22 December 2015
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
A meeting of the Development Control Committee will be held on TUESDAY, 12
JANUARY 2016 in the Council Chamber, Ebley Mill, Ebley Wharf, Stroud at 10:00.
David Hagg
Chief Executive
Please Note:
This meeting will be filmed for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s
i
internet site (www.stroud.gov.uk
www.stroud.gov.uk).
). By entering the Council Chamber you are
consenting to being filmed. The whole of the meeting will be filmed except where
there are confidential or exempt items, which may need to be considered in the
t
absence of the press and public.
public
ii
The
he procedure for public speaking which applies to Development Control
Committees is set out on the page immediately preceding the Planning Schedule.
AGENDA
1
APOLOGIES
To receive apologies of absence.
2
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
INTE
To receive declarations of interest.
3
MINUTES - 8 DECEMBER 2015
To approve and sign as a correct record the Minutes of the Development Control
meeting held on 8 December 2015.
4.
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL - PLANNING SCHEDULE
(NOTE: For access to information purposes, the background papers for the
applications listed in the above schedule are the application itself and
subsequent papers as listed in the relevant file.)
4.1
SOUTH VIEW, STONEHOUSE,
STONEHOU
GLOUCESTERSHIRE - S.15/1226/OUT
Erection of 3 no. dwellings with workspace and 3 no. affordable dwellings.
Page 1 of 206
4.2
THE
LAMMASTIDE
INN,
NEW
GLOUCESTERSHIRE. - S.15/1832/FUL
BROOKEND,
BERKELEY,
Construction of annexe to provide 6 no. holiday lets for use with The Lammastide Inn.
4.3
BENCOMBE BARNS, LAMPERN HILL, ULEY, GLOUCESTERSHIRE S.15/1587/FUL
Conversion of 3 Barns to a live/work unit.
4.4
79 REGENT STREET, STONEHOUSE, GLOUCESTERSHIRE - S.15/2313/FUL
Erection of a new dwelling.
4.5
DOVE COTTAGE, 5 CRAWLEY HILL, ULEY, GLOUCESTERSHIRE S.15/1250/FUL
Proposed new dwelling.
4.6
MISTLE HOUSE, FRAMILODE, GLOUCESTER - S.15/2418/HHOLD
Erection of garden room and utility to rear of dwelling.
4.7
LAND WEST OF STONEHOUSE,
GLOUCESTERSHIRE - S.14/0810/OUT
NASTEND
LANE,
NASTEND,
A mixed used development comprising up to 1,350 dwellings and 9.3 hectares of
employment land; a mixed use local centre, primary school, open space and landscaping,
parking and supporting infrastructure and utilities; and the creation of new vehicular
accesses from Grove Lane, Oldends Lane and Brunel Way.
4.8
WIMBERLEY MILL, KNAPP LANE, BRIMSCOMBE, GLOUCESTERSHIRE S.13/2668/OUT
Demolition and clearance of the existing buildings and hardstanding, residential
development of up to 104 dwellings, vehicular and pedestrian access, internal access roads,
car parking, surface water drainage and related works.
Members of Development Control Committee
Councillor Stephen Moore (Chair)
Councillor John Marjoram (Vice-Chair)
Councillor Liz Ashton
Councillor Dorcas Binns
Councillor Rowland Blackwell
Councillor Nigel Cooper
Councillor Paul Hemming
Councillor Haydn Jones
Councillor Dave Mossman
Councillor Steve Robinson
Councillor Emma Sims
Councillor Tom Williams
Page 2 of 206
Development Control Committee
Agenda Published: 22 December 2015
On being put the vote the Motion was carried 7 votes for, 4 against and 1 abstention.
RESOLVED To REFUSE PERMISSION for application S.15/1297/FUL as set out in
the Motion.
DC.063
LAND OFF, LOWER SPILLMANS, STROUD, GLOUCESTERSHIRE –
S.15/2009/OUT
The Chair, Councillor Stephen Moore, stepped down for the item as he wished to speak
to the application. Councillor John Marjoram, Vice Chair, chaired the remainder of the
meeting.
The Team Manager advised Members that the application was a resubmission of an
application that had been previously refused. The new application was similar to the
previous one but provided more information regarding; highway issues, trees and
ecology. In terms of parking there would be a neutral impact on the area. Some
engineering work would be needed to the site. He suggested two additional conditions:
(i) a SUDs drainage and (ii) a detailed levels plan to be agreed. Condition 8 should also
be amended to ensure vehicles left the site with clean wheels.
Councillor Stephen Moore informed Members that the previous application was subject
to appeal. He reported that residents were concerned that there would be an impact on
traffic, the roads were very narrow and dangerous. There would be a loss of open space
which would have an impact on wildlife. There would be an impact on parking as there
is very little parking available on Rodborough Hill.
In response to Members questions the following points were clarified;
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The electricity pole would need to be re-sited
There would be 8 parking spaces in total, 4 would be for public use
Each new property would have 2 parking spaces
There would be two way traffic along the road
A national consultancy had been used to undertake the ecology report and
conditions had been recommended
6. No objections had been raised by the highway authority
7. Badger Sets are at the north end of the site
8. The Council’s Tree Officer had raised no objections to the proposals
Councillor Rowland Blackwell proposed a Motion to support the officer’s
recommendations subject to the two additional conditions suggested and the
amendment to Condition 8.
The motion was seconded by Councillor Haydn Jones. On being put to the vote the
Motion was carried; 8 votes for, 3 against and 1 abstention.
RESOLVED to GRANT PERMISSION for application S.15/2009/OUT as set out in
these minutes and in accordance with officers recommendations.
Meeting ended at 9.50 pm.
Page 8 of 206
Chair
Development Control Committee
8 December 2015
Subject to approval at next meeting
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Item No:
02
Application No.
Site No.
Site Address
Town/Parish
S.15/1832/FUL
PP-04363144
The Lammastide Inn, New Brookend, Berkeley, Gloucestershire
Hinton Parish Council
Grid Reference
368422,202062
Application
Type
Proposal
Full Planning Permission
Construction of Annexe to provide 6 No Holiday Lets for use with the
Lammastide Inn.
Applicant’s
Details
Mr S Winearles
Lammastide Inn, New Brookend, Berkeley, Gloucestershire, GL13 9SF
Agent’s Details
Mr Malcolm Hunt
Page 28 of 206
Frome Lodge, High Street, Chalford, Stroud, Gloucestershire
GL6 8DJ
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Access should be through Lye Farm. Unsustainable location. Other nearby refusal. Previous
conditions restrict use to agriculture and that it should not be converted. Suspicion of
intention to circumvent planning.
REASONS FOR DECISION
The reasons for the Council's decision are summarised below together with a summary of the
Policies and Proposals contained within the Development Plan which are relevant to this
decision:
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS - NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES
Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in
accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015 is the Development Plan for Stroud
District. This Plan has recently been found sound by the Appeal Inspector. It is therefore
considered consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework.
Policy CP15 of the adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015 seeks to protect the
separate identity of settlements and the quality of the countryside by limiting development
outside settlements. However, CP15 recognises that sometimes it is impossible for some
kinds of development (including barn conversions) to be accommodated within settlements
and establishes criteria for such development, in order to help sustain, enhance and revitalise
our rural communities. Development will only be permitted in the countryside if it does not
have an adverse impact on any heritage assets and their setting, does not lead to excessive
encroachment or expansion of development away from the original buildings and of particular
relevance to the re-use of an existing building or buildings, these are appropriately located
and are capable and worthy of conversion. Any such conversion should involve a building
that positively contributes to an established local character and sense of place. In the case of
replacement buildings they must bring about environmental improvement. The National
Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) also promotes sustainable development in rural areas.
Chapter 3 and paragraph 55 are of particular relevance.
Local Plan Policy ES7 addresses landscape character and seeks to ensure that all forms of
development make a positive contribution to the District's character and appearance, paying
particular attention to the locally distinctive qualities of its surroundings including the
Cotswolds AONB. This is in line with paragraph 113 of the NPPF.
Local Plan Policy ES3 seeks to maintain quality of life by preventing an unacceptable level of
noise, general disturbance, smell, fumes, loss of daylight or sunlight, loss of privacy or an
overbearing effect. Additionally the policy seeks to maintain highway safety including public
rights of way.
National policy encourages flexible working practices, such as the integration of residential
and commercial uses within the same unit. Live/work units can have a part to play in the rural
economy and are generally supported by the Local Plan para 4.58 - 4.60.
PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT
This proposal is to convert the existing group of barns into a live work unit. The previous
history of the site is noted but the application
has to be considered on its own merits and
Page 41 of 206
assessment made on the current situation and the submitted details. The restrictive use of
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
the development hereby permitted, unless otherwise agreed in
writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason:
In the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining
residential property.
6.
The dwellling hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until
provision is made for the parking, on a properly made-up surface,
of a minimum of two cars within the curtilage. This provision shall
be maintained as such thereafter.
Reason:
To ensure that sufficient parking spaces are made available.
Informatives:
1.
In accordance with Article 35 (2) the Local Planning Authority have
worked with the Applicant. The case officer contacted the
applicant/agent and negotiated changes to the design which has
enhanced the overall scheme; these have been detailed in the
Officer Report.
2.
The application site is within 250 metres of a suspected landfill
site, the applicant/developers attention is drawn to the fact that
there is the potential for production and migration of landfill gas.
You are reminded that the responsibility for safe development
rests with the owner and/or developer. Accordingly, the
applicant/developer is advised to seek independent expert advice,
regarding the possibility of the presence, or future presence, of gas
and whether any precautionary measures are necessary. The
Council’s Environmental Health Section will make available to you,
free of charge, any information or data which it has in relation to
the land to which the application applies.
