Planning Development Control Committee - 21 July 2009 Report Item 1 Application No: 09/94120/FULL Full Application Site: Land rear of Gilpin Close, Pilley, Lymington, SO41 5RY Proposal: 9 affordable dwellings; access and parking areas; outbuildings Applicant: Mr C Buchan-Hepburn, Hyde Martlet Case Officer: Mark Funnell Parish: BOLDRE 1. DISTRICT/BOROUGH: New Forest District Council 2. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION Contrary to Parish Council View Significant local interest or effect 3. DEVELOPMENT PLAN DESIGNATION Conservation Area 4. PRINCIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES DW-E1 General development criteria (page 57) DW-E8 Trees (page 60) DW-E23 New development in Conservation Areas (page 70) DW-E40 New sites of nature conservation value and enhancement of existing (page 81) DW-E41 Protected species (page 81) DW-T8 Access, safety and traffic management requirements (page 100) DW-R3 Open space contributions (page 111) NF-E4 Landscape character of the New Forest (page 139) NF-E5 Design of new development in the New Forest (page 140) NF-H5 Outbuildings in the New Forest (page 145) NF-H8 Affordable housing for local needs in the New Forest (page 147) 5. MEMBER COMMENTS None received 6. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS Boldre Parish Council: Objects. Is disappointed that the new plans still do not address the problem leading to the Parish Council’s earlier objections. The access road would create an additional hazard at the garage entrances in view of increased traffic. No details of the external materials are available. Lighting issues have not been addressed. 1 7. CONSULTEES 7.1 Housing Development (NFDC): Supports the application. The District Council has worked with the applicant, Hyde Martlet, to achieve this affordable housing development in Boldre parish for local people. The development is reflective of the housing need and we commend Hyde Martlet for the collaborative and inclusive way in which they have worked with the Parish Council. Site selection and design has been strongly influenced by members of the community, the design is excellent and sensitive to the character of the New Forest and would enhance the village edge. The homes would be built to a high environmental standard. 7.2 Landscape Officer: The landscape layout is acceptable. Further details required about species of proposed trees and planting. There is no indication of lighting and it is recommended that details are sought prior to decision rather than left to condition. 7.3 Archaeologist: Given the scale of development the site should be the subject of a minimally invasive archaeological evaluation and a suitable planning condition should be imposed. 7.4 Ecologist: No objection subject to include submission of a revised landscaping scheme to meet requirements for biodiversity mitigation, and submission of a wildlife mitigation and enhancement scheme. 7.5 Highway Authority (HCC): No highway objections, subject to conditions relating to completion of parking and circulation areas and provision of cycle parking facilities before occupation. 7.6 Environmental Services - Building Design: No objection. This scheme in its revised format is acceptable subject to the usual conditions for materials, details, concealed meter boxes and landscaping. In terms external materials, feather-edged boarding and a mix of traditional tile and slate is recommended in this Conservation Area context. 7.7 Tree Officer: No tree objections subject to condition that an arboricultural method statement and tree protection plan are submitted and approved. Also, details of service runs and a specification for the footpath adjacent to the Lime tree need to be agreed. 7.8 Land Drainage (NFDC): Recommended a flood risk assessment is provided to ensure that adjacent properties or proposed properties or gardens would not suffer flooding. 7.9 Natural England: No objection. The proposed development would not be likely to have a significant effect on the New Forest designated sites. The Authority should secure measures to 2 enhance biodiversity through any permission. 7.10 Commercial Services Directorate - Household Waste Collection (NFDC): No comments received. 8. REPRESENTATIONS 8.1 Applicant (Hyde Martlet) writes in support: The revised application addresses the previous concerns. It follows considerable discussions with the Parish Council over a number of issues. External materials would be discussed with the Parish Council before being finalised. External lighting would be bollard lighting. The revised highway and pedestrian access arrangements are considered to be improvements. 