following a tourism assessment prepared by Blue Sail, as part of the Western Dorset Growth Strategy, which identified the need for all year round and all weather facilities for leisure and tourism on the Peninsula. The financial case put forward for tourism and leisure without residential at this point in time has been accepted by the Council as a means of regenerating the Peninsula area.
11.1.1 This Outline Planning Application, reflects the its recommendations of the tourism assessment and also concurs with the proposed uses for the site set out in Planning Policy WEY6 and the Weymouth Town Centre Masterplan other than residential development, which is not a requirement of the policy but is one of the listed options.
11.1.12 Policy WEY6 recognised a potential need for some housing development to stimulate financial investment from the market to provide the necessary leisure and tourism facilities. However, the Policy does not require housing in principle and therefore does not alter the acceptability of the current proposal in principle. The Council, as applicant, is seeking to stimulate further leisure development by front loading the tourist accommodation on the site. The return on that investment, through leasing the tourist accommodation, could then potentially support the all year round indoor leisure facilities, and fund improvements to the public realm. If successful this would meet the identified tourism and leisure needs, without the need for enabling private housing development at this stage.
11.1.13 It is considered that the application accords with Policies INT1, ECON4, ECON5, WEY1 and WEY6 of the Local Plan. The proposed development is acceptable in principle.
11.2 Heritage and Landscape Impacts
For the purposes of this report and the comments received regarding heritage and landscape, the development of the site can broadly be split into two components:
- Development to the east of the Pavilion (seaward side of the site) - Development to the west of the Pavilion (townward side of the site)
The following sections of this report address those two key development areas.
Development to East of the Pavilion – Heritage and Landscape
11.2.1 Initial illustrative massing plans showed all proposed buildings to the east of the Pavilion having pitched roofs and being between 16m and 18m in height. At these heights it was apparent that buildings would dominate the views to the Nothe Fort and Gardens and cause the Pavilion and Devonshire Buildings to lose their primacy in views from the Esplanade and Nothe Gardens. This was a concern for
a number of statutory consultees (Historic England, WPBC Conservation and WPBC Landscape) as well as a number of individuals and organisations making representations on the planning application.
In response to those concerns, revised Drawing 23b was submitted. This shows pitch roofs removed, and the heights of buildings reduced to 10m-11m. Historic England and the Conservation Officer are now satisfied that while there would still be some incursion into views of the Nothe Fort, the impact would not be significant and the scale of the proposed buildings would be relatively subservient, allowing the fort and its associated gardens to remain a meaningful backdrop to the Peninsula site. Views from the Nothe’s gun platforms back towards the Esplanade and the beach, which are of significant illustrative historic value, as a demonstration of the fort’s use preventing the beach from being used as a landing point for an invading enemy, would remain sufficiently unobstructed. Therefore with regard to the scheduled 2* monument the proposal will adequately address that heritage asset.
Development to the West of the Pavilion – Heritage and Landscape
Initial illustrative massing plans showed a proposed building to the west of the Pavilion having a pitched roof and being 15m in height. This has since been revised to a 2/3 storey building (predominately 3 storey) of maximum 10m in height. The Devonshire Buildings are listed and lie within a conservation area which extends some 35m into the subject site. The gap which currently exists in this part of the site provides important views to and through the site. A building in this location has raised concerns from Historic England, WPBC Landscape Officers and WPBC Conservation officer, as well as from a number of those making representations. The concerns raised are: 1. Development in this location in principle 2. The siting of development over the route of the historic railway line
Taking these matters in order:
Principle of Development in this Location
Paragraph 200 of the NPPF reinforces these messages, with a particular focus on heritage. It notes that “local authorities should look for opportunities for development within conservation and the setting of heritage assets to enhance, or better reveal, their significance."
Policy WEY1, amongst other things, encourages new development to “retain and enhance the area’s rich and distinct local character and notable landmarks, and the harmony in the scale, massing and materials used that help create a cohesive character, particularly when viewed from the sea and coastline taking account of views across Weymouth Bay.”
The Local Plan explanatory text preceding Policy WEY6 states:
“Extreme care is needed to ensure that the scale and style of development is sympathetic to and does not dominate or detract from the adjoining historic areas of the Esplanade and the Nothe.”
Policies ENV10, ENV12 and WEY1 are of landscape relevance. These policies require development of the Peninsula to respect the landscape and townscape setting, the design and positioning of buildings and public realm enhancements. The SPD Masterplan requirements for this site include a requirement to “To provide high quality attractive pedestrian public areas with quality fittings, public art and sculpture and hard landscaping and good pedestrian linkage into the town centre”.
Historic England suggest that it would be preferable for the pub/diner building to be removed from this outline application and replaced by a full, detailed planning application for this specific part of the scheme. That would allow for detailed consideration of this critical component of the proposed development. If this is not possible, they propose a condition to ensure the tramline route is retained, and this matter is dealt with below. Historic England’s full comments can be found at Appendix 1.
Both the WPBC Landscape and Conservation officers object to the principle of development in this location.
The Landscape position is informed by a Landscape Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) provided during the process of this outline planning application. It shows the impact of illustrative development on strategic views to and through the Peninsula site. In summary, the Landscape Officers opinion is that there will be a significant impact from the introduction of a building in the gap between the Pavilion and the Devonshire Buildings on the important visual and physical connections between the Esplanade, the harbour and the Nothe Gardens. The gap also provides an important separation between the historic end of the Esplanade and the modern and contemporary proposals for the peninsula. The existing gap is 80m and the Landscape officer is of the opinion that a gap of a minimum of 60m should be retained. The full Landscape comments can be found at Appendix 1.
In summary, the Conservation Officers position is that fundamentally, the space between Devonshire Buildings and Pavilion Theatre needs to be retained. As a minimum, the Conservation Officer proposes conditions ensure that any buildings in this location do not dominate or detract from the historic significance or setting of the Devonshire Buildings and the Conservation Area which provides their setting.
They consider that a 60m distance between The Grade 2* Listed Roundhouse Hotel and any new building (as suggested by the landscape officer) is appropriate. They then recommend that any new building which starts at that distance, should
be single storey and if necessary climb in height in an easterly direction (away from Devonshire Buildings)
The applicant’s position is clear, that development in this location provides an extension to the town centre, and provides an important link between the town centre and the remainder of the proposed Peninsula development. Their position is that without this element of the proposal, the distance between the Esplanade/Custom House Quay and the proposed development beyond the Peninsula is such that it would deter pedestrians from visiting the Peninsula site. They believe that a building in this location could be delivered early in the development of the Peninsula, acting as a catalyst for the broader development of the site.
The Weymouth Town Centre SPD provides an indicative block plan for the Peninsula site (see plan below). This shows a proposal which includes the Pavilion building being removed and largely replaced by open space. It also includes a significant reduction in parking and some residential development – i.e. a different proposal. The SPD plan retains a gap (not the same gap) to allow for views to and through the site, and provide public open space. Nevertheless, the SPD indicative block plan does include a building (min 2 storey) in the location between the end of the Esplanade and the existing Pavilion building.
Obviously there are a range of conflicting views about development in this location. Having considered the range of matters outlined above, it is clear that there are landscape and heritage benefits derived from the ‘gap’ between the Pavilion and the Devonshire Buildings. The NPPF requires that great weight be attributed to landscape and historic matters. It is also clear that preventing any development in this location would undermine the development strategy for this proposal put forward by the applicant.
Building at scale on the Peninsula will inevitably change views to and through the site, and the siting of buildings will have a variable impact on landscape. Likewise, the proximity of new buildings to the Devonshire Buildings has the potential to negatively impact on these listed buildings and the Conservation Area the site within. In identifying the Peninsula as a key regeneration site in the Local Plan, and taking this a step further in the Town Centre Masterplan SPD including block plans of the site, it is clear that change (in principle) is an accepted outcome of redevelopment.
Whilst scale, mass, design and layout are matters that have been reserved, an outline planning application provides the opportunity to constrain building heights and/or locations, to limit negative impacts and set the parameters for any redevelopment of such an exposed and prominent location in the Town Centre
Given the outline nature of this application, with no layout of buildings proposed on the site, it would be premature to rule out the principle of a building in this location entirely, without considering the details of design, scale and mass of any such building. A well designed, sympathetic building in this location may be able to satisfy some, if not all of the concerns raised by statutory consultees. Such a design would have to include, amongst other things, a significant reduction in the scale and massing shown on the indicative drawings to overcome these concerns, provide a gap between any new development and the Devonshire Buildings, and retain views to the harbour and the Nothe Gardens. A condition is proposed at the end of this report to achieve this.
The siting of development over the route of the historic railway line As outlined above, Historic England’s position in the event that development in this location is not removed from this application and considered through a full planning application, is that a condition be imposed to avoid the tramline route and ensure that any development is to the north of this route. This is the line of the original pier and tramway, which Historic England believe should remain with unobstructed historic views from Custom House Quay, alongside Weymouth Quay and through to the end of the Peninsula. This would retain a pedestrian thoroughfare along the alignment of the former pier along the tramway lines, inviting the pedestrian to explore the Peninsula and its proposed new facilities as well as preserving the historic grain.
A condition is proposed at the end of this report to achieve this.
Overall, it is considered that this outline proposal can be accepted in principle together with the proposed conditions addressing the site constraints. At this outline stage the application complies with relevant policies of the Local Plan acknowledging that the scale, layout, external appearance and landscaping associated with any buildings on the site will be subject to reserved matters approval.
11.4 LANDSCAPE STRATEGY for the future development
11.4.1 The landscape strategy and plan together with the design and access statement aims to consider at the outline stage the layout of the public realm on the Peninsula in relation to any buildings and also the form and location of any buildings. Sustainable transport infrastructure and linkages also plays an important role in the landscape strategy. This would then determine the positions of buildings and their interface with the public realm. The applicant has identified improved pedestrian circulation to be provided around the perimeter of the Peninsula and across the Peninsula. The supporting documents with the application state that the removal of the ferry terminal offers the potential for significantly improved access to the waterside and for safe viewing of the working of the wharf. It is intended the improved pedestrian circulation and access to the Pleasure Pier are a central part of the attraction to the redeveloped Peninsula. The shared landscaped surface near the entrance to the Peninsula will also enhance the setting of the Pavilion and could include informal play areas.
11.4.2 The Landscape Officer has raised five significant concerns with the submitted Landscape Strategy and Site Development Option Plan: namely:
failure to sufficiently reflect and enhance the existing landscape townscape character potential harmful impact/ loss of views of Heritage Coast and Nothe and the connecting visual ‘gap’ between the Devonshire buildings and the Pavilion. the dominance of proposed parking/roads limited benefit of development in terms of limited uses and low sustainably of design failure to meet explicit local plan policies/criteria
11.4.3 As this is an outline application, the Senior Landscape Officer considers that a condition could be placed on a permission to require a revised design and access statement and revised landscape strategy to be submitted prior to the reserved matters application. A list of appropriate open public realm areas, linkages and finishes could be incorporated into the condition, to assist the developer in addressing the public realm issues at the outset, before determining the precise location of the buildings. This would also provide the added benefit of enabling sustainable transport issues to be addressed.
The aims of the strategy should intrinsically inform and improve the development layout which should demonstrate how the proposed hard and soft landscaping scheme and strategy will be –
Rich in local character and materials, which reflects Weymouth’s historic maritime culture, whilst looking to the future. Respect and stay below important views of the Nothe and maintain the important visual gap between the Devonshire buildings and Pavilion. create exceptionally high quality place making with a landmark public open space Create a network of pedestrian only routes and public spaces with minimal parking for loading/disabled. Make best use of the harbour side location and access to the water. Provide an attractive and interesting year round environment considering microclimates and providing exceptional landscape design
The current landscape strategy documents reflect a generic approach to a beach and seaside town, rather than focussing closely on a modern interpretation of the historic maritime culture of Weymouth through its design of pedestrian linkages and public realm features on the Peninsula. It is these areas that require further analysis and proposals need to be addressed in a revised document, to ensure that Policies WEY 1 and WEY 6 and the Masterplan are applied.
11.5 ECOLOGY
11.5.1 Following the submission in August of a Biodiversity Mitigation Plan to address the ecology of the Peninsula and consider potential improvements as part of the current scheme, The Dorset Natural Environment Team (DNET) consulted Dorset Wildlife Trust to gain their recommendations about appropriate mitigation for the marine ecology as the BMP submitted referred simply to bird and bat life on the Peninsula, rather than addressing the wider harbour/marine environment. The Dorset Wildlife Trust (DWT) put forward some suggestions to the applicant and a requirement to refer to the South Marine Plan, adopted in July 2018. 11.5.2 In response to this, revised survey work has been undertaken and 18th October, a revised BMEP was submitted by the applicant and has been referred for further consultation with Dorset Wildlife Trust and DNET. The updated version of the BMEP now incorporates DWT’s comments.
11.5.4 The marine habitat is an important statutory consideration for this application and it is appropriate that a condition be applied to the consent requiring compensatory enhancements and mitigation for impacts of the development on the sea life, as well as providing interpretation boards and information where appropriate in the public realm or in buildings on the Peninsula to inform about the seagrass beds around the Nothe Peninsula and the impacts of development on them.
11.5.5 A condition is recommended to secure all these required enhancements to the ecological environment which will enhance the value of nature conservation and the World Heritage Coastline.