CONSULTEES
Comments
Received
Environmental Health (E)
Contaminated Land Officer (E)
Not Yet
Received
CONTRIBUTORS
Letters of
Objection
Stonehouse Town Council, Town Hall, High Street
J Dickson, North Berryfield, 11 Bristol Road
P Edmonds, 7 Bristol Road, Stroud
P Beard (Practice
Manager),
Regent Street Surgery, 73 Regent
Page
46 of 206
Street
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
therefore considered the proposal would not appear out of keeping or significantly harm the
character of the area.
The site is located near the Uley Bury Camp scheduled monument. The proposed dwelling
would lie at the foot of the eastern slope of this hill fort. It will be seen within the context of
other buildings as well as being partially screened by the topography and trees. It is therefore
considered the scheme will not have an impact or harm the views which form part of the
significance of the monument. This has been confirmed by Historic England who have no
objections.
Concern has been raised regarding the glass atrium that links the main sections of the
building causing light pollution in a sensitive area within the AONB. This concern is noted
however, the link is limited in scale and as the site is surrounded by other residential
properties the development would not appear as a new isolated form of lighting or create a
significant additional amount of residential light. Therefore the wider impact would be limited.
The plot size is large enough to accommodate the development providing amenity space for
both the existing and proposed dwellings without appearing cramped or overdeveloped.
Being located within other residential properties it is considered the proposal would not
appear isolated or overly prominent in wider views and therefore not cause significant wider
harm to the surrounding landscape and setting.
On sites capable of providing less than four dwellings Policy CP9 seeks a financial
contribution for affordable housing where viable. The Policy Implementation Manager has
considered this scheme and has confirmed that this application is unable to make a
contribution to affordable housing for viability reasons.
Whilst the plot is slightly unkempt at present it is located within an existing residential garden
which could be cleared at anytime and does not provide significant ecological interest. A local
resident has highlighted the possibility of slow worms on site. However, it is extremely
unlikely that the population of slow worms and other reptiles that could be affected is
sufficiently valuable for the impact to be significant. However, in order to comply with the
Wildlife and Countryside Act, an informative is recommended highlighting the applicant’s
responsibilities should protected species be evidenced on site.
HIGHWAY SAFETY
Concerns have been raised about the traffic generated from the proposed dwelling and
during the construction phases. These concerns are appreciated given the narrow nature and
surface of Crawley Lane. However, the site is located at the beginning of the lane and as a
single dwelling it will not generate a significant amount of additional traffic or have a severe
impact on highway safety. The proposal includes widening a section of the lane which would
be an improvement that could be used by all residents. On site parking has been provided.
The proposed public turning head has been removed from the scheme following discussions
with GCC Highways who felt it position at the beginning of the lane would not make it overly
beneficial for the majority of residents further along the lane and was unlikely to be adopted
by the GCC.
Whilst it is accepted there maybe some
Pageshort
59 ofterm
206 disruption during the construction phase,
the developer needs to give this careful consideration given the nature of the site and the
lane. A construction method statement can be required via condition.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The NPPF is a material consideration in planning decisions. The NPPF was published on 27
March 2012. This is a key part of the reforms to make the planning system less complex and
more accessible, to protect the environment and to promote sustainable growth.
RESIDENTIAL AMENITY
Policy ES3 precludes development that would lead to an unacceptable level of: noise,
general disturbance, loss of privacy or overbearing effect; environmental pollution; noise
sensitive development in unacceptable locations; increased risk of flooding, detrimental
impact upon highway safety or adverse effect on contaminated land where a risk to health or
environment.
Due to the position, height and design of the proposed extension in relation to the
neighbouring dwellings there would be no unacceptable overbearing effect, impact on light
levels or loss of privacy arising from the development. Any alterations to neighbouring
property would be a civil matter.
HIGHWAY SAFETY
Policy ES3 precludes development that would lead to an unacceptable detrimental impact
upon highway safety.
The proposal would have no direct impact upon vehicular access or parking arrangements
which would remain adequate to serve the enlarged dwelling. The potential increase in
vehicular movements associated with the proposed development is not considered to result
in any significant detrimental impact upon highway safety.
DESIGN/APPEARANCE/IMPACT ON THE AREA
Policy HC8 permits extension of residential properties subject to appropriate height, scale,
form and design which is in keeping with the existing dwelling and the wider setting. Sufficient
appropriate space must be retained for vehicular parking and the opportunity to enhance the
energy efficiency of the property should be exercised.
The design of the proposed development is based primarily upon the extension for which
planning permission was granted in 1993. That development appears as a slightly quirky
addition to the original structure. However, to base the design of a further extension upon this
non-original element of the building erodes the original character of the property. The
proposed extension would cut into the existing extension and as such would result in a
cluttered and confused appearance.
There would be adequate parking and amenity space remaining to serve the enlarged
dwelling.
HERITAGE IMPACT
Policy ES10 seeks to preserve, protect and enhance the historic environment. An
assessment of the heritage asset will be required. Proposals that conserve and where
appropriate enhance any heritage significance and setting including views will be supported.
Any harm or loss would require clear and convincing justification as to why any heritage
interest should be overridden.
Page 64 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
S Pickover, 81 Renard Rise, Stonehouse , GL10 2BT
OFFICER’S REPORT
THE PROPOSAL
A mixed use outline application comprising up to 1,350 dwellings and 9.3 hectares of
employment land for use classes B1, B2, and B8; a mixed use local centre comprising use
classes, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, D1, D2 and B1; primary school, open space and landscaping;
parking and supporting infrastructure and utilities with all matters reserved except the
creation of new vehicular accesses from Grove Lane, Oldends Lane and Brunel Way. An
environmental statement has been submitted as part of the application, it covers the following
subject areas:
Socio economics
Ecology and Conservation
Landscape and visual assessment
Traffic and transport
Air quality
Noise and vibration
Hydrology, drainage and flood risk
Ground conditions
Culture heritage and archaeology, soils and agriculture.
An indicative Masterplan, design strategy statement and parameter plans dealing with land
uses, building heights, green infrastructure (GI), and movement and access are also part of
the application.
The illustrative masterplan shows the main vehicular access to the application site being from
a new access onto Grove Lane with a change to the priority giving priority to traffic entering
or leaving the application site. The details of this new access are not reserved matters and
detailed plans for this and the other vehicular access points have been submitted. The other
new access points to be formed are adjacent to Oldends Lane to the west of the existing
level crossing, and off the existing employment estate at Brunel Way. The disposition of land
uses is set out in the illustrative masterplan and explained in the submitted design evolution
document and expressed in the submitted parameter plans. In summary the employment
areas are sited immediately to the west of the main Bristol to Birmingham railway line, with
further employment land site shown to the immediate north of the existing employment areas
lying to the north of Brunel Way. The Local centre, incorporating a community hall and area
for health provision and the primary school site are proposed to the immediate north of this
employment land.
The settlement of Nastend is shown protected by a substantial are of open space to the
south of the settlement and a significant buffer area to the north, The areas reserved for the
provision of sports areas including sports pavilion are to be sited at the northwestern area of
the site between part of the housing area and to the southeast of Nupend.
The masterplan and parameter plans show the pattern of footpaths through the site which
Pageof69way
of 206
connect to already existing public rights
adjoining the application site. Generally the
existing pattern of footpaths and bridleways on the site are respected within the masterplan.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
2.
It sits alongside the Hamlets of Nastend (12 Homes) and Nupend (50 homes). The
scale would destroy these unique settlements with over 400 years of history.
3.
Such a large number of houses adjacent to, but disconnected by a railway line from
Stonehouse would more likely focus on retail facilities accessible from the motorway
network than Stonehouse High Street.
4.
This number of additional homes would add up to 12,000 journeys a day to the already
congested A419, the only major road from junction 13 on the motorway to the major
centre of population and jobs in Stroud and the Stroud Valleys (40% of the district’s
population). The effect on the A419 and the M5 slip-road congestion should not be
underestimated. The critical importance of this arterial road to Stroud where 60% of all
jobs in the district are based is not recognised by this development.
5.
Stroud is a struggling market town, increasing traffic congestion will further weaken it’s
viability.
6.
Increased congestion will threaten the viability of a number of commercial and retail
employers as it will be quicker and easier for shoppers to commute to Gloucester for
retail and commercial outlets. This is likely to affect the economic growth of Stroud
District adversely.
7.
Protecting the main arterial road to the District’s major centre of population and its jobs
has to be a priority. Developing brownfield land within the centre of population should
be the priority.
8.
Eastington Parish has a population of 1,500. A new development of 1,350 would add
around 3,200 additional population to the parish, overwhelming it with, effectively, a
dormitory housing estate. The district already has a problem with unbalanced,
excessive, out-commuting.
9.
The site has no connection to any existing community. It is simply a vast estate near to
a motorway junction. It will encourage further out-commuting from the district which
already has a much higher than average level of out commuting.
10.
The Stroud population is set to increase, according to the office of National Statistics
from around 113,000 today to 126,500 by 2031 (12,500 more people). Stroud district
has over 4,000 granted planning permissions today. If all of those are realised they will
accommodate an additional 9,400 people. In addition the SDC plans a further 2,000
additional permissions, (4,700 people). This is a further 14,100 people in all. It
is recognised that some of the permissions will not happen but housing permissions
that take the population projection above the ONS projection to 127,000 without this
large planning application seems to have more than provided for the districts needs.
11.
In addition to all of the existing (4,000) permissions, SDC has an evidence based
report from Evans Jones indicating a further 2,700 windfall allocation. This proposal is
excessive.
12.