8.2 Two representations in support: HARAH (Hampshire Alliance for Rural Affordable Housing): Hyde Martlet have worked closely with the parties involved. This has enabled them to create a scheme that is very well designed and sensitive to the character of the local area. It would provide much needed affordable housing for local people and thereby contribute to the long term sustainability of the community. Rural Housing Enablers (Community Action Hampshire): The NFDC Housing Register shows a high level of affordable housing need in the Boldre area (31 households). The proposed site is close to all amenities. The re-submission addresses the previous highways and design issues. 8.3 Seventeen representations from members of the public raising objections and concerns: • Lack of major change to the previous (withdrawn) application. • Principle of additional affordable housing in Pilley: There is already enough; Hudson Davies Close was due to be the last; insufficient demand in Pilley; would cater for families from elsewhere; affordable dwellings have recently been provided in Lymington; there are few local amenities. • Location of development: Gilpin Close already has six affordable dwellings; new dwellings should be dispersed in smaller groups around the parish, or alternatively sited at the recreation ground next to existing affordable housing; a greenfield site on the edge of the village is not appropriate. • Scale, design and character: Overdevelopment – nine dwellings is too much; detrimental effect on rural character of village and on special qualities of National Park; insufficient weight given to Conservation Area status; loss of agricultural land; departs from generally linear / ribbon nature of development along Pilley Hill; the mass of buildings with black timber cladding and the tiled car ports are not appropriate; too much harsh concrete and paving areas; 'estate' style 3 development. • Highway safety and parking: Increased volume of traffic; narrow site entrance; dangerous junction with Pilley Street; lack of pedestrian provision on local roads; would add to the existing daily congestion (including parking in Gilpin Close) associated with the primary school; insufficient parking spaces. • Impacts on neighbours: Loss of residential amenities; noise; four privately owned homes in Gilpin Close would be surrounded by affordable dwellings. • Ecology / landscape: Loss of wildlife habitat; concern of maintenance of landscaping; concern over light pollution • Drainage: Concerns over surface water drainage and flooding of adjacent land. • Other issues: A previous application for affordable housing on the site was turned down, including for highway reasons; shared equity dwellings should be considered as well as social rented; water pressure is abysmal in Pilley Street; notes that the adjacent Primary School is intending to have a larger new hall with community use. 9. RELEVANT HISTORY: 9.1 Erect 15 social housing units (51225) refused on 10 February 1993 9.2 Nine affordable dwellings; access and parking areas; outbuildings (93647) withdrawn by applicant on 19 May 2009 10. ASSESSMENT 10.1 The site comprises just over 0.4 ha of land to the rear (north) of Gilpin Close, off Pilley Hill. The site is currently part of an agricultural field. There are ten existing dwellings in Gilpin Close (one terrace of six bungalows, one terrace of four houses), including six existing affordable dwellings. There are further residential properties to the east and south, with the primary school to the east. The site lies within the Forest South East Conservation Area. 10.2 Consent is sought for nine affordable dwellings, associated outbuildings and access arrangements. This follows a survey of local housing need and the examination by the applicant of other possible options within Boldre parish. It also follows a more historic refusal of a larger affordable housing scheme at the site in 1993. 10.3 The development now proposed would be accessed off Gilpin Close, and would incorporate one 1-bed, six 2-bed and two 3-bed dwellings in buildings varying from single to two storeys. External materials are indicated as facing brickwork and timber weatherboarding, and concrete roof tiles. The outbuildings would be for cycle storage and waste bins. 4 10.4 The main criteria to be met is set out in Policy NF-H8 (affordable housing) which requires consideration of whether: • the proposal is put forward in exceptional circumstances for a small-scale housing development in or adjoining a village. • the dwellings would meet a particular local need that cannot be accommodated in any other way. • the dwellings would be managed by an appropriate body and secured by a legal agreement. • there are appropriate local facilities (e.g. school, shop, public transport). • the dwellings would be under 100 sq metres floorspace. 10.5 In terms of whether there are exceptional circumstances given the need for affordable housing, a Housing Needs Survey (2003) requested by