11.6 DESIGN PRINCIPLES
11.6.1 Details of the design of the buildings will be determined at reserved matters stage to address the matters of scale, layout, external appearance and landscaping. However, the outline application determines the principles of where on the Peninsula buildings should not be positioned, in order to address the constraints of flooding, highway infrastructure, conservation, ecology and landscape visual impacts. The constraints of the site and the mitigation required to overcome issues that arise from each of these constraints, will have an impact on the final design of the buildings and their layout on the site.
11.6.1 The rationale behind addressing the views of the Nothe Peninsula backdrop has involved the reduction of all the proposed building heights by between 5 and 7 metres and the removal of all pitched roofs so that all the roofs would either be flat roofed and no more than three storey in height or will reduce down to two storey with a roof. Maximum roof heights will be set by condition to be 11 metres high (previously 18 metres) for the largest potential hotel building to the east of the Pavilion, and all remaining buildings being not higher than 10 metres (previously 15 metres). The constraint of height leading to potential flat roofs provides design opportunities for planted areas and viewing terraces, which could be of benefit to the building users and in views from the fort, as well as in habitat creation, rainwater attenuation and rainwater harvesting
11.6.2 The design of public realm with hard and soft landscape is being shaped by the need to preserve a gap at the neck of the Peninsula. How large that gap is needs more analysis and information than has been provided with the current outline planning application. A condition will be recommended to respond to retaining historic and landscape views. The positioning of any building at the neck of the Peninsula would also have to address the wider townscape setting and established connectivity between the different conservation sub-areas. If a modern building were to be introduced in the space it would need to respond to its environmental surroundings and established social links within the Town Centre as well as be justified for economic reasons.
11.6.3 Flooding also offers a constraint to building design as the design needs to ensure flooding at ground floor would not occur from tidal or surface water. It had initially been proposed that buildings would be elevated by a metre above ground level to provide this protection. However, following a revised Flood Risk assessment it proved possible to not have to raise the buildings above the ground level by a metre and that other mechanisms will be provided to avoid flooding of buildings including above ground water storage tanks to be held until it can be safely released into the sea.
11.7 HIGHWAY SAFETY
11.7.1 The Highway Authority cannot suggest that traffic impacts of this proposal would be severe, when consideration is given to paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) – July 2018, due to the small increase in likely traffic generation.
11.7.2 DCC Highways recognise the minimal focus on change to highway infrastructure in this outline application. This approach conflicts with DCC Transport policy. For economic reasons the applicant is seeking to work with existing infrastructure as far as possible, but this retains focus on the car as the preferred means of travel to the facilities proposed and accommodating the cars on the Peninsula as far as possible. This strategy in turn keeps the focus on motor traffic in the Town Centre, which is contrary to the aim of DCC Highways. Transport and Movement Study.
11.7.3 The Weymouth Town Centre Masterplan and more recent Transport and Movement Study recommend reducing the dominance of motor traffic in town centre streets, focussing short stay car parking in key gateway car parks outside of the town centre, rather than on the Peninsula, and contributing to traffic management along the Esplanade and King Street. As proposed, the public car parking element of the scheme, will be likely to continue to draw unnecessary traffic through this key part of Weymouth. Given this situation the recommended conditions seek to control this by not attracting unnecessary traffic in the town centre when the Peninsula car park is full, through the use of more variable message signs directing traffic to other car parks when the Peninsula car park is full.
11.7.4 The public response to car parking is mixed. Most responses raise concerns that parking numbers on the Peninsula are reducing such that the Pavilion will be less attractive to visitors. Others would be looking for better sustainable means of travel for cycles on labelled cycle routes and for pedestrians through the public realm treatment on the site and also better pedestrian links onto The Esplanade and Custom House Quay.
11.7.5 DCC Highways no longer require an extension to the bus service as part of this application because the current bus terminus at Kings Statue is only a few minutes’ walk along the Esplanade to the Peninsula. There is a potential new stop that could be introduced into existing highway alongside Alexandra Gardens should the bus company decide it is in their interests to extend their service to the Peninsula. This matter will be covered in the accompanying S106 agreement.
11.7.6 Overall the highway impact is not significant and will alter very little of the existing infrastructure. It would have been ideal to review the town centre and Peninsula infrastructure as part of this scheme, but this scheme in itself does not
prohibit future consideration of controlling traffic in the Town Centre to minimise conflicts between the different modes of transport in the future.
11.7 FLOOD RISK
11.7.1 The Environment Agency and the Lead Local Flood Authority have both considered supporting information that was amended during the application process. Additional tidal flow information was requested by the Environment Agency who became satisfied subject to conditions concerning perimeter/quay wall raising, raised finished floor levels, and flood resistance/resilience measures.
11.7.2 The Lead Local Flood Authority required amendment to the initial surface water attenuation method, and requested that discharge of flood water go directly into the sea but with above ground holding storage for tidal locking. Adequate information was provided to satisfy them that the site could be drained in the event of heavy rainfall and a high tide, subject to conditions.
11.7.3 Wessex Water confirmed that the site would be served by separate systems of drainage and that a connection to the public foul network could be agreed.
11.7.4 On this basis it is clear that the drainage can be dealt with through planning conditions.
11.8 AMENITY
11.8.1 These outline proposals have an illustrative layout only and all matters other than access are reserved matters. Therefore the position of buildings is not part of the considerations of this application. The only building to be likely to have any potential impact on neighbouring properties is the proposed pub/diner with rooms as this is proposed to be sited forward of the Pavilion Theatre. Noise would be assessed when the positions of buildings is known and any noise attenuation measures would be incorporated into the design consideration within the buildings and conditioned accordingly.
11.8.2 It is expected that there will be a higher ambient noise level within town centres and this site lies within the Town Centre boundary. Harbour uses themselves can be noisy and the use in leisure buildings and times of exit will impact surrounding properties. However, it is not considered that restrictions should be placed on closing times for these uses in view of the former ferry use and the Pavilion Theatre. On this basis any adverse noise impacts outside the buildings are generally controlled through licencing and the police, and it is not considered to be likely to amount to material harm.
11.9 ECONOMIC IMPACTS
11.9.1 The NPPF at Paragraph 81 requires planning policies in Local Plans to set out a clear economic vision and strategy which positively and proactively encourages sustainable economic growth, having regard to local policies for economic development and regeneration. Since the Local Plan and Masterplan SPD were adopted in 2015 the need for regeneration of the Peninsula site has arisen due to the departure of the former ferry service and redundant ferry terminal buildings occupying a large area of the Peninsula.
11.9.2. The Council has responded to the need for regeneration of this focal point within Weymouth town centre with this application to promote sustainable economic growth to the Peninsula and boost the economy of the town centre as a whole. This application proposed the regeneration of the former ferry terminal with an economic strategy to accord with economic tourism and leisure policies of the Local Plan, demonstrated below.
11.9.3 This application complies with all of the economic requirements of the following Policies in terms of general location of buildings within the Peninsula and mix of uses proposed: ECON4. Retail and town centre development ECON5 Tourism attractions and facilities ECON6 Built tourist accommodation
11.9.4 The mix of uses proposed are considered in principle to be appropriate in type and scale to the town centre location and its catchment population in order to maintain vitality. It may be that residential development would need to be incorporated in the future to make sufficient return on the investment, but sufficient evidence has been submitted to show that a mixed leisure and tourism scheme could deliver tourist accommodation in the first phase to stimulate the following provision of the leisure facilities in a second phase.
11.9.5 The viability test undertaken by the applicant for a first phase of development relates to fixed siting of the pub/diner. However, the outline application does not take into consideration building sizes and siting. Buildings are not defined on a plan other than illustratively. It is therefore not possible nor has it been requested by the applicant to secure a fixed siting of a building between the Pavilion and the Devonshire Buildings at this stage. This should not therefore affect the determination of this outline application with site layout and appearance to be reserved matters.
11.9.6 The applicant’s commerciality statement seeks to justify the viability of a scheme for a hotel and pub-diner with accommodation above, at the neck of the Peninsula, in terms of the principle of providing rental revenue from hotels and restaurants. The revenue would in turn be able to subsidise the provision of leisure facilities in the longer term. This is based on soft-market testing to determine what
the market requires in terms of type, size and location on the site. This justification is helpful in demonstrating the broad principle of the approach to an economically sound delivery of the uses on the site. However, this statement does not offer any indication whether the pub/diner building could be equally successful in an alternative location on the Peninsula. It is therefore considered that there is insufficient information in terms of economic justification at outline stage to determine why a pub/diner with accommodation cannot be a located in another location. The economic justification can be revisited at reserved matters stage along with the necessary analysis of scale external appearance and layout addressing heritage and landscape constraints.
11.9.7 The applicant is proposing a range of buildings with vibrant ground floor uses with accommodation at first and second floor which accords with policy ECON4
11.9.8 In accordance with Policy ECON5 the proposals would enhance an existing leisure attraction alongside the Pavilion Theatre and Jurassic Skyline Tower, and could provide wider community benefits with a new all-weather recreational facility that could be used all year round by the local community, as well as visitors. These attractions would increase the quality and diversity of the tourism offer in the local area, and could benefit the local economy if sufficient accommodation is provided.
11.9.9 The proposed uses would regenerate the site through the removal of redundant ferry buildings and provide replacement buildings in accordance with Policy ECON5 ii). The proposal could also provide major tourism attractions within the town with adequate visitor facilities, such as parking and toilets, rather than relying on community facilities in the area, providing an end user is found to comply with policy ECON5 iii).
11.9.10 Policy ECON6 specifies that the best location for built tourist accommodation in the form of large new hotels and guest houses is within the town centre. The Peninsula site lies within the Town Centre Boundary in the local plan as is therefore fully compliant in policy for the provision of new build hotels to cater for the range of visitors and reflecting their needs, so as to continue to be vibrant, and competitive.
11.9.11 The Local Plan identifies that employment in the hospitality and leisure sectors has declined in Weymouth since 2011. This is because it lacks a major driver or single distinctive reason to choose it over other seaside towns. The provision of additional all year round and wet weather facilities could give that required addition, and would also assist in extending the season.
11.9.12 As outlined in section 11.2, the applicant has provided reasons why they believe a building is necessary in the gap between the Pavilion and the Devonshire Buildings. This is set out in the Commerciality statement produced by the agent. Whilst there are no clear financial justifications put forward (eg: costing, profits
predictions etc.) it is the applicant position that development in this location is essential. The financial analysis to support this position has not been provided, however appropriate weight has been attributed to the economic justification. In section 11.2, the balance between landscape, heritage and development viability have been considered and a condition is proposed to strike a balance between these matters.
11.10 OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
11.10.1 Contaminated land is a consideration that was raised by both the Environment Agency and the Environmental Health Officer and several individual representations made on the application. Both statutory organisations identified that the Peninsula has historic uses that present a high risk of contamination. There were fuel storage areas in association with the ferry services is and the ground itself is filled and made up from materials that may not be fully known. On this basis the standard three part planning condition is proposed to check, record and decontaminate the land where needed.
11.11 THE PLANNING BALANCE
11.11.1 At Paragraph 8 of the National Planning Policy Framework there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development. This is assessed in relation to three objectives, namely: economic, social and environmental. These three objectives are to be pursued by taking opportunities to secure net gains. These net gains are achieved through firstly identifying the level of harm caused by the development, and secondly by weighing that level of harm against the gains achieved economically socially and environmentally. The weight of the harms and the gains is summarised below. This process is termed the planning balance and is used to see if the proposed development satisfies the test of being a sustainable development.
11.11.2 Firstly the weight to be attributed to material considerations raised by Statutory Consultees is considered below:
11.11.3 Highway Impacts are acceptable The cumulative highway implications of the proposals have been fully assessed and found to be acceptable by the Highway Authority. The vehicular and pedestrian access which has been submitted for detailed consideration is deemed to be acceptable subject to conditions.
11.11.4 Drainage impacts are acceptable subject to conditions Surface water drainage can be adequately dealt with on and off the site to prevent flooding and will drain directly into the sea as regulated from above ground attenuation tanks on site.
11.11.5 Landscape impacts are reserved for further consideration. The impact can be minimised through mitigation in the form of revised design solutions and landscape strategy prior to the reserved matters stage. Conditions are proposed to achieve this.
11.11.6 Biodiversity enhancement and mitigation for harm are acceptable. Benefits to habitat and biodiversity will also be secured through the implementation of a Biodiversity Mitigation Plan and Landscape Environment Management Plan.
11.11.7 Heritage impact is reserved for further consideration. The impact of the proposed development on heritage assets would need to be subject to detailing of scale, mass, density, layout and materials at reserved matters stage when locations and heights of proposed buildings are known. Conditions are proposed to address these concerns.
11.11.8 Neighbouring Amenity - no demonstrable harm. No harm has been identified that could not be mitigated at reserved matters stage in terms of noise or overlooking or loss of privacy.
11.11.9 Combined harm of the proposed development is minimal. Weighing material considerations against the benefits of this application it has been demonstrated that cumulative transport effects are not going to generate severe harm, the drainage details can be conditioned to prevent flooding, matters of ecology, landscape and conservation are either offering mitigation to offset the identified harm or providing further information and adapting the proposed layout for reserved matters to ensure there is no harm to the conservation area and heritage assets, or significant landscape views.
11.11.10 The economic gains - In terms of economic gains, the development would provide employment during the construction phase by providing investment and jobs to benefit the local and national economy. Residents within the town would provide a supply of labour to leisure industries, which in turn would help keep other shops and services in the town viable. Once operated as a mixed use leisure and retail development, the new hotels, cafes, restaurants and leisure facilities, would all add to and compliment those already established within the town, to attract a wider range of tourists and visits from local residents.