Page 74 of 206
As the West of Stonehouse settlement has now been removed from the Local Plan
Stonehouse is no longer a Core Priority Tier 1 strategic site and needs to be included
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
used as rat runs. The nationally accepted TRICS database suggests that somewhere
between 10,000 and 12,000 extra vehicle movements will be generated by the residential
element of the development alone. In addition there will be even more generated by the 10
hectares of employment development. Most will decant on to the A419, which is already
known to be at capacity. In particular the growth of traffic at peak hours is likely to cause grid
lock on the A419. An unwanted knock on effect will be further growth of traffic through the
middle of Alkerton as people are forced to bypass the A419 and use the byroad through the
Stanleys.
The NPPF states clearly at Paragraph 32 that “All developments that generate significant
amounts of traffic movements should be supported by a “Transport Statement or Transport
Assessment” and that decisions should take account of whether:
•
•
•
opportunities for sustainable transport have been taken up to help reduce the need for
major transport infrastructure,
safe and suitable access is achievable,
improvements can be undertaken within the transport network that cost effectively
limits the significant impacts of development.
With regard to the first bullet point it is noted that bullet point 12 of Policy SA2 requires a
design brief to consider opportunities to improve transport connectivity with Stonehouse. In
theory this is a worthwhile objective, although meaningful solutions are thought unlikely to be
achievable in practice. Nevertheless EPC would be happy to discuss any suggestions that
might be thrown up through the design brief process.
The only proposal that seems to have been suggested by the Applicant is that of relatively
limited contributions to the establishment of local bus services. This seems to EPC to be
totally inadequate. If the objective is both to improve connectivity and as the first bullet point
of Paragraph 32 suggests, to try to reduce the need for major highway infrastructure
improvements, then a much more comprehensive approach is necessary.
This brings us back to the third bullet point. Other than some localised improvements which
were already planned before the submission of this planning application, it seems that no
thorough assessment has been made of the impact of the present proposals and what further
improvements are required to mitigate the impact of a very significant growth in traffic.
EPC do not believe that enough attention has been given to this problem. It requests SDC to
insist on the submission of a more thorough traffic impact assessment and to request the
County Council to seek adequate funding from the developers for highway improvements, not
just to the junctions which will directly service the new development, but at least from the M5
through to the start of the Ebley bypass.
A more technical commentary on this matter was provided to Stroud District Council by Helix
Transport Consultants on behalf of the parish, and a copy is attached.
Environmental/landscape impact
EPC is very concerned at the likely impact on the existing character and visual quality of the
parish. The emerging NDP has identified
importance
of the historic settlement pattern in
Page the
79 of
206
defining the character of the parish today. In essence Eastington is not a tightly grouped
settlement but one that comprises a number of hamlets, each with its own separate identity,
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
It is considered that the safety issues raised in the Audit relating to the Grove Lane access
have been adequately addressed.
The Stage 1 RSA has not identified any problems with the Brunel Way access. Two problems
are raised with the Oldends Lane access design. These both relate to providing sufficient
visibility for the footway/cycleway by the level crossing. The RSA recommendations are
accepted and can be addressed by detailed design and through a note which has been
added to Drawing H414/12B.
Appropriate pedestrian and cycle provision has been provided within each of the junction
designs. The safety of these facilities has been assessed through the Stage 1 RSA.
Conclusion
The proposed vehicular access arrangements will ensure that safe and suitable access can
be achieved for vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists in line with the NPPF Paragraph 32.
Pedestrian/Cycle Accessibility.
Each of the access junctions provides safe and suitable access for pedestrians and cyclists
in line with the NPPF Paragraph 32. The key for the development is identifying desire lines
and routes between the development and local facilities, and addressing any barriers.
The TA has provided four plans identifying barriers to pedestrian and cycle movement on key
routes between the development and key facilities. This formed the basis for discussions with
GCC on improvements to the pedestrian and cycle network to be provided by the developer.
GCC has reviewed these plans and formed a view on which items it would be appropriate for
the developer to address. This has considered:
−
−
−
What level would be appropriate;
Where the most benefit can be derived; and
Whether an improvement could realistically be delivered within the applicant’s gift, e.g.
vegetation maintenance and improvements requiring third party land would not be
deliverable by the applicant.
It is understood that the applicant has agreed the provision of Mini Stop Lights with Network
Rail for railway crossings.
The proposed pedestrian and cycle works to be provided by the developer has been fully
addressed in File Note H414-FN37, and is summarised below. These improvements will be
secured by a planning condition.
Route 1: to Maidenhall School
The route between the development and the B4008 Gloucester Road along Oldends Lane is
an important route both to the school and the town centre. Furthermore, Maidenhall School is
a secondary school, a facility which is not proposed to be provided on site. It would be
expected that a reasonable number of school children will walk to the school from the
development.
The developer has agreed to address
points
2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 10, and 11. Additionally, GCC
Page
91 of1,206
has identified that there will be a desire line for a crossing point over the B4008 Gloucester
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Employment travel plan to be submitted within 6 months of occupation including monitoring
cost – travel plans to be submitted prior to occupation in accordance with approved
framework.
Chipmans Platt Roundabout will be front funded by Hitchins. Inclusion of clause to allow
Hitchins to invoice GCC to recover cost of junction improvements up to the value of £500,000
(PFA confirmed total costs email 28/09/15 £492,760).
Public Transport Sc106 to indemnify GCC from costs of delivery Public Transport Service
including bonding to the value of £525,000. This could be either a rolling or reducing bond as
appropriate.
Condition 1: Chipmans Platt Roundabout
No more than 200 dwellings shall be occupied until the highway improvement works at
Chipmans Platt Roundabout have been completed broadly in accordance with drawing No.
H414/14 Rev B.
Reason: To ensure that cost effective improvements are undertaken to the transport network
that mitigate the significant impacts of the development in accordance with paragraph 32 of
the National Planning Policy Framework.
Condition 2: Oldends Lane Roundabout
No more than 300 dwellings and 3.25 acres of employment use shall be occupied until the
highway improvement works at Oldends Lane have been completed broadly in accordance
with drawing No. H414/29 Rev B.
Reason: To ensure that cost effective improvements are undertaken to the transport network
that mitigate the significant impacts of the development in accordance with paragraph 32 of
the National Planning Policy Framework.
Condition 3: Horsetrough Junction
No more than 600 dwellings and 6.5 acres of employment shall be occupied prior to details of
the highway improvement works at the Horsetrough Junction being submitted and agreed in
writing by the Local Planning Authority broadly in accordance with drawing no. H414/24 Rev
A or other wise agreed in writing by the LPA.
Reason: To ensure that cost effective improvements are undertaken to the transport network
that mitigate the significant impacts of the development in accordance with paragraph 32 of
the National Planning Policy Framework.
Condition 4: The development spine road
No more than 600 dwellings and 6.5 acres of employment use shall be occupied prior to the
development spine road linking Oldends Lane to Grove Lane has been completed.
Reason: To ensure that safe and suitable access is provided and that cost effective
improvements are undertaken to the transport network to mitigate the significant impacts of
the development in accordance with Paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy
Framework.
Condition 5: Off-site pedestrian/cyclist
improvements
Page
104 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The site is traversed by public rights of way and this permission does not authorise additional
use by motor vehicles, or obstruction, or diversion.
The developer will be expected to meet the full costs of supplying and installing the fire
hydrants and associated infrastructure.
The applicant is advised that the Local Planning Authority requires a copy of a completed
Dedication Agreement between the applicant and the local highway authority or the
constitution and details of a Private Management and Maintenance Company confirming
funding, management and maintenance regimes.
Sport England:
No comments.
EPR Ecology Consultants:
19/08/2014
Insufficient information is available to assess the effect of this Scheme on the Severn Estuary
SPA and SAC, Frampton Pools SSSI, the River Frome Key Wildlife Site, Barn Owls, Brown
Hares and the local Great-crested Newt meta-population, as set out above. It is therefore not
possible to determine whether the Scheme complies with legislation and policy.
11/06/15
The following further information is required:
1.
A project specific visitor survey and/or impact analysis to demonstrate that no likely
significant effects will arise. If such effects are identified, sufficient information will be
required to enable SDC to be confident that mitigation measures could be devised to
address any impact without affecting the deliverability of the development.
2.
Consideration of the contribution of this scheme to the cumulative effects on the way
the River Frome corridor supports riverine mammals and other valuable populations in
terms of its structure and function.
3.
Firm commitments to the improvement of the structure and function of the River Frome
corridor.
4.
Consideration of the survey long-term results of GCN surveys at Stonehouse Newt
Pond and other GCN surveys in the area, consideration of the likely causes of decline
and a clear plan to implement the actions needed to restore the meta-population within
the retained area.
5.
Given that, without successful mitigation, the effects could be significant, a detailed
and costed management plan is required, with a clear commitment to funding,
implementation and monitoring. The objectives should be measurable and monitoring
designed to flag up failure to achieve objectives. A process and funding for remedial
action is also required.
Page 109 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
To serve the existing households in the Stroud district costs £0.56 per household per year.
An additional 1350 houses equates to £756 per annum.
We require a one off cost of £756 to increase capacity. Failure to increase PND capacity in
step with growth the subject of this application will directly impact the capacity of the Force to
rapidly access and respond to crime information.
Is the contribution necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms?
Deployment to adequately deliver community safety will not be met where this is prejudiced
by insufficient capacity in the Police PND system.
Is it directly related to the development?
The additional demands of this development in relation to this infrastructure have been
identified as have mitigations.
Is the contribution fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development?
This is a residential development and the Policing demands it will generate, in terms of PND
use, are known by comparison with other local residential development. The development is
not built and this is a reasonable way to forecast this impact. Demand and mitigations have
been determined by the scale of the development.
Control Room telephony Police control room call handling equipment is used to capacity at
peak times. Our call handling centre at Waterwells directs all calls and deploys resources to
respond and continue monitoring. We know the capacity of the technology and the calls it
currently handles [fixed around minimum times with callers] and will be expected to handle as
a result of the new development. In order to deal with all our calls across the County
telephony, lines and licences are required at a total cost of £ 22,530 per year. This currently
cost 8p per household.
The proposed 1350 additional houses in the Local Policing Area are forecast to generate 469
additional calls per year. We request a one off contribution of £113.53 to pay for additional
lines and licences.
There will be a call handling impact and delays in response times if we attempt to serve this
development with our current telephony systems.
Is the contribution necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms?
Crime and community safety are Planning considerations and the Councils Core Strategy
content further demonstrates this. NPPF identifies need to achieve security in new
development and makes provisions to deliver this through the planning system. These
considerations will not be met where Policing delivery is prejudiced by insufficient telephony
capacity to take calls and deploy responses in good time.
Is it directly related to the development?
The additional demands of this development in relation to this infrastructure have been
identified as have mitigations.
Is the contribution fairly and reasonably
scale and kind to the development?
Pagerelated
131 ofin206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Reason: To prevent flooding from the existing sewerage system as a result of new
development. To allow Severn Trent Water time to deliver any necessary capacity
improvements.
(We would expect to be able to discharge this condition within 2 years if improvements are
necessary. If they aren’t we will have confirmed that under the previous condition and
discharge the two together on the grounds that nothing needs to be done.)
And finally:
Condition No surface water from the development hereby proposed should discharge to local
foul sewers.
Reason: To prevent the public foul sewerage system from flooding under storm conditions.
(Through the IDP (Infrastructure Development Plan) evidence for Stroud District Council’s
Local Plan Severn Trent Water the proposed site is within Stanley Downton sewage
treatment works catchment. Comparison of current dry weather flow against consented dry
weather flows indicates there is reasonable spare capacity at this treatment works. Should
additional capacity be required in order to accommodate future development above the
existing capacity then STW do not envisage any issues as there are no land or other physical
constraints preventing expansion.
Severn Trent Water confirmed that a maintenance programme is underway which includes
capacity upgrades to accommodate long term developments. Work planned for completion in
2017. While it is envisaged that there will be some spare capacity to accommodate the initial
phases of any development to the west of Stonehouse, it is expected that capacity
improvements will be required to accommodate later phases. As a worst case this may
require replacement of the existing pumping station and duplication /upsizing of the existing
1.3km risking main.
Severn Trent Water confirmed that a project is ongoing to ensure this capacity at the
Stonehouse pumping station. This will be sized accordingly to accommodate employment
and residential allocations and completion will be phased to coincide with development).
Wales and West Utilities:
08/04/2014
Offer no objection but advise of the presence of their intermediate / high pressure gas
main(s) in proximity to this site. No excavations are to take place above or within 10m of the
confirmed position of these mains without prior consultation with Wales and West Utilities.
Page 138 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The aim of this section is to provide the necessary guidance to ensure that the new tree
planting on development sites contributes to the creation of a high level of amenity, and an
attractive environment, and relates to the character of a site and its surroundings.
•
Tree Planting should be recognised from the outset as an integral part of any
development scheme and should be purposefully designed to complement the
proposed features of the devilment, and those existing features intended for retention.
On sites, which have no trees whatsoever, it is especially important to plan for the
planting of trees as part of the development.
•
Tree Planting will be expected to contribute, on an effective scale, to the conservation
or enhancement of the landscape, providing an overall environmental benefit in terms
of public amenity and nature conservation.
•
Tree Planting schemes should be appropriate for the intended use of the development
and will be expected to contribute to the establishment of a well –structured framework
of diverse ages, sizes and species with the potential to be managed constructively
over decades or even centuries.
•
Developers should recognise the functional role of tree planting in enhancing the
physical characteristics of a development through providing shelter, screening,
enclosure, softening the harsh outline of the buildings, defining space or directing
routes and views, or simply in lending enhancement to the visual amenity of an area.
•
Particular attention should be given to the use of tree planting in enhancing public
areas within developments and views into the sites from surrounding public
viewpoints.
•
In locations where nature conservation objectives are recognised, planting schemes
will be expected to maximise the benefits to wildlife, through the use of a range of
native trees and shrubs suited to the ecology of the locality. Due consideration should
be given to layout configuration, planting density, choice of species mixes, proportions
and edge characteristics. Such schemes should always be prepared with input in the
form of professionally qualified ecological advice.
Accordingly I recommend that the following condition be attached to any grant of permission:
No development shall commence on the non reserved matters until a scheme for the
landscaping of those aspects of the development have been submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local planning Authority. The landscaping scheme shall include details of hard
landscaping plans, written specifications, including cultivation and other operations
associated with tree, shrubs, hedges or grass establishment. schedules of plants noting
species, plant size, and proposed numbers/ densities and an implementation programme
must be submitted to the local authority planning department.
Reason: To comply with the requirements of Stroud District Local Plan, adopted November
2015. Core policy CP 14. Point 8.
Page 145 of 206
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
16. The provision of appropriate bus stops and shelters forms part of the recommended
planning conditions to provide adequate new public transport provision for the site and the
Section 106 agreement provides detailed trigger points for the enhancement of bus services.
17. As set out above the section 106 that deals with highway and transport issues provides
for a payment to the bus company to provide services into the site and connecting it to
Stonehouse and its town centre, with trigger points to increase the frequency of that service
as the development proceeds.
Within the red line of the application site, but not owned by the developer, there is a narrow
strip of land adjacent to Oldends Lane level crossing which is reserved for the potential
provision of a base for a DDA compliant pedestrian and cycleway bridge over the main line.
The consent detailed in relevant planning history above has allowed for in the design of the
approved employment building this reserved area.
18. The application does not provide a contribution to a new railway station at Stonehouse,
the policy on this issue is caveated by a Network Rail requirement. Network Rail have been
consulted on whether they have any plans for such a facility and have responded that they
have no present plans for a new/ reopened station at Stonehouse.
19. The Infrastructure Delivery Plan (November 2014) at section 6.3 deals with the local Plan
allocation the subject of this application. The document notes that there are no identified
infrastructure projects that would suggest substantial delays to delivery of the strategic site.
20. The section 106 Highways and transport agreement sets out the phasing of infrastructure
associated with the site and the timing of that work. The S106 dealing with public open space
and community issues also contains clauses which require employment land to be brought
forward as residential occupations are achieved as detailed in point 2.above.
The application is judged to be in compliance with Policy SA2 in all respects, and this view is
supported by the strategic policy officers response to the application.
Other Material Policy Matters and issues
Policy ES16 requires that major residential schemes contribute to public art, in this case it is
considered that such public art can be secured though the detailed design of individual
phases of the development and the laying out of areas of public open space. The design
vision together with the masterplan and parameter plans will provide an appropriate context
for the siting and content of public art.
Policy ES12, together with CP4 and CP5, requires that the layout and design of new
development provides a well designed, socially integrated and high quality development. The
illustrative masterplan, the design evolution document, the parameter plans and the design
strategy together provide at this outline stage a clear ‘design brief’ for the subsequent
applications for approval of reserved matters applications to be judged both against these
policies and the requirements of the NPPF at section 7 ‘Requiring good design’.
Policy HC3 requires that such strategic sites shall be compliant with Government aspirations
to encourage self build housing sites
to 152
be available.
In order to comply with this policy a
Page
of 206
suggested planning condition is set out (No. 45).
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
16.
No more than 550 dwellings (based on a 30% affordable and 70% private mix) or
any other development mix generating greater than 30 peak hour trips on the M5
Junction 13 northbound on-slip based on agreed trip rates and distributions to be
submitted to and approved by the LPA shall be occupied or brought into use until a
scheme to improve the M5 Junction 13 northbound on-slip as shown on PFA
Consulting's drawing no. H414/21 has been constructed and is available for use by
the travelling public. No occupation or use of the development beyond the threshold
stipulated shall occur until the approved works have been completed.
Reason:
To ensure that timely cost effective improvements are undertaken to the transport
network that mitigate the significant impacts of the development in accordance with
paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy SA2 of the
Stroud District Local Plan ( 19th November 2015).
17.
No more than 300 dwellings and 1.3 hectares of employment use shall be occupied
until the highway improvement works at Oldends Lane have been completed
generally in accordance with drawing No. H414/29 Rev B.
Reason:
To ensure that timely cost effective improvements are undertaken to the transport
network that mitigate the significant impacts of the development in accordance with
paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy SA2(14) of the
Stroud District Local Plan ( 19th November 2015).
18.
No more than 600 dwellings and 2.6 hectares of employment shall be occupied
prior to details of the highway improvement works at the Horsetrough Junction
being submitted and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority generally in
accordance with drawing no. H414/24 Rev A or other wise agreed in writing by the
LPA.
Reason:
To ensure that timely cost effective improvements are undertaken to the transport
network that mitigate the significant impacts of the development in accordance with
paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy SA2(14) of the
Stroud District Local Plan ( 19th November 2015)
19.
No more than 600 dwellings and 2.6 hectares of employment use shall be occupied
prior to the development of the spine road linking Oldends Lane to Grove Lane has
been completed.
Reason:
To ensure that safe and suitable access is provided and that timely cost effective
improvements are undertaken to the transport network to mitigate the significant
impacts of the development in accordance with Paragraph 32 of the National
Planning Policy Framework and Policy SA2(14) of the Stroud District Local Plan (
19th November 2015).
Page 159 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
In accordance with the Stroud District Local Plan 2015 Policy ES6.
Hours of Construction/Demolition
44.
Demolition or construction works outside a building shall not take place outside
0730 hours to 1830 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 hours to 1700 hours on
Saturdays nor at any time on Sundays or Bank Holidays).