11.11.11The social gains would include the provision of accessibility for all to leisure facilities and areas of public realm, providing greater access around the Peninsula to walk and obtain views of beach, Nothe Fort and the quayside both sides of the River Wey. Other social gains to meet the needs of the community of all ages and interest groups within the town include: facilities to support the existing community asset of the Pavilion Theatre, including the potential to have an overnight stay in associated hotels and restaurants. All these necessary social benefits are considerable and should be afforded significant weight.
11.11.12 The environmental gains include: pedestrian routes and play areas, better signposting of cycle routes, and potential all-weather all year round indoor leisure facilities. These environmental benefits offer a significant improvement to the connectivity and range of attractions within the town and should be afforded significant weight. In environmental terms the responses from statutory consultees demonstrate that there have been environmental issues to address during this outline process, but that all can be overcome with carefully worded planning conditions. The highways, flooding, contaminated land, conservation and landscape issues are all afforded significant and great weight, but can all potentially be overcome with submission of more plans or information before submission of the reserved matters applications.
12. CONCLUSION/SUMMARY 12.1 Overall, the supply of a mixed use tourism and leisure scheme, provides economic, social and environmental gains to Weymouth which would regenerate the Peninsula and have positive impacts throughout the town. The proposal represents a sustainable form of development, with economic, social and environmental benefits that clearly outweigh the harm. Where harm has been identified, conditions are recommended to overcome the concerns raised to enable planning permission to be granted and a S106 agreement entered into, to secure adequate mitigation for sustainable transport and marine ecology.
13. RECOMMENDATION Delegate to the Head of Planning to approved subject to conditions and the completion of a legal agreement (s106) to secure sustainable transport contributions and marine ecology mitigation and enhancements.
Conditions:
1. Commencement of Development The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than whichever is the later of the following dates:-
(i) The expiration of three years from the date of grant of outline planning permission, or (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. Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
2. Timing of Reserved Matters Applications Application for approval of any reserved matters must be submitted to the Local Planning Authority not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission and the development hereby permitted shall begin before
the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved. Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
3. Approval of Reserved Matters before commencement Approval of the reserved matters (that is any matters in respect of which details have not been given in the application and which concern the layout, scale or appearance of the building(s) to which this permission and the application relates or the landscaping of the site) shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced, and such development shall be carried out as approved. Reason: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
4. Approved Plan The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plan: Location Plan Drawing No: 025C Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to clarify the permission.
5. Phasing Plan Prior to the submission of any reserved matters application associated with this outline permission, a phasing plan for the development shall be provided to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All development on the site shall thereafter be undertaken in accordance with the agreed phasing (or any alternatives subsequently agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority).
6. Masterplan The first reserved matters shall include a masterplan for the whole of the site, setting out details of access roads within the site, site layout, areas of open space, landscaping, and scale. All subsequent reserved matters applications shall be in accordance with the approved masterplan unless any alteration to the masterplan is first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All development of the site shall thereafter be undertaken in accordance with the agreed phasing (or any alternatives subsequently agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority) Reason: To ensure the proper and appropriate development of the site
7. Contamination investigation and Remediation Strategy No development approved by this planning permission, except demolition to facilitate further ground investigation and demolition of existing buildings to ground floor slab level, shall commence until a remediation strategy to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. This strategy will include the following components:
i) A preliminary risk assessment which has identified: • All previous uses; • Potential contaminants associated with those uses; • A conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors; • Potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site. ii) A site investigation scheme, based on (i) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off site. iii) The results of the site investigation and the detailed risk assessment referred to in (ii) and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken. iv) A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in the remediation strategy in (iii) are complete and identifying any requirements for longer-term monitoring of pollutant linkages, maintenance and arrangements for contingency action. Any changes to these components require the written consent of the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.
The development shall proceed in accordance with the approved strategy. Reason: To ensure that the development does not contribute to, or is not put at unacceptable risk from, or adversely affected by, unacceptable levels of water pollution in line with National Planning Policy Framework and the Water Framework Directive.
8. Remediation implementation Prior to each phase of development being brought into use, or in the event that the development is undertaken in one phase, a verification report demonstrating the completion of works set out in the approved remediation strategy and the effectiveness of the remediation shall be submitted to, and approved in writing, by the local planning authority. The report shall include results of sampling and monitoring carried out in accordance with the approved verification plan to demonstrate that the site remediation criteria have been met. Reason: To ensure that the development does not contribute to, or is not put at unacceptable risk from, or adversely affected by, unacceptable levels of pollution in line with National Planning Policy Framework and the Water Framework Directive.
9. Further Contamination Remediation Strategy If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority) shall be carried out until a remediation strategy
detailing how this contamination will be dealt with has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The remediation strategy shall be implemented as approved. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. Reason: To ensure that the development does not contribute to, or is not put at unacceptable risk from, or adversely affected by, unacceptable levels of pollution in line with National Planning Policy Framework and the Water Framework Directive.
10. Piling Methods to be approved Piling and foundation designs using penetrative methods shall not be carried out other than with the written consent of the local planning authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the development does not contribute to, or is not put at unacceptable risk 5 from, or adversely affected by, unacceptable levels of pollution in line with National Planning Policy Framework and the Water Framework Directive.
11. Demolition Method Statement and Protection A Demolition Method Statement shall be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of any demolition. This Statement must include arrangements for protecting the environment and residents from Noise, Vibration and Dust. The statement shall also include proposed provisions for the removal of any potentially hazardous waste found / generated on site. Construction works should have regard to the following:
• No bonfires to be held on site at any time. • Hours of demolition and construction are to be limited to: Monday – Friday 0700 – 1900 Saturday 0900 – 1300 No activity on Sundays or Bank Holidays If there are to be any proposed deviations from these hours, please contact Environmental Health to discuss these. • Start up and movement of vehicles / equipment etc. will be limited to 30 minutes prior to the hours of construction only. • To minimise disturbance, broadband alarm or video shall be fitted to works vehicles instead of the conventional beepers when reversing. • Activities which may give rise to dust shall be controlled, as far as practicable, to minimise dust emissions. This must include controlling dust from regularly trafficked road areas. Dust suppression may be achieved using water and locating equipment and machinery, away from residential areas. • At all times, a contact telephone number shall be displayed on site for members of the public to use to raise issues. A named person will also be provided to Environmental Health in order for contact to be made should complaints be received. • Any waste arising at the site shall be appropriately segregated and controlled prior to its removal by an appropriately licensed contractor. Any waste arising from the activity which could potentially be contaminated in any way shall also be
segregated again, and removed appropriately. Environmental Health must be informed if this occurs. • The use of any radio / amplified music system on site must be kept at a level not to cause annoyance to noise sensitive premises beyond the boundary of the site. • Any future sub-contractors to the site shall be made aware of, and comply with any guidelines/conditions relating to site management of emissions of noise, dust, smoke, fumes etc., made in as part of the determination of this application.
• Letter drops to adjacent residents in close proximity should be considered as part of the Demolition / Construction phase to give a minimum of 48 hours’ notice of any exceptional activities proposed. Reason: To protect residents from nuisance due to the close proximity of existing residential dwellings to this site,
12. Flood Risk Mitigation prior to construction All flood risk mitigation measures set out in the Flood Risk Assessment submitted with the application including perimeter/quay wall raising, raised finished floor levels and flood resistance/resilience measures shall be fully implemented in accordance with the details provided prior to the first construction works on site, unless a suitable alternative is first agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Environment Agency. Reason: To ensure the appropriate flood risk mitigation is provided for the new development on the site.
13. Emergency Response Plan Prior to the submission of the first reserved matters, an emergency response plan for the Weymouth Peninsula including all public areas and proposed buildings shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall include details for evacuation of the site due to any warning of a flood or tidal event and the response that should be provided when such a warning is in place. Reason: In the interests of public safety.
14. No infiltration of Surface water into ground No infiltration of surface water drainage into the ground is permitted, other than where it has been demonstrated that it will not mobilise contamination, without the written consent of the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the development does not contribute to, or is not put at unacceptable risk from, or adversely affected by, unacceptable levels of water pollution in line with National Planning Policy Framework and the Water Framework Directive.
15. Surface water management scheme No development shall take place until a detailed and finalised surface water management scheme for the site, based upon the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development, has been submitted to, and approved
in writing by the local planning authority. The surface water scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the submitted details before the development is completed. Reason: To prevent increased risk of flooding and to improve and protect water quality.
16. Surface water maintenance and management No development shall take place until details of maintenance and management of the surface water sustainable drainage scheme have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details. These should include a plan for the lifetime of the development, the arrangements for adoption by any public body or statutory undertaker, or any other arrangements to secure the operation of the surface water drainage scheme throughout its lifetime. Reason: To ensure future maintenance of the surface water drainage system and to prevent increased risk of flooding.
17. Outline Estate Road Construction (adopted or private) Notwithstanding the submitted plans no construction must commence until precise details of the access, geometric highway layout, turning and parking areas as shown on the Peninsula Site Layout (Illustrative) 15 have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure the proper and appropriate development of the site.
18. Car Park Management Strategy Prior to commencement, a car park management plan should be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan should include details of the proposed VMS signage and include measures to encourage short stay parking, not associated with the proposed development, to be off site, in the main gateway car parks. Reason: This plan is seen as a pre-requisite for allowing the development to proceed, providing the necessary management plan to mitigate the impacts of the proposal.
19. Electric Vehicle charging scheme to be submitted Prior to commencement construction, a detailed plan showing provision of electric vehicle charging infrastructure should be provided and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan should include details for the future increase in the number of electric vehicle charging bays. Reason: To promote and provide for the increased take up of low-emission vehicles.
20. Grampian condition Before the development hereby approved is occupied or utilised the following works must have been constructed to the specification of the Local Planning Authority:
Pedestrian improvement works to the west and north of the site in accordance with the submitted walking audit. Replacement cycle signage to the Rodwell Trail VMS signage for car park to include all major approaches Reason: These specified works are seen as a pre-requisite for allowing the development to proceed, providing the necessary highway infrastructure improvements to mitigate the likely impact of the proposal.
21. Vehicle access construction Before the development is occupied or utilised the first 15 metres of the vehicle access, measured from the rear edge of the highway (excluding the vehicle crossing – see the Informative Note below), must be laid out and constructed to a specification submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that a suitably surfaced and constructed access to the site is provided that prevents loose material being dragged and/or deposited onto the adjacent carriageway causing a safety hazard.
22. Cycle parking scheme to be submitted The development hereby permitted must not be occupied or utilised until a scheme showing precise details of the proposed cycle parking facilities and the timing of their delivery is submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Any such scheme requires approval to be obtained in writing from the Local Planning Authority. The approved cycle parking facilities must be implemented in accordance with the agreed scheme, and thereafter, must be maintained, kept free from obstruction and available for the purpose specified. Reason: To ensure the proper construction of the parking facilities and to encourage the use of sustainable transport modes.
23. Travel Plan to be implemented A travel plan shall be submitted and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority setting out requirements for each phase of development. The relevant elements Travel Plan, in so far as they relate to each new building, must be implemented and be operational prior to first occupation of each building. Reason: In order to reduce or mitigate the impacts of the development upon the local highway network and surrounding neighbourhood by reducing reliance on the private car for journeys to and from the site.
24. Construction traffic management plan to be submitted Prior to construction, a Construction Traffic Management Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Plan shall cover: • Construction vehicle details (number, size, type and frequency of movement)
• A programme of construction works and anticipated deliveries • Timings of deliveries to avoid, where possible, peak traffic periods • A framework for managing abnormal loads • Contractors’ arrangements (compound, storage, parking, turning, surfacing and drainage) • Wheel cleaning facilities • Vehicle cleaning facilities • Inspection of the highways serving the site (by the developer (or his contractor) and Dorset Highways) prior to work commencing and at regular, agreed intervals during the construction phase • A scheme of appropriate signing of vehicle route to the site • A route plan for all contractors and suppliers to be advised on • Temporary traffic management measures where necessary
The construction must be carried out strictly in accordance with the approved Construction Traffic Management Plan. Reason: to minimise the likely impact of construction traffic on the surrounding highway network and prevent the possible deposit of loose material on the adjoining highway.
25. Development to the West of the Pavilion Notwithstanding the illustrative layout submitted with this outline application, any reserved matters application for any building proposed at the entrance of the Peninsula (on any of the land between the River Wey and the Beach, from north to south, and between the Pavilion Theatre and the Devonshire Buildings, from east to west) shall be designed and submitted at reserved matters in accordance with the following criteria:
i) Any building shall be of a height, mass and footprint which retains open, clear views between the Esplanade and Nothe Peninsula, including the backdrop of the World Heritage Coastline of Nothe Peninsula. It shall also allow for views of masts from boats moored at Custom House Quay from the Esplanade and shall be supported by a Landscape Visual impact assessment and by a model or computer modelling, to demonstrate the extent of views achieved with the building in the position proposed.
ii) Any building shall be sited to remain clear of all railway Lines, ensuring an uninterrupted view from Custom House Quay to the whole length of the Peninsula Quayside is retained.
iii) Any building shall be accompanied by a public open space (POS) which shall be provided between the Pavilion and the Devonshire Buildings, of sufficient size to host Weymouth public events and provide an all year round outstanding place, which will connect and enhance the variety of landscape characters of the area and provide an attractive setting to the conservation area.
iv) The site layout plan of any building shall include details of any associated private outdoor area, and shall also incorporate details of the provision of public open space to be retained between the Pavilion Theatre and Devonshire Buildings and beach to quayside. These details shall be submitted with full specification of hard and soft landscape layout for the whole area.
v) Any building shall show details of footpath links and street furniture demonstrating the wider public connectivity of the building and public open space with the Jurassic Tower, Pleasure Pier, Custom House Quay and the Esplanade. Such pedestrian links and street furniture shall be provided within this entrance area of the Peninsula prior to first occupation of any building approved.
vi) Any building shall not be sited within the Conservation Area boundary. Reason: To ensure that the scale and style of development is sympathetic to and does not dominate or detract from views between the adjoining historic area of the Esplanade and the World Heritage Coastline of the Nothe Peninsula.