Reason:
In accordance with Policy ES3 of the Stroud district Local Plan (19th November
2015.
Self Build Housing
45.
Applications for approval of reserved matters of individual residential phases of the
development shall unless otherwise agreed by Stroud District Council allocate
within each phase a site or sites for self build development .
Reason:
In accordance with Policy HC3 of the adopted Local Plan (2015).
INFORMATIVES
a)
b)
No work should be carried out on the application site that may endanger the safe
operation of the railway or the stability of Network Rail’s structures and adjoining land.
In view of the likely close proximity of some works to the railway boundary the
developer should contact Richard Selwood at Network Rail.
[email protected] before works begin
The proposed development will involve works to be carried out on the public highway
and the Applicant/Developer is required to enter into a legally binding Highway Works
Agreement (including an appropriate bond) with the County Council in its role as the
local highway authority before commencing those works.
Further guidance on the local highway authority's requirements can be found in its
document entitled ' Manual for Gloucestershire Streets' which is available on
Gloucestershire County Council's website
c)
The site is traversed by public rights of way and this permission does not authorise
additional use by motor vehicles, or obstruction, or diversion.
The developer will be expected to meet the full costs of supplying and installing the fire
hydrants and associated infrastructure.
The applicant is advised that to discharge condition 29 the LPA requires a copy of a
completed dedication agreement between the applicant and the local highway
authority or the constitution and details of a Private Management and Maintenance
Company confirming funding, management and maintenance regimes.
d)
For the proposed residential areas of the development that applications for approval of
reserved matters pursuant to
this166
permission
Page
of 206 include a detailed noise assessment
setting out the measures to be taken to ensure that there is no detriment to the
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
covenant to use the land for such purposes as are permitted in relation to the Local
Centre as may be agreed by the District Council.
6.
Employment Provision
To prepare and submit to the District Council within 6 months following the grant of
Planning Permission the Marketing Plan in respect of the Employment Land for
approval by the District Council.
As soon as is commercially expedient following agreement of the Marketing Plan, to
commence the marketing of the Employment Land (or such part or parts thereof as
have been agreed to be marketed) in accordance with the Marketing Plan.
To notify the District Council of the date on which the marketing of the Employment
Land (or relevant part of it) commenced.
To continue to implement the Marketing Plan until all parts of the Employment Land
has been occupied for the relevant employment purposes.
Not less than every six months, to review the Marketing Plan with the District Council,
report on progress made in relation to the implementation of the Marketing Plan
(including a written summary of marketing activities undertaken, details of interested
parties and of Offers received and transactions completed) and, where appropriate,
make such changes to the Marketing Plan as may be agreed with the District Council
with a view to ensuring the Marketing Plan is achievable and reflects the then current
market conditions.
a)
Prior to the first Occupation of the 400th Dwelling, to provide parcel E4 as a fully
serviced site;
b)
Prior to the first Occupation of the 700th Dwelling;
i) to provide parcels E1, E2 and LC1 as fully serviced sites and
ii) to have secured an Offer for parcel E1, E2 or E4 (the “First Offer”);
7.
c)
Prior to the first Occupation of the 1000th Dwelling;
i) to provide parcels E5 and LC2 as fully serviced sites and
ii) to have secured an Offer (other than the First Offer) for parcel E1, E2, E4 or
E5; and
d)
Prior to the first Occupation of the 1,100th Dwelling, to provide E3 as a fully
serviced site.
Affordable Housing
The Affordable Housing shall be provided in the following sub-proportions or as
otherwise agreed by the Council in writing in accordance with paragraph 3 of Schedule
1 above
Page 173 of 206
1.
If less than 1350 dwellings are constructed pursuant to the Permission then:
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Item No:
08
Application No.
Site No.
Site Address
S.13/2668/OUT
PP-03034892 (251)
Wimberley Mill, Knapp Lane, Brimscombe, Gloucestershire
Town/Parish
Minchinhampton Parish Council
Grid Reference
387435,202014
Application
Type
Proposal
Outline Planning Permission
Demolition and clearance of the existing buildings and hardstanding,
residential development of up to 104 dwellings, vehicular and pedestrian
access, Internal access roads, car parking, surface water drainage and
related works, various engineering operations including changes to site
levels, de-culverting the River Frome and works to create new flow and
flood channels, associated landscaping including a play area. (Revised
Plan 21st November 2014, revised description of development and plans
13.5.2015).
Page 181 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Reason:
Information required as part of the detailed design phase in order
to ensure the health and safety of the trees on the site and to
ensure continuity of the visual amenity that they provide and the
ecological habitat potential and to comply with Policy ES6, ES8 of
the adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015 and
guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework.
18.
The development hereby permission shall not commence until a
Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and
approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved
Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period.
The Statement shall:
i. specify the type and number of vehicles;
ii. provide for the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors;
iii. provide for the loading and unloading of plant and materials;
iv. provide for the storage of plant and materials used in
constructing the development;
v. provide for wheel washing facilities;
vi. measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during
construction
vii hours of working
viii measures to protect the water course during construction
ix measures to protect ecological habitat during construction
phase.
Reason:
The provision of further information in order to reduce the potential
impact on the public highway during the construction phase in
accordance with Policy ES3 of the adopted Stroud District Local
Plan, November 2015 and the National Planning Policy Framework
Chapter 4.
19.
The development hereby permitted shall not commence until
details of the proposed improved connection of the PROW to the
canal towpath has been submitted to an approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority, together with a timetable for the
implementation of the highway works. The works shall then be
completed in accordance with the approved timetable and shall be
maintained as such thereafter unless and until adopted as highway
maintainable at public expense.
Reason:
Information is required as part of the detailed design phase to
ensure that there suitable access details are provided to reduce
potential Page
highway
188impact,
of 206 in accordance with paragraph 32 of the
National Planning Policy Framework.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
SDC Housing and Policy Implementation Manager: The District Valuer has confirmed that
the scheme is not financially viable if affordable housing is included within it. However, I
would expect there to be a s.106 agreement with an overage clause such that if the scheme
yields a profit in excess of 20% gross development value, 50% of this excess should be
secured to provide affordable housing.
Environmental Protection Manager: no objection and makes suggestions of conditions
controlling delivery times and dust management. The need for conditions controlling
contaminated land has also been requested.
Environment Agency: has no objection to the proposed development subject to conditions
controlling the associated impacts of the development.
Natural England: identify the potential impact on Rodborough Common SAC and advise that
appropriate mitigation is provided in line with the interim strategy. No comment is made on
protected species.
Historic England: The application should be in line with national and local guidance, and on
the basis of the Council’s specialist conservation advice. However, there are some concerns
about the loss of building 4 which exhibits some characteristics of value.
Gloucestershire Police: make comments on the layout of the site and make suggestions on
the physical changes that could be made to improve security. A request for a contribution
towards policing is outlined.
Severn Trent Water: no objection but suggest condition regarding surface water run off
Ecologist: no objection subject to a condition requiring an ecology mitigation and
enhancement plan.
Water Resources Engineer: Comments on the increase in number of dwellings from 96 to
104 and suggests a condition relating to surface water drainage.
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS - NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES
Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in
accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015 is the Development Plan for Stroud
District. This plan has recently been found sound by the Appeal Inspector and adopted and is
therefore considered consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework. The National
Planning Policy Framework sets out the Government’s core planning principles and a
statement on achieving sustainable development. The document then provides guidance in a
series of 13 chapters covering the range of planning considerations.
Core Policy CP1 of the adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015 and the core
planning principles of the NPPF (Paragraph 17) seek to enhance and improve the places in
people live, support sustainable development, secure high quality design, protect important
landscape features, encourage the use of renewable sources, conserve and enhance the
natural environment, re-use previously
Pagedeveloped
195 of 206land, promote mixed use developments,
conserve heritage assets, encourage sustainable transport and improve health, social and
cultural wellbeing for all.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Zone 3 to a Flood Zone 2. This has been confirmed by the Environment Agency. Other
benefits include ecological and landscape improvements.
The effective downgrading of the flood risk of the site to Flood Zone 2 removes the need for
the Sequential and Exception Tests to be applied to the site. The decision maker needs to
have regard to the impact of the development and the risk of flooding. These aspects have all
been taken into account in the allocation of the site as part of the Local Plan process.
The Environment Agency (EA) has been involved in discussions relating to the proposed
development on the site and has formally commented to the proposed development. Their
comments are detailed and are available in full on the web site.
The extensive discussions with the EA demonstrate that they are satisfied that the scheme is
acceptable from a flood risk, biodiversity and a controlled water perspective subject to
appropriate control mechanisms. The River Frome, which runs across the site, is currently
culverted and the culverted section of the river cannot convey flows. The proposed
development opens up the river. Modelling has demonstrated that this will improve flows
significantly such that the flood classification is reduced from zone 3b to zone 2. Conditions
are proposed relating to the opening up of the river; the access details; footbridge
requirements; and ongoing management. Land contamination conditions are proposed to
ensure that controlled waters are not contaminated. The conditions require details of
remediation and work along with the control of the impact of contaminated land on human
health with the Environmental Health department.
The Water Resources Engineer has advised that the application is acceptable in principle
subject to approval of a specific drainage scheme, which can be secured through planning
conditions.
Overall, subject to a series of planning conditions, the scheme has demonstrated that is
acceptable in water management terms and that the scheme provides for a number of
benefits the environment.
ECOLOGICAL IMPACT
This is a brownfield site which has the potential for ecological value. The site has been
subject to a number of ecological surveys identifying the impact of the development on such
habitat. The site has potential for ecological habitat for a variety of species given the
presence of water and mature landscaping. The ecological surveys highlighted the potential
for bats on the site but there was no evidence of badgers, otters, water voles, white claw
crayfish and great crested newts.
The ecological surveys have indicated that only the eastern part of Building B1 has some
potential for bats. The demolition of this building would be the subject of a licence from
Natural England which subject to details and timing of demolition is likely to be acceptable.
The site offers foraging potential within the mature trees, wooded areas and the adjacent
canal. The scheme will require the approval of the landscape for which the indicative plans
show substantial tree/hedgerow Page
retention.
202 ofThe
206 majority of the site is proposed for
development within the areas of existing built form. The reinstatement of the river corridor
offers a significant ecological enhancement.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
are to be live/work, adequate parking provision would be 2 spaces per dwelling. Any garages
attached or ancillary to the dwelling would need to comply with the minimum dimensions
listed within MfGS but given the plot size there is sufficient space to provide this provision.
Each dwelling should also have at least one cycle storage space in accordance with 9.38
MfGS and to comply with the minimum dimensions outlined by 8.2.22 MfS. If there is no
separate cycle storage provided, it can be accommodated within the garage space to ensure
covered, secure and convenient provision is provided, however in doing so this may affect
the decision as to whether or not the garage should count towards the car parking provision.
There is sufficient space within the site to allow the internal layout to have an adoptable
standard turning head. This would accommodate refuse and service vehicles and allow them
to enter and leave the site in forward gear without causing a detriment to highway safety.
The County Highways Officer has also highlighted the Public Rights of Way bounding the
site. These will not be interrupted by the development but the safety of users during
construction must be provided for.
Whilst the concerns of local residents are appreciated with the limited scale of the
development and lack of County Highway objection it would be difficult to uphold an
argument that the scheme would cause a severe impact on highway safety.
RESIDENTIAL AMENITY
The location of the site and plot size creates some distance to the nearest unconnected
residential properties. This space between properties reduces the potential for the scheme to
be overbearing or cause overshadowing and loss of privacy. The retention of the trees to the
east of the site also provides some screening to the neighbour on this side.
Whilst the design and appearance have been reserved it is considered that an appropriate
scheme can be designed so that the proposed dwellings will not significantly harm the
residential amenities currently enjoyed by local residents.
CONCLUSION AND PLANNING BALANCE
The provision of affordable housing is a key Council priority and the Housing Need survey
has an identified housing need within the Parish. The proposal is therefore considered as an
exception site.
The need for affordable housing is also a pressing consideration. The site is not immediately
adjacent to a settlement but it is reasonably accessible to local services.
Whilst the concerns of local residents are also appreciated as addressed above it is
considered that the site will not appear overly prominent or dominant on the character of the
surrounding area, will not have a severe impact on highway safety and will not significantly
affect residential amenities.
Therefore, on balance the proposal is recommended for permission subject to a legal
agreement in respect of the affordable housing provision.
Page 26 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
HUMAN RIGHTS
In compiling this recommendation we have given full consideration to all aspects of the
Human Rights Act 1998 in relation to the applicant and/or the occupiers of any neighbouring
or affected properties. In particular regard has been had to Article 8 of the ECHR (Right to
Respect for private and family life) and the requirement to ensure that any interference with
the right in this Article is both permissible and proportionate. On analysing the issues raised
by the application no particular matters, other than those referred to in this report, warranted
any different action to that recommended.
Page 27 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Item No:
02
Application No.
Site No.
Site Address
Town/Parish
S.15/1832/FUL
PP-04363144
The Lammastide Inn, New Brookend, Berkeley, Gloucestershire
Hinton Parish Council
Grid Reference
368422,202062
Application
Type
Proposal
Full Planning Permission
Construction of Annexe to provide 6 No Holiday Lets for use with the
Lammastide Inn.
Applicant’s
Details
Mr S Winearles
Lammastide Inn, New Brookend, Berkeley, Gloucestershire, GL13 9SF
Agent’s Details
Mr Malcolm Hunt
Page 28 of 206
Frome Lodge, High Street, Chalford, Stroud, Gloucestershire
GL6 8DJ
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Case Officer
John Chaplin
Application
Validated
03.08.2015
RECOMMENDATION
Recommended
Decision
For the
following
reasons:
Refusal
1.
Insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate the need
or viability of the proposed holiday accommodation or how this
relates to the existing business. Without the details of the need or
viability the proposal would result in the creation of a residential
development in an unsustainable location, remote from facilities
and services. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies EI10
and CP1, CP3 of the adopted Stroud District Local Plan,
November 2015.
2.
Due to the built form and scale, the proposal would erode the well
defined gap between existing buildings, intensify the built form and
would be harmful to the established open and rural character of
the surroundings. The style and finish of the development also
does not particularly relate to the character and appearance of the
existing public house. The proposal is therefore contrary to
Policies EI10 and ES7 of the adopted Stroud District Local Plan,
November 2015.
3.
Insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that the
development will not have severe impact on the local highway
network, that safe and suitable access and an appropriate level of
parking for the existing public house will be provided or that the
opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken up
and exploited. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies CP13,
CP14, EI10 and ES3 of the adopted Stroud District Local Plan,
November 2015 and paragraphs 32 and 35 of the NPPF.
4.
Due to the proximity to the boundary, the first floor Juliet balconies
would result in a degree of impact and a perceived loss of privacy
to the neighbouring residential property and increased potential for
noise and activity close to the boundary. The proposal is therefore
not overly neighbourly and would be contrary to Policies EI10 and
ES3 of the adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015.
CONSULTEES
Comments
Received
Not Yet
Received
Parish / Town
Development Coordination (E)
Page 29 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
CONTRIBUTORS
Letters of
Objection
Letters of
Support
Mr And Mrs S Ellis, Westerings, New Brookend
H And J Withers, Ashton Villa, New Brookend
Mr And Mrs Castledine, Berkeley Heath, GL13 9EW
Letters of
Comment
OFFICER’S REPORT
SITE
The application site is a pub and restaurant located within Brookend. This small group of
dwellings has a mainly linear form with the majority of development to the east end of the
road. The hamlet has no settlement limit and is part of the wider open countryside of the
Severn Vale.
The pub is constructed of painted brick under a plain tiled roof and is located in a large plot
with beer garden and seating to the front and rear. Access and car parking is located to both
side of the building.
PROPOSAL
Construction of Annexe to provide 6 No Holiday Lets for use with the Lammastide Inn.
REVISED DETAILS
Further supporting statement submitted.
MATERIALS
Walls: Brick
Roof: Concrete Double Roman Roof Tiles
Fenestration: UPVC
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
In 2002 (S.02/1868) the public house was granted planning permission for extensions to
provide guest bedroom accommodation and a restaurant conservatory.
S.02/1696 Outline application for erection of detached dwelling (resubmission following
refusal S.01/1350). Refused and appeal dismissed.
Previous refusals for residential development in 1986, 1996 and 2001.
CONSULTATION RESPONSES
Full details of all statutory consultations and public representations are available to view on
the electronic planning file. A summary of the consultation responses and public
representations also appears below.
Hinton Parish Council: No objectionPage
to the30structure
of 206 or siting of the building, however, there
needs to be adequate parking for the lets and users of the pub.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
GCC Highways: Further information required.
Environmental Health: Recommends conditions & informative
Local Residents:
2 Support comment received - support local pub which is at the centre of the community.
Limited accommodation in the area. Will not have a detrimental effect on local community.
Other rural pubs closing. Draw in visitors and support local businesses.
3 Objection comments received - highlights planning history of previous refusals.
Loss of privacy and overlooked from first floor Juliet balconies. Overbearing and cause a loss
of light and shadowing. Increased activity near the boundary. Increase noise and
disturbance. Lack of licensing controls for holiday let guests. Different hours and activities to
pub.
Limited space, impact on layout and character of the area. Out of character. Impact on
landmark building. Height, style and colour out of place. Does not reflect the architectural
features of the pub. Not in keeping.
Does not look like holiday let but clearly like 3 residential dwellings. Question the
sustainability and the apparent easy convertible design. Question the need and viability.
Disturbance during construction. Increased traffic, loss of onsite parking and an increase in
parking on the highway to the detriment of highway safety. Loss of space used by delivery
lorries.
New build residential development outside settlement boundary contrary to Policy. Set a
precedent for future development.
Support petition also received with 29 signatures raising no objections and supporting the
viability of the pub.
REASONS FOR DECISION
The reasons for the Council's decision are summarised below together with a summary of the
Policies and Proposals contained within the Development Plan which are relevant to this
decision:
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS - NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES
Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in
accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015 is the Development Plan for Stroud
District. This plan has recently been found sound by the Appeal Inspector and adopted and is
therefore considered consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework.
Policy EI6 of the adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015 seeks to protect
individual and village shops, public houses and other community uses that provide key
services and facilities, especially in rural settlements, and which often play an important role
in community life. A development or change of use may be considered on part of the site to
enable a continued community use. Distance to local facilities and the viability have to be
considered. This is consistent with the NPPF para 28 and other legislation relating to
permitted development rights and Assets of Community Value.
Page 31 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Tourism is important to the economy of Stroud, particularly in the attractive rural areas, and
the policy positively supports sustainable rural tourism and leisure developments which
benefit businesses in rural areas. Policy EI10 sets out the approach to providing new tourism
opportunities in the district and directs developments to accessible locations inside
settlements higher up the defined settlement hierarchy (Policy CP3 sets out the settlement
hierarchy, to which this sequential approach relates).
Policy EI10 does provide for exceptional cases in lower tier settlements where there is
evidence that the facilities are in conjunction with a particular countryside attraction and it is
demonstrated how the proposal could assist rural regeneration and the well being of
communities. It needs to be demonstrated that no suitable alternative existing buildings or
sites exist which are available for re-use or a countryside location is essential for the
proposed use. That the scale, design and use of the proposal is compatible with its wider
landscape setting and would not detract from any acknowledged biodiversity interest nor the
character and appearance of the landscape or settlement and would not be detrimental to the
amenities of residential areas. The development also has to be served by adequate access
and infrastructure and have reasonable access to local services. This approach is consistent
with the NPPF para 28.