26. Scale of development East of the Pavilion Any building to the east of the Pavilion shall be of a scale, height and mass which reflects and respects the low continuous roofline of the Esplanade. All building heights in this area shall not exceed 10 metres other than one hotel building which shall not exceed 11 metres in height.
27. Landscape Strategy Plan Notwithstanding the submitted landscape strategy plan, prior to the submission of the first reserved matters a revised hard and soft landscape strategy plan for the whole of the Peninsula shall be submitted for the site. The principle aim of the soft and hard landscape strategy plan is to provide a framework for creating an active public realm throughout the peninsula that relates to the character of Weymouth and encourages pedestrian interconnectivity between the Peninsula, the Esplanade, the commercial town centre and the harbour. The strategy plan should identify:
Areas of public open space with descriptions of the intended uses of these spaces; and Proposed pedestrian circulation around the site and pedestrian connectivity between the esplanade and custom house quay; and Proposed materials and furniture, including: paving materials, outdoor seating, sculpture, public art, signage, interpretation boards etc. ; and Proposed shrub and tree planting.
The four elements identified above should relate to the unique characteristics of Weymouth and, in particular The Esplanade and harbour areas. These characteristics include:
Georgian architecture – Striking architecture, repetition of form, muted colours. Victorian and Edwardian – Seaside leisure activities, bright colours. Maritime heritage – WWII history, railway, cranes, tall ships, warehouses, links to Europe.
28. Design and Access Statement Notwithstanding the submitted Design and Access Statement and prior to the submission of the first reserved matters, a revised Design and Access Statement for the whole of the Peninsula shall be submitted for approval. This will provide a framework for development and place making, creating an active public realm throughout the Peninsula that relates to the character of Weymouth and encourages pedestrian interconnectivity between the Peninsula, The Esplanade, the commercial town centre and the harbour. This information shall be submitted for agreement, demonstrating the design response to the site and a vision statement with framework masterplan which will address the following design principles.
Development proposals for the Peninsula should:
Create exceptional place making that connects the peninsula to the town and maximises the unique, outstanding historic and landscape qualities of the location. Prioritise pedestrians with limited access and parking accommodating disabled spaces and deliveries. Maintain a substantial gap in development between the Pavilion and Esplanade to ensure visual connectivity of local landscape character. Include a major public open space between the Esplanade and Pavilion to provide an exceptional quality place and setting to the Weymouth conservation area that connects the variety of local landscape characters. Be a sustainable scheme with a diverse mix of uses, that maximises the development potential of the site whilst respecting the landscape and visual qualities and constraints Respect the unique characteristics of Weymouth local landscape character, maritime history and architecture. These characteristics include, but are not limited to: the repetition of form and rhythm and continual roofline of the Georgian esplanade, the urban form within the town, the maritime heritage including WWII history, the dominance of the Nothe fort and gardens and World Heritage Coast, the on-site railway and harbour with tall ship mooring. Be at the same height or lower than the continuous roofline of the Esplanade, maintaining the Nothe Fort scheduled monument, the Pavilion and the Sky tower as the prominent built form. Include a pedestrian promenade circuit around the peninsula waterside of active public realm, with outdoor dining and access to the water.
Provide suitable outdoor space to host public events such as the seafood festival. Demonstrate exceptional, sustainable and contemporary place making and architecture. Use the highest quality materials in the buildings and public realm including paving materials, outdoor seating, sculpture, public art, signage and planting.
29. Perimeter Walkway The perimeter walkway of the whole Peninsula shall be implemented within I year from the occupation of the first building on the site. All other identified public connectivity and linkages to the rear of the Pavilion Theatre shall be submitted in detail with each phase of building works in accordance with the phasing plan approved in accordance with condition 5 above.
30. Lighting Strategy The first reserved matters application shall include a lighting mitigation plan/strategy for the first phase of development of the site and subsequent lighting mitigation plans or strategies shall be submitted and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority with reserved matters applications for subsequent phases, to accord with the Condition 5 above Reason: To ensure lighting does not impact upon or compromise existing biodiversity or integrated enhancements included in the buildings.
31. Biodiversity Mitigation Plan Enhancement features for birds/bats shall be included within the building design for each phase of the development and such features shall be installed in accordance with the Biodiversity Mitigation Plan to have first been approved by the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with Dorset Natural Environment Team. The positioning of all such enhancements on each building identified, shall be supervised by a qualified ecologist prior to first occupation of each building.
INFORMATIVE NOTES
1 National Planning Policy Framework Statement
In accordance with paragraph 38 of the NPPF the council, as local planning authority, takes a positive approach to development proposals and is focused on providing sustainable development. The council works with applicants/agents in a positive and proactive manner by: • offering a pre-application advice service, and • As appropriate updating applications/agents of any issues that may arise in the processing of their application and where possible suggesting solutions. In this case: • The applicant/agent was updated of any issues and provided with the opportunity to address issues identified by the case officer.
2. Section 106 Agreement This decision notice shall be read in conjunction with S106 agreement dated XXXX
3. Flood Resilient Construction: In view of the potential flood risks in this locality, we would advise that any developer of this site gives consideration to the use of flood resilient construction practices and materials in the design and build phase. Choice of materials and simple design modifications can make the development more resistant to flooding in the first place, or limit the damage and reduce rehabilitation time in the event of future inundation.
Guidance is available within the Department for Communities and Local Government publication ‘Improving the Flood Performance of New Buildings – Flood Resilient Construction, May 2007’ available at: - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/flood-resilient-construction-of- newbuildings
4. Flood Defence Consent: In addition to any other permission(s) that may have already been obtained, e.g. planning permission, an environmental permit for flood risk activities (formerly known as Flood Defence Consent prior to 6 April 2016) may be required to carry out work:
• In, under, over or near a main river – the River Wey is designated a ‘main’ river adjacent the site of the proposed development;
• On or near a flood defence on a main river;
• In the floodplain of a main river;
• On or near a sea defence;
For further information and to check whether a permit is required please visit: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/flood-risk-activities-environmental-permits
For any further advice, please contact your local Environment Agency FRA Permitting Officer, [email protected]
5. Pollution Prevention: Safeguards should be implemented during the construction phase to minimise the risks of pollution and detrimental effects to the water interests in and around the site. Such safeguards should cover the use of plant and machinery, oils/chemicals and materials; the use and routing of heavy plant and vehicles; the location and form of work and storage areas and compounds and the control and removal of spoil and wastes. We recommend the applicant refer to our Pollution Prevention Guidelines, which can be found at: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/pollution-prevention-for-businesses
6. Controlled Waste: If any controlled waste is to be removed off site, then site operator must ensure a registered waste carrier is used to convey the waste material off site to a suitably authorised facility. If the applicant require more specific guidance it is available on our website https://www.gov.uk/how-to-classify- different-types-of-waste
7. Contaminated Waste: If any contaminated waste is to be removed from the site then the applicant needs to ensure that sufficient testing has been undertaken in line with Waste classification technical guidance WM3. This is to ensure all waste on the site is correctly classified and disposed of accordingly to a suitably authorised facility.
If any hazardous waste is to be removed offsite the site operator must ensure that consignment notes are completed correctly in accordance with the legislation. If the applicant requires more specific guidance it is available on our website https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/hazardous-waste-consignmentnote
8. Sustainable Construction: Sustainable design and construction should be implemented across the proposed development. This is important in limiting the effects of and adapting to climate change. Running costs for occupants can also be significantly reduced.
9. Water efficiency: Water efficiency measures should be incorporated into this scheme. This conserves water for the natural environment and allows cost savings for future occupants. The development should include water efficient systems and fittings such as: dual-flush toilets; water-saving taps; water butts; showers and baths. Greywater recycling and rainwater harvesting should also be considered.
10. Developer-Led Infrastructure: The applicant is advised that, notwithstanding this consent, if it is intended that the highway layout, or any part of it is to be offered for public adoption under Section 38 of the Highways Act 1980, the applicant should contact Dorset County Council’s Development team. They can be reached by telephone at 01305 225401, by email at [email protected], or in writing at Development team, Dorset Highways, Environment and the Economy, Dorset County Council, County Hall, Dorchester, DT1 1XJ
11. Stopping-up of the Highway: The proposals will require the stopping up of an area of Highway and that DCC Highways confirm the land is surplus to requirements. If the applicant wishes to use Section 247 of the Planning Act to stop up those parts of the highway affected then this must be requested in writing from the County Highway Authority in advance of any physical works progressing to obtain a letter confirming the land is surplus. The applicant must then submit this letter with their application to the Department for Transport.
12. Section 278 Agreement (Grampian) The highway improvement(s) referred to in the recommended condition above must be carried out to the specification and satisfaction of the Local Highway
Authority in consultation with the Local Planning Authority and it will be necessary to enter into an agreement, under Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980, with the Local Highway Authority, before any works commence on the site.
APPENDIX
Full Consultation Responses in Full numbered as summaries in Section 8 of report above
8.1 Historic England
You will recall from our previous correspondence that Historic England had two principal concerns about the proposals; firstly that the height of the buildings proposed would detract from the setting of Nothe Fort (a Scheduled Monument) and secondly that the proposed pub/diner building at the neck of the peninsula did not respond to the historic grain of the area, to the detriment of the character and appearance of the conservation area.
In response to the former point regarding building heights, the applicant has made amendments to the proposals to lower the height of the proposed buildings. While there would still be some incursion into views of the Nothe Fort, the scale of the proposed buildings would be relatively subservient, allowing the fort and its associated gardens to remain a meaningful backdrop to the peninsula site. Views from the Nothe’s gun platforms back towards the esplanade and the beach, which are of significant illustrative historic value as a demonstration of the fort’s use preventing the beach from being used as a landing point for an invading enemy, would remain unobstructed.
We disagree with the conclusion of the applicant’s visual impact assessment that the impact of the proposals on views of the fort from the Esplanade are “minimal and positive”. There would still be a degree of harm to the setting of the monument through the increase in built form beneath and ahead of it. However, we are content that at the scale now proposed, the proposals have struck the right balance between facilitating development of the peninsula and preserving the setting of the Nothe Fort. It should be possible to further mitigate against any harm through the detailed design of the buildings at a reserved matters stage.
In regards to our other area of concern, that of the proposed pub/diner building at the neck of the peninsula not responding to the character and appearance of the conservation area, our concerns remain.
The peninsula site has developed from the original pier of the 1840s being progressively extended to the North by reclaiming land from the sea. Despite the progressive extension, the original alignment of the pier remains apparent. In constructing a building over this alignment, the historic visual connection between the Pier and Custom House Quay would be severed.
Historic England are of the view that maintaining a visual connection between the pier alignment and Custom House Quay should be an important principle behind any development here; not just for heritage reasons but also in terms of placemaking. An unobstructed view and pedestrian thoroughfare along the alignment of the tramway lines would invite the pedestrian to explore the peninsula and its proposed new facilities as well as preserving the historic grain.
A detailed hard landscaping plan could interpret the original alignment of the pier and use the tramway lines creatively. This could, of course, be delivered through a reserved matters application. Could the footprint of the pub/diner building also be resolved by the same means? This building will be the most challenging of all new structures on the peninsula to design; it needs to respond to the bull-nosed corner of the Grade II* Devonshire buildings opposite, to successfully address the pavilion, to engage with the proposed shared surface to the north, and stand clear of the historic pier alignment to its south. Commercially, we appreciate the desirability for an occupier to have a hotel floorplate with a central corridor providing access to bedrooms either side.
It would be preferable for the pub/diner building to be removed from this outline application and replaced by a full detailed planning application for this specific part of the scheme, which is within the conservation area. That would allow for detailed consideration of this critical component of the proposed development. However, if that is not achievable we may be content with a planning condition that requires, notwithstanding the information shown on the published plans, for the proposed pub/diner building to be located at least 4 metres further to the north than is currently shown. Planning Practice Guidance (Paragraph 012 ref 21a-012- 20140306) indicates that “Depending on the case, it may be possible for the local planning authority to impose a condition making a minor modification to the development permitted”. I would be grateful if you could confirm whether your authority could consider imposing such a condition on any approval.
The policies of NPPF chapter 12 are of particular relevance to these proposals. Paragraph 127 notes that planning decisions should ensure that developments “….add to the overall quality of the area….are visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout, and appropriate and sympathetic landscaping…..and are sympathetic to local character and history.” We suggest the proposals could better respond to these aims. Paragraph 130 states that “Permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character of an area or the way it functions”. Paragraph 200 reinforces these messages, with a particular focus on heritage. It notes that “local authorities should look for opportunities for development within conservation and the setting of heritage assets to enhance, or better reveal, their significance."