However, in the lower tier and unclassified settlements or the countryside, the Council
favours the principle of re-use, rather than new-build or the provision of temporary structures
such as tents or caravans.
Local Plan Policy ES7 addresses landscape character and seeks to ensure that all forms of
development make a positive contribution to the District's character and appearance, paying
particular attention to the locally distinctive qualities of its surroundings. This is in line with
chapter 11 of the NPPF.
Local Plan Policy ES3 seeks to maintain quality of life by preventing an unacceptable level of
noise, general disturbance, smell, fumes, loss of daylight or sunlight, loss of privacy or an
overbearing effect. Additionally the policy seeks to maintain highway safety including public
rights of way.
PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT
This proposal is to provide 6 units of holiday accommodation in conjunction with and to
diversify the existing Lammastide public house. Whilst wanting to support rural pubs, no
evidence has been submitted to demonstrate the need or viability of the 6 proposed holidays
lets and how this relates to the existing business. It is not known if the existing business
needs 6 units to remain a viable concern and how this would affect the financial viability of
the business.
There may be some walkers coming along the canal/surrounding area, however, it has not
been shown that there would be a specific demand in this location for this scale of
development. Is there a sufficient need for 6 holiday units of this type in this location? Without
the details of the need or viability it would also be difficult to link the units to the pub or control
the use of the flats. The creation of a row of new separate open market dwellings could easily
result should the demand or business case for holiday accommodation not proceed. The pub
has also recently been advertised forPage
sale 32
on of
rightmove.
206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Whilst the site is located within a small hamlet this does not have a settlement limit and is
considered a rural location. Apart from the pub it is distanced from most local shops and
services and is not considered sustainable. No details of local bus services have been
provided and apart from walking to the local attraction of the Purton Hulks, occupiers would
be reliant on the use of a private car. There are some pavements however, the unlit rural
nature and distance would discourage pedestrians from walking to Newtown, Wanswell or
Berkeley. With this unsustainable location the site is not an area where the Local Plan seeks
to provide new build residential developments such as dwellings or tourism developments
such as holiday lets.
DESIGN/APPEARANCE/IMPACT ON THE AREA
The proposal has a linear two storey form with a pitched roof above and is positioned to the
side of the public house. The public house is located within a large plot with space to the
neighbouring property. Whilst there are two storey dwellings in the wider area the immediate
setting of the pub has open agricultural fields to the side and rear and there are two single
storey bungalows on the same side of the road on the other side of the site. This creates a
pleasant generally open and rural character and setting to the pub and surrounding area. The
built form and scale of the proposal would erode the well defined gap between existing
buildings and intensify the built development. This would be harmful to this open and rural
character of the surroundings.
The materials and terraced form create a style and finish to the development that also does
not particularly relate to the character and appearance of the public house.
HIGHWAY SAFETY
The Parish Council and local residents have raised the need to provide adequate parking for
both the proposed holiday lets and the existing public house and restaurant. The proposal
would result in the loss of 6 parking spaces and a further 6 spaces would be required to be
used by the occupants of the proposed holiday lets. County Highways have also questioned
this and are seeking further information and a parking survey to demonstrate how the loss of
this number of space from the pub would impact on the surrounding highway network. The
agent has suggested more parking spaces can be provided elsewhere on the other side of
the pub. He does not consider this necessary so no plans or details of how this can be
provided have been submitted. Given the existing car park fills the space to the side it is
unclear how this can be provided. The impact of increasing the hardstanding and parking is
also a concern.
Local residents have also highlighted the site of the holiday lets is currently used by
delivery/beer lorries to the public house. It has not be demonstrated that with the proposed
new building and associated parking an appropriate access and turning space will still be
available for large delivery lorries identified by local residents.
Therefore, insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate the scheme would
provide and retain sufficient parking for the public house and access for deliveries. This could
lead to a situation detrimental to highway and pedestrian safety on the surrounding highway
network with vehicles parking and reversing onto the public highway.
Page 33 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
RESIDENTIAL AMENITY
The proposed building is located close to the boundary with the neighbouring residential
property. Whilst the side elevation is blank the two storey design does provide first floor Juliet
balconies facing to the rear. Whilst mainly facing to the rear these would provide an angled
view to the garden area of the neighbour and even with the hedge boundary there is a
degree of impact and a perceived loss of privacy.
Concern regarding overlooking has also been raised by the neighbours opposite. Whilst the
introduction of front first floor windows are noted compared to the existing bungalow it is
considered that the position and width of the road creates sufficient space to mitigate any
significant loss of privacy.
The concern regarding noise and disturbance from occupiers either on holiday or attending
events or parties also is noted. Whilst the site is currently a public house, activity is not so
concentrated this close to the boundary. The nature and hours of the use is also different to
the established public house and it would be difficult to control noise and activity. Whilst this
would depend on the occupiers the layout and proximity to the boundary is not overly
neighbourly.
CONCLUSION
Whilst wanting to support local businesses and country pubs, this has to be balanced against
all other planning considerations. With limited information and details of any business plan
justifying the need and scale of the development and how this would relate to the public
house it is considered that other material planning concerns (regarding the impact on the
appearance, character and setting, unsustainable and limited access of the location, parking
and highway safety and potential impact on residential amenities) do not outweigh any
benefit.
The proposal is therefore recommended for refusal.
HUMAN RIGHTS
In compiling this recommendation we have given full consideration to all aspects of the
Human Rights Act 1998 in relation to the applicant and/or the occupiers of any neighbouring
or affected properties. In particular regard has been had to Article 8 of the ECHR (Right to
Respect for private and family life) and the requirement to ensure that any interference with
the right in this Article is both permissible and proportionate. On analysing the issues raised
by the application no particular matters, other than those referred to in this report, warranted
any different action to that recommended.
ARTICLE 35 (2) STATEMENT
Little if any pre-application discussions took place on this project, however, the case officer
was in contact with the applicant/agent and the community, acting in a positive and proactive
manner. The agent has been advised of the concern regarding the proposal and the likely
recommendation of refusal. Due to the conflict of this particular proposal with adopted policy
it is not possible to support the proposed development and seek solutions to the planning
issues.
Page 34 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Item No:
03
Application No.
Site No.
Site Address
S.15/1587/FUL
PP-04288272
Bencombe Barns, Lampern Hill, Uley, Gloucestershire
Town/Parish
Uley Parish Council
Grid Reference
379181,197375
Application
Type
Proposal
Full Planning Permission
Applicant’s
Details
Conversion of 3 Barns to a Live/work Unit
Howard Tenens Distribution Ltd
Tenens House, Kingfisher Business Park, London Road, Thrupp, Stroud
Gloucestershire
GL5 2BY
Page 35 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Agent’s Details
Mr Timothy Roberts
Tim Roberts Planning, Garden Cottage, Mumbleys Lane, Thornbury,
South Gloucestershire
BS353JZ
Case Officer
John Chaplin
Application
Validated
27.07.2015
RECOMMENDATION
Recommended
Decision
Subject to the
following
conditions:
Permission
1.
The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the
expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
Reason:
To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the
Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
2.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in all
respects in strict accordance with the approved plans listed below:
Site Location Plan of 02/07/2015
Plan number = 21452/01
Site Plan Proposed of 02/07/2015
Plan number = 21452/02
Proposed plans and elevations of 02/07/2015
Plan number = 21452/02, 03 & 05
Reason:
To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with
the approved plans and in the interests of good planning.
3.
The materials to be used in the development shall be in
accordance with the approved details (outline in the agent emails
sent on 21 & 22 Sept 2015) and retained in perpetuity unless
otherwise approved by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason:
To enable the local planning authority to ensure the satisfactory
appearance of the development, in accordance with Policies CP15
and ES7 of the adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November
2015.
Page 36 of 206
4.
Prior to occupation of the development hereby approved, details of
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
the boundary treatment shall be submitted and approved. The
boundary treatment used in the development shall be in
accordance with the approved details and retained in perpetuity.
Reason:
To enable the local planning authority to ensure the satisfactory
appearance of the development, in accordance with Policies CP15
and ES7 of the adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November
2015.
5.
No construction site machinery or plant shall be operated, no
process shall be carried out and no demolition or constructionrelated deliveries taken at or dispatched from the site except
between the hours 08:00 and 18:00 on Mondays to Fridays,
between 08:00 and 13:00 on Saturdays and not at any time on
Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays.
Reason:
To protect the amenity of the locality, especially for people living
and/or working nearby, in accordance with Policy ES3 of the
adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015.
6.
The live/work unit hereby approved shall be occupied as a single
planning unit and not sub-divided or sub-let at any time. The work
unit may only be used ancillary to the occupation of the live unit.
Reason:
The use of the work unit for separate use not ancillary to the main
dwelling may have implications on residential amenity, highway
safety and the wider amenities of the surrounding area which
would require further consideration by the Local Planning
Authority.
7.
The employment/work floorspace (Barn 2) of the live/work unit
hereby approved shall be finished ready for occupation before the
residential floorspace (Barn 1) is occupied and the residential use
shall not precede commencement of the employment use of the
unit. The work unit (Barn 2) then must not be converted or used
solely for living accommodation or residential use unless consent
has been approved by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason:
To safeguard the provision of employment/work space to support
the appropriate rural employment opportunities in accordance with
Paragraphs 4.58 – 4.60 of the adopted Stroud District Local Plan,
November 2015 and paragraph 28 of the NPPF.
8.