Recommendation Historic England has concerns regarding the application on heritage grounds. We consider that the issues and safeguards outlined in our advice need to be addressed in order for the application to meet the requirements of paragraphs 127, 130 and 200 of the NPPF.
Your authority should take these representations into account and seek amendments, safeguards or further information as set out in our advice
8.2 Natural England No objection, subject to conditions
Biodiversity: Natural England welcome the inclusion of the Ecological Phase 1 Survey and Bat Roost Assessment (dated 17 April 2018) and advise your authority that the recommendations and appropriate enhancement for the site is secured through a Biodiversity Mitigation and Enhancement Plan (BMEP). Provided the BMEP has been approved by the Dorset County Council Natural Environment Team and is made a condition of any permission then no further consultation with Natural England is required.
Designated sites: The site is within 200m of Portland Harbour and Shore SSSI and 700m of Radipole Lake SSSI, we recommend that a Construction Environment Management Plan (CEMP) is produced and implemented which includes methods for the suppression of dust during the construction phase to ensure effects from air pollution are reduced.
8.3 Sport England: The proposed development does not fall within either our statutory remit (Statutory Instrument 2015/595), or non-statutory remit (National Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) Par. 003 Ref. ID: 37-003-20140306), therefore Sport England has not provided a detailed response in this case, but would wish to give the following advice to aid the assessment of this application. General guidance and advice can however be found on our website: www.sportengland.org/planningapplications
If the proposal involves the provision of a new sports facility, then consideration should be given to the recommendations and priorities set out in any approved Playing Pitch Strategy or Built Sports Facility Strategy that the local authority may have in place. In addition, to ensure they are fit for purpose, such facilities should be designed in accordance with Sport England, or the relevant National Governing Body, design guidance notes: http://sportengland.org/facilities-planning/tools- guidance/design-and-cost-guidance/
In line with the Government’s NPPF (including Section 8) and PPG (Health and wellbeing section), consideration should also be given to how any new development, especially for new housing, will provide opportunities for people to lead healthy lifestyles and create healthy communities.
Sport England’s Active Design guidance can be used to help with this when developing or assessing a proposal. Active Design provides ten principles to help ensure the design and layout of development encourages and promotes participation in sport and physical activity.
NPPF Section 8: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/national-planning-policy- framework/8-promoting-healthy-communities
PPG Health and wellbeing section: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/health-and- wellbeing
Sport England’s Active Design Guidance: https://www.sportengland.org/activedesign
8.4 Theatres Trust: Thank you for consulting the Theatres Trust on the above application for a mixed use redevelopment at Weymouth Peninsula. We have been consulted because the site area includes the Pavilion Theatre, a facility which is valued by local people as demonstrated by its designation as an Asset of Community Value.
The trust supports this proposal, which would appear to benefit the theatre by enhancing the attractiveness of its surroundings and improving pedestrian access to and through the site. Through expansion of Weymouth’s leisure offer and efforts to make it more of a year-around attraction, this should also help enhance the theatre’s viability by expanding its potential market. In turn, the theatre can also continue to help draw people to the town which will help support the new uses on the Peninsula.
It appears form the indicative plans that the suitable access has been maintained for the theatre’s servicing requirements (get-in and get-out) along with car parking. We would though encourage the Council to engage with us at an early stage regarding the theatre should amendments be considered and proposals are further developed.
We appreciate at this stage it is an outline application, nonetheless we would encourage the Council as the applicant to agree demolition and construction strategies with the theatre operator (and ourselves) and for these to be conditioned as part of a permission. This is to ensure performances at the Pavilion are not unduly impacted by noise from works in close proximity to it.
Similarly we would seek appropriate soundproofing of the hotel adjacent to the theatre in order to mitigate the risk of future noise complaints in line with the Agent of Change principle set out in Paragraph 180 of the revised National Planning Policy Framework. Any restrictions placed on the theatre including deliveries and servicing could detrimentally harm its viability.
In conclusion we would support the granting of outline planning permission and look forward to continuing engagement with the Council as plans develop.
8.5 Environment Agency – Flood Risk, Contaminated Land, Waste Management
Based on the content of the updated Flood Risk Assessment (Syntegra Consulting, dated August 2018) we remove our objection to the proposed development, however wish to make the following comments:-
Flood Risk
The updated Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) is based solely on the flood risk evidence and mitigation strategy set out in your Authority’s Level 2 SFRA and Flood Risk Management Strategy. We note that no new evidence, in the form of modelling, has been carried out in support of this outline planning application. The applicants stated intention in the FRA is to only carry this out at a later stage (presumably at the reserved matters stage).
Please note that we are aware the Council is at present undertaking flood risk appraisal work for Weymouth, hence we would advise the Local Planning Authority (LPA) to satisfy themselves that the outputs, albeit draft, of their appraisal work are not significantly different to the current understanding of flood risk from the sea for this site.
If there is a difference in the understanding of flood risk from the sea, in particular in the future, then there may be merit in sharing this with the Council’s flood risk consultant (the applicant’s consultant) to allow the FRA to be updated accordingly.
The FRA is a desk based study which provides an overview of the flood risk to the site for the lifetime of the proposed development (50 years) and provides an overview of the minimum design criteria for proposed key flood risk mitigation measures to reduce flood risk from the sea, namely raising the perimeter of the site and raising floor levels of new buildings.
NOTE TO LPA: - As a reminder, the Council’s strategy for the site in respect to development opportunity is to raise ground levels and the perimeter/quay walls to mitigate flood risk from the sea. The Council’s strategy (2010) also sets out the need for maintenance/replacement of the sheet piling around the Pavilion and [former] ferry port peninsula site within the next 20-30 years; the Strategy notes the condition survey was carried out in 2005. Hence, should this outline planning application be approved we advise the LPA, for avoidance of doubt in the future, ensure a legally binding agreement, or similar, is in place to ensure delivery of the Council’s strategy.
The FRA sets out the minimum design criteria for the flood mitigation measures but recognises that at the reserved matters stage refinement of the
design criteria of such measures may be required. Because of this the LPA is advised that there is a possibility the site masterplan may need to be amended to reflect any changes to the minimum design criteria, for example the position of new buildings. Mindful this is an outline application with all matters other than access reserved we have no objection to this approach but leave it to the LPA to decide whether such an approach is acceptable to them.
Should the LPA be minded to approve this application we recommend they attach a suitably worded condition to any permission granted to ensure the flood risk mitigation measures as set out in the FRA (perimeter/quay wall raising, raised finished floor levels, and flood resistance/resilience measures) are fully implemented.
RECOMMENDATION: The Council’s Emergency Planners should be consulted in relation to flood emergency response and evacuation arrangements for the site. We strongly recommend that the applicant prepares a Flood Warning and Evacuation Plan for future occupants. The Local Planning Authority may wish to secure this through an appropriate condition. We can confirm that the site does lie within a Flood Warning area. We do not normally comment on or approve the adequacy of flood emergency response and evacuation procedures accompanying development proposals, as we do not carry out these roles during a flood. Our involvement with this development during an emergency will be limited to delivering flood warnings to occupants/users. Planning policy guidance places responsibilities on Local Planning Authorities to consult their Emergency Planners with regard to specific emergency planning issues relating to new development. Further details are set out in the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) available at: - http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/flood-risk-and- coastalchange/making-development-safe-from-flood-risk/
In relation to Flood Risk we request two informative notes be attached to any permission granted.
Contaminated Land. We have not reviewed the Phase 1 Desk Study in detail but we agree with the conclusions that the historic uses of the proposed development site could presents a high risk of contamination. This could be mobilised during construction to pollute controlled waters.
Controlled waters are sensitive in this location because the proposed development site is located upon Secondary aquifer and in proximity to the Harbour and sea.
The Phase 1 Desk Study M41956 (jnpgroup) dated November 2016 submitted in support of this planning application provides us with confidence that it will be possible to suitably manage the risk posed to controlled waters by this development. Further detailed information will however be required before built development is undertaken. It is our opinion that it would place an
unreasonable burden on the developer to ask for more detailed information prior to the granting of planning permission but respect that this is a decision for the Local Planning Authority
Waste Management. Should this proposal be granted planning permission, then in accordance with the waste hierarchy, we wish the applicant to consider reduction, reuse and recovery of waste in preference to offsite incineration and disposal to landfill during site construction.
8.6 Wessex Water
Proposed Sewerage Infrastructure: The site shall be served by separate systems of drainage.
Sewers can be offered for adoption under a S104 application subject to technical review and satisfactory engineering proposals. The developer should liaise with our local development engineer [email protected] to agree proposals and submit details for technical review prior to construction. Please see guidance notes ‘DEV011G – Section 104 Sewer Adoption’ and ‘DEV016G - Sewer Connections’ for further guidance Foul Drainage A connection to the public foul network can be agreed. The downstream sewer network has limited capacity and upon grant of planning Wessex Water may need to plan, design and construct any necessary improvements to accommodate permitted development. Prioritising and programming these works will require consultation with all development. Prioritising and programming these works will require consultation with all stakeholders to ensure that capacity improvements can be delivered to match the rate of development. Please keep us informed of proposals so we may review as necessary Any redundant on site sewers will require sealing at the point of connection to the public system
Surface Water Drainage
We support the Lead Local Flood Authority comments that the most sustainable method of SW drainage is to discharge to sea quickly and the applicant should review their drainage strategy to consider a discharge direct to sea with storage for tidal locking. Surface Water connections to the public foul sewer network will not be permitted. If there are any existing surface water connections to the existing foul water system these should be redirected upon re-development.
Water Infrastructure
A water supply can be made available to the proposed development with new water mains installed under a requisition arrangement. A point of connection
can be reviewed upon receipt of a Section 41 Requisition Application and the developer is advised to contact Wessex Water as early as possible in the development process. Please consult the Wessex Water website for further information. www.wessexwater.co.uk/Developers/Supply/Supply-connections- and-disconnections
Buildings above two storeys will require pumped storage.
8.7 DCC - Lead Local Flood Authority
We have no in-principle objection to this development, however, we must be sure that Surface Water (SW) can be appropriately managed or stored during raised tidal levels, so that the site does not flood behind any tidal / wave overtopping defences.
Clear demonstration of the applicant’s strategy for managing drainage during a combined rainfall and raised tidal events is needed given the increased vulnerability classification that this site will have post-development. If below ground storage is not achievable, then it may be appropriate to consider above ground storage with discharge routes carefully designed to travel safely over the site and into the sea
Thank you for (re)consulting Dorset County Council’s (DCC) Flood Risk Management (FRM) team, as relevant Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) in this matter. It is appropriate that we are consulted with specific regard to the Surface Water (SW) management for major development, as defined within Article 2(1) of the Town & Country Planning, Development Management Procedure, England Order 2015. Given that the proposal under consideration relates to a development with floor space greater than 1000m2, we acknowledge that it qualifies as major development.
We have already commented extensively on these proposals in our letter and email dated 28/06/2018 and 26/09/18. These previous responses provide some assessment of prevailing flood risk to the applicant’s site and surrounding areas.
We suggest that the Local Planning Authority (LPA) review this response as a reminder of the setting of the site from a flood risk perspective as well as our reasons for objecting previously.
We now write in response to your recent (re)consultation dated 15/10/2018 and subsequent revised information provided to us by Syntegra Consulting via Cushman & Wakefield on the 12/10/2018, referenced below: • Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) & Drainage Strategy (DS): FRA & SUDS Strategy for Planning – Weymouth Peninsular, The Esplanade, Weymouth, DT4 8ED – Syntegra Consulting – Rev B (12/10/2018) – Ref No: 18-4062
Further detail has been provided which addresses the concerns offered in our previous responses, as a result we are able to clarify the following: • The applicant has recognised the most sustainable method of drainage (in this particular case) as creation of, or re-use of, a direct discharge to the sea, but also now understands that this discharge maybe prone to tidal locking and therefore not available / viable during a high tide event. Tidal locking may occur when sea levels rise above outlet levels when there is insufficient head difference between collection points and sea level. As a result, Syntegra has committed to storing all storm water from the site, during a combined rainfall and high tide event. This analysis was constrained to lower order return periods (for tidal and pluvial elements), however, when combined, these lower return periods typically produce a higher magnitude “combined” event. • To this end Syntegra were asked to demonstrate that sufficient storage could be provided temporarily, on site, for a 1 in 30-year rainfall event. This volume would then be discharge at an uncontrolled rate into the sea during low tide / following a coastal flood event. • The applicant was asked to consider 1 in 1-year tidal event levels with respect to drainage discharge. For all parts of the site the applicant was able to demonstrate sufficient fall between ground levels, any over ground or underground storage and 1 in 1-year high tide levels; except for one part of the site, where water will be held safely above ground, until tidal levels recede. • Some discussion with respect to exceedance and raised floor levels has also been provided; therefore, increasing the development’s resilience to flooding. • Whilst the applicant has not completed any survey work with regards to existing drainage, they have committed the applicant to this work at a later stage and confirmed that new SW outlets will be constructed where necessary. • Appendix G of the above document includes a provisional layout as to where storage during a combined event will be held.
Given the commitments and substantiation summarised above, we are satisfied that SW can be safely managed during low level tidal events and that sufficient consideration has been given to any residual risk that remain.
We therefore have no objection to the application subject to the conditions and informative notes at the end of this letter being included on any permission granted.
Whilst we are content to withdraw our objection, given the above revisions and the Environment Agency’s (EA) acceptance of the proposals, we would emphasise the following, which will need to be addressed at Discharge of Conditions (DoC) stage:
• The analysis regarding a joint probability event is limited. Any DoC applicant will need to undertake this formally and in accordance with guidance. The scope of the analysis agreed by us, was to ensure that at a minimum base level could be
secured – it should not be viewed as comprehensive or acceptable for detailed design purposes. • The storage volumes calculated using HR Wallingford’s web-based tools, as far as we are aware these online calculations assume a continuous discharge during the rainfall event and as such they are not appropriate for sizing and design of any on site storage. These calculations will need revisiting at DoC / Detailed Design stage. • We continue to note that no consideration has been made as to who might own or be responsible for maintaining infrastructure at this site. Ideally, we would like to see adoption of any SW infrastructure by Wessex Water (WW). As such, the applicant should contact WW to ascertain whether they might have any in-principle objections to adoption of infrastructure at this site.
To ensure that the above elements are properly considered, in addition to the usual detail such as: invert, cover levels and storage design, we recommend the following conditions be attached to any permission granted:
CONDITION No development shall take place until a detailed and finalised surface water management scheme for the site, based upon the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The surface water scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the submitted details before the development is completed.
REASON To prevent increased risk of flooding and to improve and protect water quality.
CONDITION No development shall take place until details of maintenance and management of the surface water sustainable drainage scheme have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented and thereafter managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details. These should include a plan for the lifetime of the development, the arrangements for adoption by any public body or statutory undertaker, or any other arrangements to secure the operation of the surface water drainage scheme throughout its lifetime.
REASON To ensure future maintenance of the surface water drainage system and to prevent an increased risk of flooding.
NOTES TO THE LPA: The following areas are outside of our statutory remit, however, they remain pertinent to SW management because of their connection to flood risk management. We therefore suggest you consider them on a discretionary basis:
We are encouraged by the recommendation and commitment for any future DoC applicant to use flood resilient construction techniques and agree with the Environment Agency’s (EA) informative concerning this. We also echo the following comment in the EA’s letter dated 2nd October 2018:
“Should the LPA be minded to approve this application we recommend they attach a suitably worded condition to any permission granted to ensure the flood risk mitigation measures as set out in the FRA (perimeter/quay wall raising, raised finished floor levels, and flood resistance/resilience measures) are fully implemented.” It is important to understand that drainage cannot be managed safely and in accordance with policy unless the tidal risk has been thoroughly addressed. As such, the EA should be satisfied with any conditions you propose concerning the above. You may therefore wish to take further advice from them about any flood risk conditions that the planning authority is minded to attach and as to how these might be worded.
We also agree with the EA’s comments concerning Flood Warning and Evacuation planning and note some of the discussion regarding this within the referenced FRA. Should you wish to condition this you should seek the advice of Dorset Councils Partnership emergency planner Jess Rice, and Dorset County Council’s Emergency Planning service, who can be reached at [email protected].
Our (DCC/FRM) generic guidance note regarding SW management, for the applicant’s information can be found at www.dorsetforyou.com/localfloodrisk. Should you require further clarification of our comments or position in respect of this proposal, please do not hesitate to contact me. Flood Risk Engineer.
8.8 DCC – Highways and Sustainable Transport
The proposal is an outline application, however, the applicant has requested that ACCESS be considered in full at this stage and therefore detailed comments are provided.
Principle of development The Weymouth peninsular has significant importance as a development opportunity. The Highway Authority do not consider this proposal provides a sensible pattern of land use types when related to the wider policies and aspirations relating to Weymouth Town Centre. The Weymouth Town Centre
Masterplan and more recent Transport and Movement Study recommend reducing the dominance of motor traffic in town centre streets, focussing short stay car parking in key gateway car parks outside of the town centre, rather than on the peninsula, and contributing to traffic management along the Esplanade and King Street. As proposed, the public car parking element of the scheme, for which there is little information on the operation regime, will be likely to continue to draw unnecessary traffic through this key part of Weymouth.
Consequently, while the resulting traffic distribution may be little worse than the current situation, this proposal would not contribute towards the aspiration for a more vibrant pedestrian and public realm along the esplanade as proposed in successive Town Centre plans.
Comments on the detail of the proposed development Trip generation for the site’s varied proposed uses has been predicted using TRICS. The pavilion site has been excluded as this is an existing use which will remain and is, therefore, regarded as neutral. TRICS is the national standard for trip generation analysis and employs a system of site selection filtering that enables users to simulate site scenarios through several progressive stages and to calculate vehicular and multi-modal trip rates based on these selections. An allowance for pass-by and transferred trips of people already in the town centre area has been made, along with an allowance for linked trips and cross visitation trips. These discounts have not been applied to the Hotel or Harbour Building.
The proposed development is predicted to generate up to an additional 26 vehicular departure trips in the AM peak period and up to 42 vehicular trips in the 17:00 to 18:00 PM peak period, allowing for discounted trips. It is interesting to note that a survey of the existing car parks generated observed departures of 80 vehicles during the same peak time on a Wednesday in June this year during a 24 hour video survey. For additional robustness the existing car park use has been left within the junction assessment even though it could be argued that a proportion of it will be displaced to other car parks due to its reduction in size and change of use. This is particularly the case for the Esplanade/King Street junction.
The TA considered the distribution of the development traffic on key junctions on the local highway network. At no point was there a predicted increase of vehicular traffic greater than 3%. The conclusion reached was that there would be no significant impact on the operation of the network. This is accepted by the County Highway Authority.
The car parking is being reduced from 629 spaces to 280 which is considered to be sufficient to meet the needs of the development site. In addition to freeing land for development, this reduction may have the potential to reduce the
number of vehicle trips using the Esplanade (south of King Street), provided that those trips related to the use of the beach or town centre are managed and use other existing long stay car parks (such as Swannery and Lodmoor parks or ones within the town). This will require an appropriate car park management strategy that the applicant will need to provide.
In addition, 62 cycle parking spaces will be provided on the site and secured by condition. It should be noted that a signed route for cycles already exists and connects the site to the NCN 26, Rodwell Trail, via the Esplanade and Westham Bridge in both directions. It is signed but these signs are out of date, in that they use the word “Ferry” in addition to the route number and are difficult to follow.
Public comments received about the proposed extension of the bus route and particularly buses turning and the proposed bus stop in front of Devonshire Buildings are noted. There are also concerns over the bus stop and turning area (which have received many comments) and this should be looked at further by the LPA if this is to be progressed.
Cycling is now permitted on the promenade in Weymouth, except during peak pedestrian flow periods between May and September. The application proposes to support total removal of cycling restrictions on the promenade. This is not deliverable as part of the proposal and may not be supported locally or desirable. The facility shown in Appendix G of the Transport Assessment is not a shared-use facility as described but a dedicated cycle route. If such a route were to be provided it is likely to be in a different location to this and would require the full removal of the PSPO. Cycling along the sea front would ideally be provided for with a dedicated cycle track located between the road and the promenade to minimise points of conflict. This would be a major engineering project and beyond the scope of the current proposals to deliver.
The mitigation measures suggested by the applicant’s consultant to aid sustainability and increase active travel include:
• Section 106 contributions to be made available to provide a bus stop and associated facilities on the seaward side of the Esplanade adjacent to Alexandra Gardens. This will facilitate the future extension of a bus service to the Peninsula site if it becomes viable and removes the need for the bus facilities in front of Devonshire Buildings shown on the submitted drawings. • Cycle parking within the site. • A series of localised improvements to the pedestrian realm providing for improved pedestrian access from the north to be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. • Improved signage for cyclists from the Rodwell Trail to the site (final locations and routing to be agreed).
• Provision of a Variable Message Sign (VMS) signing in relation to car parking at the Peninsula car park. • Electric vehicle charging point(s) should be provided and maintained.
In the interests of promoting sustainability and active travel, it is suggested that the above measures are secured either by condition or by way of a Planning Agreement.
In conclusion, the County Highway Authority considers that the submitted Transport Assessment and its Addendum are satisfactory. Whilst it is accepted that the proposal may increase traffic flows on the immediate highway network, the residual cumulative impact of the development cannot be thought to be "severe", when consideration is given to paragraph 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) – July 2018. Should planning permission be granted, the County Highway Authority recommends that a number of conditions be imposed.
8.9 DCC Archaeologist With regard to impact on below-ground archaeology, I consider that the application’s Archaeological Impact Assessment has looked at the evidence in an appropriate manner, and its conclusion that it is unlikely that significant remains would be affected seems reasonable to me. Both the Archaeological Impact Assessment and the Heritage Impact Assessment also consider the buildings and structures on the site. I have no reason to doubt the accuracy here, and would simply add that more detailed recording of some of the buildings may be appropriate.
8.10 DCC Natural Environment Team (Ecology) - No objection subject to conditions and S106 contributions.
We have received a BMP for the above planning application but have not yet issued a Certificate of Approval. I was concerned about the focus being largely on the buildings (birds and bats) and hard standing areas rather than addressing the wider harbour/marine environment.
We regularly discuss Biodiversity Mitigation Plans (BMPs) with Dorset Wildlife Trust (DWT), and so I raised concerns about this one with their marine team. I understand Dorset Wildlife Trust has now sent in a separate response (see below). We do not feel able to approve the BMP until the issues raised by have been addressed and appropriate mitigation and enhancements included in the BMP to address the marine environment.
Nature Conservation Officer Natural Environment Team
30/08/2018
Dorset Wildlife Trust’s comment on Application Details (WP/18/00403/OUT) LAND KNOWN AS WEYMOUTH PENINSULA, THE ESPLANADE, WEYMOUTH
Dorset Wildlife Trust would like to make the following comments on this proposed development.
Our concerns are around the limited scope of the Phase 1 Ecological Assessment and the apparent lack of consideration of the South Marine Plan. The Phase 1 ecological assessment significantly overlooks the marine environment. The assessment concludes “no further survey is required with regards to the aquatic habitats surrounding the site” on the premise that the “majority of surrounding marine habitat is designated as made-ground”. The field survey report only notes that “The water surrounding the peninsula is relatively deep, and little was observed of the substrate”. The only way to discover if there are any important marine species/habitats present in the surrounding area, and therefore potentially affected by the development, is to investigate. We do not consider the ecological assessment to be adequate for that reason and would expect to see the Phase 1 ecological assessment properly address the surrounding marine environment. ecological assessment does identify the likely (but unconfirmed) presence of seagrass adjacent to the site, but does not then appear to consider seagrass beds as a UK priority habitat or recommend any further investigation. We would expect to see confirmation of the presence of Zostera beds and some effort at determining the condition and extent of the beds before being able to determine the likely impact of the development.
The peninsula end (B14 and B15) is over water, constructed on wooden piles – any renovation/demolition here (a renovated pleasure pier is mentioned) would have impacts on marine species (including physical disturbance and noise), this also needs more assessment. A pleasure pier does offer some possible habitat creation, marine research and marine engagement/interpretation opportunities which might be considered as part of the biodiversity mitigation.
Will the sea-wall surrounding the site need any repair or enhancement, especially in view of projected sea-level rise? This would also likely have a marine impact. We are also disappointed to see that there is no mention anywhere of the south marine plan, adopted in July 2018. A marine plan becomes a statutory consideration in all relevant planning decisions once it is published for public consultation. This included the South Marine Plan whilst in draft stage (since Nov 2016).
The South Marine Plan must be used for all planning decisions for the sea, coast, estuaries and tidal waters as well as developments that impact these areas, such as infrastructure. All public authorities are responsible for implementing the South Marine Plan through existing regulatory and decision-making processes.
Marine Policy and Advocacy Manager
01/11/2018 Thank you for your consultation on the above application. It is important to ensure at this stage the principles of the biodiversity mitigation and net gain are firmly established and agreed, for this outline application. We have therefore asked for further amendments/clarification in the BMP on some outstanding concerns as detailed below.
Section F. Mitigation
There is insufficient detail on lighting mitigation. A lighting mitigation plan/strategy for the site will be approved by the LPA at the full planning application stage to ensure lighting does not impact upon or compromise existing biodiversity or integrated enhancements included in the buildings.
You have included the main issues of concern during demolition and construction e.g. pollution, run-off etc. Again the detail should be included in a A demolition and construction environmental method statement to be approved by the LPA.
Section G Enhancements/Net Gain
Within fabric enhancements The installation of a minimum of 1 bird box per building is very low for the scale of this development and therefore we would recommend at least 3 boxes/terraces are included per building and that a minimum number for different species is stated to ensure a variety of boxes are included within the development. These should be integrated into the building fabric rather than where possible. Some suitably located bat tubes should also be included on the harbour side. We would normally request a plan showing where these will be located. However, given time constraints a statement could be included to say a suitably qualified ecologist will oversee the positioning and inclusion of the enhancement features for birds/bats within the building design and installation.
Interpretation/Education We want to ensure that any interpretation included is effective and engaging and this will require some planning and discussion with appropriate organisations such as Dorset Wildlife Trust, Natural England and Dorset Coast Forum. Natural England have suggested a variety of ways which could be considered such as funding interpretation boards, a TV screen situated in Weymouth Marina, and donations to marine projects in the local area.
Again detail of how this will be achieved should be stated eg: A marine interpretation/awareness plan will be produced for the site in consultation with appropriate organisations and approved by the LPA. We would
recommend this is included within the BMP with your last two existing bullets points included as examples.
8.11 DCP -Environmental Health
Contamination Please refer the submitted Phase 1 Contamination report to a suitably qualified Contaminated land Consultant for review and suggestion of appropriate comments. In addition, Environmental Protection request that the Unexpected Contamination Condition is applied to any permission granted.
Demolition Due to the age of the buildings, it is likely that Asbestos Containing Material will be present within the structures. Please ensure that the Environment Agency and Health & Safety Executive are made aware of this application and proposed demolition and any formal guidance produced by either enforcing body is referred to during the demolition phase of the development
This demolition is likely to have significant effects upon the environment and residents. I strongly advise that the Developer produces a Method Statement for the demolition stage of the development.
Noise Once the reserved matters are submitted to the council for consideration, Environmental Protection require suitable noise assessments to also be provided in relation to any plant proposed to be installed within the development. Any noise assessment should also consider the cumulative effect of the different plant and equipment to be used within the development area.
8.12 DCP Landscape Officer Comments
Landscape Policy Context West Dorset, Weymouth & Portland Local Plan, Adopted Plan 2015
Policy ENV1 Landscape, Seascape and Sites of Geological Interest
Policy ENV10 The Landscape and Townscape Setting
I. All development proposals should contribute positively to the maintenance and enhancement of local identity and distinctiveness. Development should be informed by the character of the site and its surroundings. II. Development will provide for the future retention and protection of trees and other features that contribute to an area’s distinctive character. Such features may not always be designated or otherwise formally recognised. III. Development should only be permitted where it provides sufficient hard and soft landscaping to successfully integrate with the character of the site and its surrounding area.
IV. Opportunities to incorporate features that would enhance local character, including public art, or that relate to the historical, ecological or geological interest of a site, should be taken where appropriate.
Policy ENV12: The design and positioning of buildings
I. Development will achieve a high quality of sustainable and inclusive design. It will only be permitted where it complies with national technical standards and where the siting, alignment, design, scale, mass, and materials used complements and respects the character of the surrounding area or would actively improve legibility or reinforce the sense of place. This means that: · The general design should be in harmony with the adjoining buildings and the area as a whole; · The position of the building on its site should relate positively to adjoining buildings, routes, open areas, rivers, streams and other features that contribute to the character of the area; · The scale, mass and positioning of the building should reflect the purpose for which the building is proposed; · The quality of the architecture is appropriate to the type of building with particular regard to its architectural elegance, symmetry and rhythm, and richness of detail; · Materials are sympathetic to the natural and built surroundings and where practical sourced locally.
Policy WEY1 Weymouth Town Centre Strategy · To retain and enhance the area’s rich and distinct local character and notable landmarks, and the harmony in the scale, massing and materials used that help create a cohesive character, particularly when viewed from the sea and coastline taking account of views across Weymouth Bay; · To have an attractive public realm benefitting from the waterfront location.
Policy WEY 6 Ferry Peninsula Extreme care is needed to ensure that the scale and style of development is sympathetic to and does not dominate or detract from the adjoining historic areas of the Esplanade and the Nothe. I. The ferry peninsula should be re-developed to include leisure / tourist-related uses, supported by complementary town centre uses and which may include housing, and including provision for the continued operation of the ferry service. II. A comprehensive scheme is required for the site which complements the scale, mass and rhythm of the terraces along the Esplanade so as to create a coherent seafront and does not detract from the dominance of the Nothe Fort in views from the North. An elegant landmark building may be permitted.
Weymouth Town Centre Masterplan 2015
The Weymouth Town Centre Masterplan’s vision for the Peninsula Site is the creation of a new destination on the Peninsula, including upgraded tourism and leisure facilities, new public spaces, family-orientated commercial uses and residential. This vision sits alongside a vibrant working harbour.
Aim of application set out in Design and Access Statement identifies:
· Prominent and highly visible from most parts of the seafront area.
· Located between the town centre and the Nothe Fort, which is a scheduled ancient monument and backdrop to views over the bay.
· Scenic views of the South Dorset Coast and the whole of the Esplanade from all parts of the Peninsula.
· There is an opportunity to comprehensively plan this development of the site and improve the access to the public.
· The site has the potential to provide for a different market, potentially one with a high spend and demand for associated facilities, food and drink establishments or niche retail.
· Any scheme on this site has the capacity to significantly change the feel of the town centre.
· There is significant potential for high quality leisure facilities.
EXISTING LANDSCAPE CHARACTER AND VISUAL AMENITY
The Weymouth and Portland Conservation Area Appraisal (CAA) provides a good background to the distinct character areas of the Town Centre. In the CAA these character areas have been described as “sub-areas” and include:
1. The Esplanade sub-area (including Weymouth beach)
2. The Melcombe Regis sub-area (St Mary and St Thomas streets)
3. Northern and Southern Greenhill sub-area Further to these three character areas, The Old Weymouth sub-area includes a couple of distinct areas that are linked either visually or physically to the Weymouth Peninsula, these being:
4. The harbour
5. The Nothe Gardens and Fort
All five of the townscape character areas highlighted above are interlinked by road and pedestrian routes and by the intervisibility of views between them. The Weymouth Peninsula sits at an important visual and physical junction between The Esplanade, The Harbour and the Nothe Gardens and Fort. These links include:
· The Fort’s visual prominence at the entrance to the harbour in views from The Esplanade, The Peninsular and the Greenhill sub-area. Because of its visual prominence it is easy to understand its purpose (a fort) and, as a tourist attraction, gains a great deal of trade from people seeing it from the esplanade. This is evidenced in the recent and historic applications for signage on the face of the Fort.
· The prominence of the Nothe Gardens as a green backdrop in views from The Esplanade, The Peninsular and the Greenhill sub-area.
· The visual connection between The Esplanade and the Harbour that is provided by the gap between Pavilion building and the Devonshire buildings. When viewed from the Esplanade, the sight of masts and tall ships in this gap provides a strong visual clue to the harbour.
· The gap between the Pavilion and the Devonshire buildings will also provide a clear separation between the historic seafront buildings and any modern development proposed for the Peninsula.
PROPOSALS
This application is an Outline Application for the demolition of all existing buildings on the site (excluding the Pavilion and the Jurassic Skyline buildings) and for the redevelopment of the site to incorporate a mix of leisure and commercial uses. A number of drawings and images have been submitted with the application to indicate how the site may be developed to incorporate the required mix of leisure and commercial uses, these include:
· Drawing 037a – Site Layout Option 15
· Drawing 023b - Peninsula Option 15 Massing
· Original and amended views – 20/09/18
A Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) has been submitted with the application, along with a landscape strategy report.
The scheme shown on the most recently submitted drawings show:
· An 11m high “Main Hotel” immediately to the east of the Pavilion
· Three, 10m high restaurants between the main Hotel and the Jurassic Skyline · A large 10m high leisure unit on the eastern edge of the Peninsular
· A 10m high “Pub/Diner with Accommodation” in the gap between the Pavilion and the Devonshire Buildings.
POTENTIAL IMPACT ON LANDSCAPE/TOWNSCAPE CHARACTER AND VISUAL AMENITY
In July 2018, we were consulted on Drawing 23a which showed all proposed buildings having pitched roofs and being between 5m to 7m taller than the current scheme. At these heights it was apparent that the buildings would dominate the views to the Nothe Fort and Gardens and cause the Pavilion and Devonshire Buildings to lose their primacy in views from the Esplanade and Nothe Gardens.
I also raised concerns regarding the impact that the introduction of a building in the gap between the Pavilion and the Devonshire Buildings would have on the visual connection between the Esplanade, the harbour and the Nothe Gardens.
In September 2018 the revised Drawing 23b was submitted, which showed the pitch roof removed and the heights of buildings reduced. Based on this information, I agree that any adverse impact on views between the Esplanade and the Nothe Gardens and Fort will not be significant and do not object to this aspect of the scheme (subject to the detailed design of the proposed buildings being of high quality).
However, it remains my opinion that the view between the Pavilion and the Devonshire Buildings is an important visual and physical connection between the Esplanade/Promenade and the harbour. This gap also provides an important separation between the historic end of the built form of the Esplanade (at the Devonshire Buildings) and the modern and contemporary proposals for the Peninsula.
The introduction of a building in this gap will break the visual connection between the different townscape character areas highlighted above and will impact on the character of the southern end of the Esplanade by blurring the boundary between the historic character and the new development.
LANDSCAPE STRATEGY The submitted landscape strategy offers a broad list of design principles that do not really consider the character of Weymouth or provide any detailed recommendations for how the development requirement from the Weymouth Town Centre Masterplan could be achieved. I believe that it is important that the landscape strategy provides greater detail in the outline stage of the application so that it is a useful document that can inform the detailed design stage.
SUMMARY Given my comments above, I believe that the introduction of a large building in the gap between the Peninsula and the Devonshire buildings will result in visual and townscape impacts that are not in accordance with the following Local Plan policies.
· Policy ENV 10 – I
· Policy ENV 12 – I
· Policy WEY 1
· Policy WEY 6 – II
I do not have an objection to the proposed uses for the Peninsula, subject to the visual gap between the Devonshire Terrace and the Pavilion Theatre being preserved. To preserve the visual gap, a minimum clear distance of 60m should be maintained from the eastern extent of the Devonshire Buildings towards the Pavilion Building (See figure below).
Weymouth Peninsula Landscape Consultation Comments 23.10.18
Associated designations/ Policies Local Plan Policy ENV1, ENV6, ENV10, ENV12, Wey1 Weymouth Town Centre SPD 2015,
Weymouth Conservation Area Adjacent to Heritage Coast and Scheduled Ancient Monument
Overview The local plan identifies Weymouth as a nationally important tourist and recreation destination with ‘outstanding quality landscape, seascape and build heritage’. The site setting is truly outstanding being surrounded by World Heritage Coast, the scheduled ancient monument of the Nothe fort and gardens, the Esplanade and Weymouth Town Centre Conservation Area.
The Weymouth Town Centre SPD 2015 states: The overall vision for Weymouth town centre is to be a place of unique character and distinctiveness, which builds on its maritime heritage’. The principle of development, the land uses of pub and hotel is strongly encouraged and supported. However, the submitted landscape strategy fails the vision of the SPD and local plan requirements for sustainable design that enhances local distinctiveness.
Impact on views at the end of the esplanade The local plan places great weight on high quality design that not only maintains but enhances the landscape qualities of a site. The potential major loss of views to and from Nothe gardens and fort from the esplanade is of significant concern and goes against the local plan and Wey Town Centre SPD. I also disagree with the LVIA that there would be low to moderate magnitude of change on views to the fort from the esplanade
The loss of the important visual gap between the pavilion and the esplanade would disconnect the harbour and the Nothe from Weymouth bay. This open space is seen as an essential link of the key characteristics of the area. This can be seen on a number of views including Viewpoint 1/1C Appendix C of the submitted LVIA 23.8.18 and View 6 where the indicative roofline shows loss of views across the bay towards the AONB in the distance.
Impact on views of the Fort LVIA Viewpoint 1 Appendix C also highlights the potential impact on views of the Nothe fort. Whilst I have reviewed revisions since submitted to building height proposals, I suggest that the skyline should generally decline in height from the Pavilion and proposed hotel to the sky tower. Weymouth is characterised by a consistently low and continuous, skyline and this should be reflected in the peninsula development. Thus allowing the pavilion and Nothe fort and the landscape setting to dominate. Reference WEY 6 Ferry Peninsula ii) Development should not ‘detract from the dominance of the Nothe Fort in views from the North.
Landscape Setting and character The Devonshire buildings mark a clear, defined end to the esplanade in their perpendicular rotation and double frontage onto the beach and harbour. The break in built form to the pavilion allows visual connection between the harbour/Nothe fort and the esplanade and contributes to the setting the conservation area and the scheduled ancient monument.
At present, views in this ‘gap’ of ship masts and Nothe gardens, draw visitors along the seafront from the esplanade, indicating the presence of the harbour beyond. It is the collective of the diverse variety of landscape qualities, the harbour, the beach, the historic architecture of the esplanade, the historic military presence of the Nothe and its gardens which gives Weymouth its unique character.
The public open space in this gap from the Devonshire buildings to the peninsula should be strengthened and the proposed pub/dinner be restricted in proximity to the esplanade. Mr. P. Wyeth Dorset Councils Partnership, details this further in his response.
It should be noted that Wey. Town Centre SPD Connections and Links Plan, illustrates the desire by the LA to make stronger links between the Peninsula site and Nothe Fort.
Reference ENV 12 i) development will only be permitted where the sitting, alignment, design, scale, mass and materials used compliments and respects the character of the surrounding area’ and also ‘reinforce the sense of place Local plan 2.5.7 The design should be informed by the relationship with nearby buildings and the general pattern of development
Local Plan WEY1. Lists the requirement of development to retain and enhance the areas rich and distinct local character and notable landmarks, and the harmony in the scale, massing and materials used help create a cohesive character
Landscape Strategy Design Review
Redevelopment of this highly sensitive premier location should provide a wealth of exciting opportunities to significantly enhance Weymouth Town Centre for the future. The landscape strategy falls short of the high aspirations for this prime site. The document insufficiently analyses the qualities and character and opportunities of the town and site. Reference ENV10i) All development proposals should contribute positively to the maintenance and enhancement of local identity and distinctiveness. Development should be informed by its surroundings.
Traffic - the dominance of traffic and parking in the illustrative scheme is unacceptable. Weymouth is already well serviced with parking/bus routes. This site should certainly be dominated by pedestrians and maximise on its development opportunities and potential to create a sustainable scheme for the future. The surface car park that is already there shows this use only harms the landscape character. Parking and vehicle access should be carefully restricted to deliveries and disabled parking. This will maximise development and pedestrian focused place making and avoid increased traffic through town and along the esplanade.
Layout - The vision for this site should be exceptional place making , dominated by pedestrians with mixed use which in turn will drive all other benefits including economic, social, public health and ecological. The illustrative scheme does not support strong place making but centres the development around the car park.
Leisure building - I am also concerned that the proposed freestanding leisure building at the end of the peninsula would reduce the character and landscape quality of the end of the esplanade and the Nothe fort. I also have considerable concern over the sustainability of this use in its proposed prime location in Weymouth. Leisure buildings are typically unattractive, monolithic, inward looking and of low architectural quality that would add little quality to this unique setting. This is far from the aspirations of the local plan for sustainable, high quality design on this outstanding site. Such a building would be out of character to the local fabric and pattern of the built urban form.
To create an active, valuable place the type of uses must be carefully considered. The plan should look at reviewing the limited land uses and reconsider residential and retail in addition to the hotel and restaurants. This diverse mix would ensure an active waterfront that is well used throughout the seasons.
Summary The principle of development on this site is welcomed and offers an exciting opportunity for Weymouth. However as outlined above, I have significant concerns to the current application in terms of the Landscape Strategy and Site Development Option Plan. Due to the following -
Failure to sufficiently reflect and enhance the existing landscape townscape character Potential harmful impact/ loss of views of Heritage Coast and Nothe and the connecting visual ‘gap’ between the Devonshire buildings and the Pavilion. The dominance of proposed parking/roads Limited benefit of development in terms of limited uses and low sustainably of design Failure to meet explicit local plan policies/criteria
Wey Town Centre SPD 5.4.9 ‘Given its prime seafront location, close to the centre of Weymouth and its key facilities and destinations, there is an opportunity to make this area a unique destination as a vibrant living, working and leisure area with stunning sea views’.
It is recognised, that the outline application is to approve access and the demolition of existing buildings only. Consideration of the design of the development including layout, scale, massing and materials is for reserved matters. I therefore recommend that a detailed revised Landscape Strategy be submitted for review and agreement prior to the Reserved Matters application that takes into consideration the comments above.
This should include a greater depth of analysis of the town centre character, land use, urban form and facilities including existing town parking/walking distances. 3D modelling will be helpful to explain the relationship between the town, the Nothe and the site proposals in terms of massing and scale. It will be particularly necessary to consider and demonstrate the proposal as an appropriate extension to the town centre reflecting the local scale, continuous rhythm of built form and historic maritime character of the surroundings.
This strategy should intrinsically inform and improve the development layout which should demonstrate how the proposed scheme will -
Be an exceptionally high quality ambitious scheme, rich in local character, which reflects the historic maritime culture whilst looking to the future. Respect and stay below important views of the Nothe and maintain the important visual gap between the Devonshire buildings and Pavilion. The pavilion and the Sky tower should remain the landmark built forms; proposed buildings should reflect the low continuous skyline of Weymouth town centre. Provide a sufficient quantum of development to maximise the site’s potential. create exceptionally high quality place making with a landmark public open space and exceptionally high quality architecture Create a network of pedestrian only routes and public spaces with minimal parking for loading/disabled. Make best use of the harbour side location and access to the water. Consider an appropriate wider mix of uses including residential, retail, outdoor dining areas, in addition to hotel/pubs / leisure. Provide an attractive and interesting year round environment considering microclimates and providing exceptional landscape design.
Senior Landscape Architect 23.10.18
8:13 Site Address: LAND KNOWN AS WEYMOUTH PENINSULA, THE ESPLANADE, WEYMOUTH
Application Reference: WP/18/00403/OUT Application Proposal: Demolition of existing buildings (excluding Pavilion Theatre and Jurassic Skyline viewing tower) and redevelopment for a mix of leisure and commercial uses including hotels, mixed use pub/diner with guest accommodation, restaurants and cafes, indoor leisure buildings, public car parking, commercial fishing and mixed-use harbour buildings and harbour operation and storage areas together with associated landscaping, street furniture, structures, open space and access to and within the site. Case Officer: Clare McCarthy
Site Visit Date: Last visit: 1st November 2018
Recommendations:
No Comment (please consider Conservation Area Appraisals & heritage guidance where appropriate) Support x Support subject to conditions, further information and or modifications (please set out below) Unable to support (for reasons set out below) No objections
Conservation Comments:
Significance:
The Heritage significance of Weymouth Peninsula has been detailed well within the submitted Heritage Statement and within the comments of Historic England. In brief, the proposed development site location is of immense local and national importance, due to a number of factors. It falls within the Jurassic Coastline, a UNESCO World Heritage site making it of worldwide importance. Across Weymouth harbour, the peninsula is flanked by Nothe Fort and gardens; the Nothe fort has Scheduled Ancient Monument designation in addition to Grade II* Listed status. The jutting piece of land on which these features stand, rises high and offers far reaching views right across Weymouth's coastline, over the peninsula, across to The Esplanade, Greenhill beyond. This linear and open stretch of coastline is highly distinctive and impressively so, lined with imposing Georgian and Regency terraces. Most are Listed Grade II, but some are Grade II* and stand 3 or 4 storeys tall. This important seaside town, with Royal connections to King George III (during which time much of The Esplanade was built) enjoys Conservation Area status and this is divided into 3 distinct character zones. The formal sea-fronting terraces which frame the Jurassic coastline and give Weymouth it's uniquely distinct character, begins at Devonshire Buildings. This row of 6 historic brick townhouses form a crescent with No: 1 'The Roundhouse' forming the end, with its distinctive curved form and domed roof. This terrace of 3 storey buildings with attic level is Listed Grade II* but continues
into an attached terrace of Grade II listed townhouses of similar date. Devonshire Buildings lie directly opposite the development site and are included within the Conservation Area boundary which excludes, but skirts around the neck of the Peninsula. Whilst the former rail and tramline is not separately identified as a feature of significant historic interest within the Conservation Area Appraisal, this is regarded to be a key feature worthy of retention. The tramway dates to 1865 and linked Weymouth Station to the harbour, backwater, quay and peninsula. It was heavily used and provided both passenger and goods traffic and represents a key part of Weymouth's social, commercial and industrial history.
Executive Summary:
Whilst this application seeks Outline permission only at this stage, it is important to raise a number of points on the indicative layout.
There are no objections to the proposed demolitions of buildings on the site.
The comments and views of Historic England and the Landscape officer are strongly endorsed.
SETTING:
The factors needing most attention on conservation grounds are the issues of setting. The proposals create considerable impact on the setting of all the heritage assets outlined above and whilst the height of buildings have been reduced by the removal of pitched roofs, further work needs to be undertaken to retain important open spaces and sight lines within and around the site.
Fundamentally, the space between Devonshire Buildings and Pavilion Theatre needs to be retained. I would agree that a 60m distance between The Roundhouse Hotel and any new building (as suggested by the landscape officer) is appropriate and even then that any new building which starts at that distance, should be single storey and if necessary climb in height in a southerly direction (away from Devonshire Buildings).
The NPPF (section 190) is clear that it is the LPA's responsibility to identify and assess the significance of any heritage asset that may be affected by a proposal (including by development affecting the setting of a heritage asset). When considering the impact of a proposal on a heritage asset any conflict between the assets conservation and any aspect of the proposal should be avoided or minimised. The setting of a heritage asset is therefore considered to be a crucial component to an asset's significance and this is detailed further within the NPPF Guidance notes.
Section 192 also states that any new development should make a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. This would include retaining
any existing open spaces, views or building styles and relationships that may form part of that character and distinctiveness.
Section 193 further stipulates that when considering the impact of proposed development on the significance of a heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset's conservation. As identified above, a heritage asset's setting can be regarded part of the asset's significance. Harm to that setting should therefore be resisted and this is irrespective of whether any harm amounts to substantial harm or less than substantial harm.
The submitted Heritage Statement, in its Summary of Significance appropriately confirms that the value of the Peninsula's setting is 'high'. This is a clear constraint to any development proposal, but can be mitigated through sensitive treatment.
Devonshire Buildings and the Roundhouse Hotel:
The listing for Devonshire Buildings celebrates the largely unspoilt and intact qualities of the terrace, which justifies its Grade II* status. As mentioned, this forms the beginning of the formal, 'planned' terracing of Weymouth's coastline and pleasure walks along the wide promenade built alongside the Esplanade. The setting of The Roundhouse Hotel/Devonshire Buildings needs to be protected and proportionately so in relation to the whole terrace. As well as trying to ensure its historic setting is preserved, the terrace needs space for it to be enjoyed and read distinctively from new phases of development. There is significant scope to celebrate this focal building and connect it more positively to the new proposals through improved traffic arrangements, landscaping and positioning of new buildings - away from it. The Conservation Area boundary deliberately incorporates Devonshire Buildings and its character and setting also need to be given due consideration. A large scaled, contemporary building in close proximity to Devonshire Buildings would not respect its setting or the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. Some well-designed public space, small community structure such as a bandstand or indeed some sensitively designed parking could be positioned between the Pavilion and Devonshire Buildings and allow the retention of this important open space.
In terms of long range views from the Esplanade and beyond, this approach would also allow The Nothe Gardens to be visible through the site and remain interconnected with the historic coastline. The Townscape Visual Impact Assessment (view 1) identifies the existing and proposed views which clearly show the harm that would result in having the large proposed building between the pavilion and Devonshire Buildings. This is reinforced in view 3, which is a more close-range view from Custom House Quay. The scale and proximity of the new building is over bearing to Custom House Quay and although the setting back of the building from the tram tracks helps retain these as a key feature, this
fails to compensate for the negative impact which results on the setting of the Grade II* listed terrace.
The Pavilion Theatre:
Whilst the existing Pavilion theatre is a 1954 replacement of the original 1908 building destroyed by fire, this adds a further dimension to the historic evolution of the application site. The completion of Devonshire buildings occurred roughly a century before the original theatre was built and it was designed as a final junction to the built up coastline. The location of the theatre acted as stop-end and gateway to the peninsula, and this was achieved by setting it back a generous distance from the listed terrace. Whilst the current theatre has no historic/architectural value, the relationship between its position (and its historic predecessor) with Devonshire buildings is of value and also clearly defines a separation between buildings of domestic and public uses.
The Nothe Fort:
The peninsula has evolved to meet new needs and demands over the last century, beginning as jetties and piers and being extended and enlarged to its current form in the 1970s. This new phase of proposals simply continues this cycle of evolution. However, the very open nature of this stretch of coast and the connection that this has allowed between all the historic components forms a critical part of its character and significance. Built in 1872 The Nothe Fort has had a vital military function in the protection of Weymouth and Portland during two World Wars. It's Grade II* Listing and Scheduled Ancient Monument status reflect its significance and this is enhanced by Nothe Gardens which form an important green backdrop and public open space from which far reaching views of Weymouth harbour and coastline can be enjoyed. Its elevated ground level allows for full appreciation of its setting, which opens out also across the sea to Portland further south.
Similarly, views from The Esplanade across to Nothe Fort itself become almost entirely blocked under this scheme. View 1 in the Townscape Visual Impact Assessment shows a very narrow sightline to the Nothe which is barely identifiable. View 6 from the steps in Nothe Gardens looking north show the view of The Esplanade almost completely blocked by the new building between Devonshire Buildings and The Pavilion. Nothe Fort is such an important landmark feature of the coastline, it should remain clearly visible from and connect to The Esplanade and Greenhill. Similarly, the striking coastal front of The Esplanade designed in part to emulate Georgian terraces and the Royal Crescent in Bath by architect James Hamilton, should remain visible from Nothe Gardens.
Weymouth Town Centre Masterplan SPD 2015:
Parking is a dominant feature within the site, localised to one large area. This is contrary to the guidance laid out in the Weymouth Town Centre Masterplan SPD 2015. This stipulates that parking will be broken up so that it does not dominate the appearance of the development. Para.5.4.19.
The document lays out a number of key objectives that any development in this location should meet. Some outlined in Para 5.4.2 and 5.4.14 relate specifically to the historic environment and heritage assets within it. The importance of retaining visibility and interplay between these built and landscape features is clearly highlighted as follows: The highly prominent position of this site requires a high quality development that respects its high level of visibility, and its historically important location adjacent to Nothe Fort and the unsurpassed seafront vista of Georgian buildings. Visually, this location is an extension to the Esplanade, and creating a seamless transition from the beach environment to a more mixed use leisure focussed development with good public space is an important consideration.
In its current form, the proposals fail to deliver these pre-requisites.
Recommendation:
Whilst the application is supported in principle, there are concerns as outlined above. I am unable to fully support the scheme as it stands and believe that the setting and views of Devonshire Buildings, The Nothe Fort, Gardens and The Esplanade need further consideration.
In determining the proposals due consideration has been given to Section 16 (Paragraphs 190,192,193,194,195,196,200) of the NPPF, Section(s) 66/72 of the 1990 Act and Policy ENV 4 of the Local Plan
Kate Williams Senior Conservation Officer BA Hons, MSc, IHBC
09 November 2018