The employment/work
Page 37 of 206floorspace (Barn 2) of the live/work unit
hereby approved shall not be used for any purpose other than for
purposes within B1a (Business - Office) in the Schedule to the
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987, or in any
provision equivalent to that Class in any statutory instrument
revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification.
Reason:
To protect the amenity of local residents and the area generally
from noise and disturbance and in the interest of highway safety in
accordance with Policies ES3 and ES7 of the adopted Stroud
District Local Plan, November 2015.
9.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in strict
accordance with the bat and bird related mitigation
recommendations outlined within Section 5 of the submitted
Building Survey and Assessment for Protected Species Report –
Just Ecology dated July 2015. Prior to the first occupation written
confirmation from the project ecologist shall also be submitted to
and approved by the Local Planning Authority informing that the
works have proceeded as per the approved documents and in
accordance with the mitigation recommendations.
Reason:
To recognise nature conservation importance in accordance with
Policy ES6 of the adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November
2015 and the NPPF.
10.
No works shall commence on site on the development hereby
permitted until the existing roadside frontage boundaries have
been set back to provide visibility splays extending from a point
2.4m back along the centre of the access measured from the
public road carriageway edge (the X point) to a point on the nearer
carriageway edge of the public road 35m distant in both directions
(the Y points). The area between those splays and the
carriageway shall be reduced in level and thereafter maintained so
as to provide clear visibility between 1.05m and 2.0m at the X point
and between 0.26m and 2.0m at the Y point above the adjacent
carriageway level.
Reason:
To reduce potential highway impact by ensuring that adequate
visibility is provided and maintained and to ensure that a safe,
suitable and secure means of access for all people that minimises
the conflict between traffic and cyclists and pedestrians is provided
in accordance with the paragraph 32 of the National Planning
Policy Framework and CP13 of the adopted Stroud District Local
Plan, November 2015.
11.
No works shall commence on site on the development hereby
permitted Page
until the
first
5m of the proposed access road, including
38 of
206
the junction with the existing public road and associated with
visibility splays, has been completed to at least binder course
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
level, and any gates set back at least 5m from the carriageway
edge and hung so as to open away from the highway.
Reason:
To minimise hazards and inconvenience for users of the
development by ensuring that there is a safe, suitable and secure
means of access for all people that minimises the conflict between
traffic and cyclists and pedestrians in accordance with the
paragraphs 32 and 35 of the National Planning Policy Framework
and CP13 of the adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November
2015.
12.
The buildings hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the
vehicular parking and turning facilities have been provided in
accordance with the submitted plan, and those facilities shall be
maintained available for those purposes thereafter.
Reason:
To ensure that a safe, suitable and secure means of access for all
people that minimises the conflict between traffic and cyclists and
pedestrians is provided in accordance with the paragraphs 32 and
35 of the National Planning Policy Framework and CP13 of the
adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015.
Informatives:
1.
Article 35 (2) Statement - Little if any pre-application discussions
took place on this project, however, the case officer has been in
contact with the agent, acting in a positive and proactive manner
seeking clarification regarding the proposed materials and the
ecological and highway implications. With this further information
the scheme was considered permissible.
2.
Please note that the site is traversed by a public right of way and
this permission does not authorise additional use by motor
vehicles, or obstruction, or diversion.
CONSULTEES
Comments
Received
Karen Colbourn
Parish / Town
Development Coordination (E)
Not Yet
Received
Cotswolds Conservation Board (E)
CONTRIBUTORS
Page 39 of 206
Letters of
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Objection
M. Shearer, Bencombe Gables, Uley
A McKay, Uley Parish Council, 1 The Old Printhouse
Kate And Mark Easy, 1 Bencombe Cottages, Lampern Hill
Benjamin Browne QC, Angeston Grange, Uley
Letters of
Support
Letters of
Comment
OFFICER’S REPORT
SITE
The application site consists of a group of rural buildings, 2 constructed of stone with clay
pantiled roof and a 3rd open steel frame building. Part of the buildings appear to be used as
a stable with horses present in the surrounding fields. An access track connects the barns
with the highway on Lampern Hill with Bencombe Farm to the east. The site is located within
the Cotswold AONB and is outside of any defined settlement boundary.
PROPOSAL
Conversion of 3 Barns to a Live/work Unit
REVISED DETAILS
Additional highways information and clarification colour of the fenestration.
MATERIALS
Walls: Natural Stone as existing
Roof: Reclaimed double roman interlocking pantiles
Fenestration: Timber painted dark green
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
S.09/0597/FUL Construction of 2 agricultural barns (retrospective). Approved
02/2301. Erection of three barns to replace existing. Approved.
CONSULTATION RESPONSES
Full details of all statutory consultations and public representations are available to view on
the electronic planning file. A summary of the consultation responses and public
representations also appears below.
Uley Parish Council: Object – has been built with lintels in place to allow for this conversion in
contravention of previous permission. Proposal would be contrary to existing conditions
restricting use. Contrary to barn conversion policies. Outside development boundary and is
not considered suitable for residential use.
GCC Highways: No Highway Objection
Environmental Health: Recommends conditions & informative
SDC Consultant Ecologist: Recommends conditions
Local Residents: 4 Objections received - future plans to create a sellable house with no
Page 40
of 206 be improved without character being
farmland or worker attached. Access
cannot
significantly changed. Highway safety concerns, access unacceptable. Increased traffic.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Access should be through Lye Farm. Unsustainable location. Other nearby refusal. Previous
conditions restrict use to agriculture and that it should not be converted. Suspicion of
intention to circumvent planning.
REASONS FOR DECISION
The reasons for the Council's decision are summarised below together with a summary of the
Policies and Proposals contained within the Development Plan which are relevant to this
decision:
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS - NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES
Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in
accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015 is the Development Plan for Stroud
District. This Plan has recently been found sound by the Appeal Inspector. It is therefore
considered consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework.
Policy CP15 of the adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015 seeks to protect the
separate identity of settlements and the quality of the countryside by limiting development
outside settlements. However, CP15 recognises that sometimes it is impossible for some
kinds of development (including barn conversions) to be accommodated within settlements
and establishes criteria for such development, in order to help sustain, enhance and revitalise
our rural communities. Development will only be permitted in the countryside if it does not
have an adverse impact on any heritage assets and their setting, does not lead to excessive
encroachment or expansion of development away from the original buildings and of particular
relevance to the re-use of an existing building or buildings, these are appropriately located
and are capable and worthy of conversion. Any such conversion should involve a building
that positively contributes to an established local character and sense of place. In the case of
replacement buildings they must bring about environmental improvement. The National
Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) also promotes sustainable development in rural areas.
Chapter 3 and paragraph 55 are of particular relevance.
Local Plan Policy ES7 addresses landscape character and seeks to ensure that all forms of
development make a positive contribution to the District's character and appearance, paying
particular attention to the locally distinctive qualities of its surroundings including the
Cotswolds AONB. This is in line with paragraph 113 of the NPPF.
Local Plan Policy ES3 seeks to maintain quality of life by preventing an unacceptable level of
noise, general disturbance, smell, fumes, loss of daylight or sunlight, loss of privacy or an
overbearing effect. Additionally the policy seeks to maintain highway safety including public
rights of way.
National policy encourages flexible working practices, such as the integration of residential
and commercial uses within the same unit. Live/work units can have a part to play in the rural
economy and are generally supported by the Local Plan para 4.58 - 4.60.
PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT
This proposal is to convert the existing group of barns into a live work unit. The previous
history of the site is noted but the application
has to be considered on its own merits and
Page 41 of 206
assessment made on the current situation and the submitted details. The restrictive use of
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
the building imposed by the previous planning conditions does not restrict the consideration
of this proposal.
The retrospective nature of the previous application is also noted but this should not prejudge
this application. The proposal therefore has to be considered as barn conversion and
assessed against the policy requirements for this type of development.
Consideration has been given to the condition of the existing building. Whilst a structural
survey has not been submitted, the buildings appear to be substantial, sound and of
permanent construction having been recently built (2009). The new Local Plan does not
place the same requirement for emphasis on demonstrating this. The buildings have to be
capable and worthy of conversion. Whilst of a modern construction, the buildings are
constructed from stone and do have a rural character. It would therefore be difficult to defend
a refusal reason purely on the basis that the buildings are not worthy of conversion.
The scheme does not involve extending the barns and the existing buildings appear readily
capable of conversion and without needing complete reconstruction. Openings for windows
and dormers could easily be provided given the construction/provision within the existing
structure. The open frontages can be easily enclosed with glazing and fenestration. It is
proposed that the steel framed barn (No.3) will be partly enclosed and used as a carport.
The buildings appear to have been used for stabling and related storage. No marketing has
been submitted, but due to the limited size and location of the buildings they are not ideal for
a straight employment or possible community use. However, the live work unit proposed
does retain some employment on site.
Whilst not applicable in this case the principle behind the government's new flexible permitted
development for agricultural buildings also has to be considered and shows the general
support for rural conversions.
Whilst the site is not located in an overly sustainable location the proposal is to convert
existing rural buildings which dictate the position. Therefore, due to the above it is considered
the principle of development is acceptable.
DESIGN/APPEARANCE/IMPACT ON THE AREA
The proposal converts the existing buildings utilising the existing structure and materials.
Whilst some alterations are made to the buildings and fenestration these respect the form
and rural character of the buildings.
A limited curtilage has been provided with the main amenity space being provided by the
central courtyard area. Details of the boundary treatment of the corner areas can be
approved via condition and with the existing buildings on site it is considered the scheme
would have limited harmful impact on the wider character and setting of the surrounding area
and this part of the AONB.
An ecological survey report has been submitted. This survey shows that the barns have
negligible potential for roosting batsPage
and nesting
birds but sets out precautionary mitigation
42 of 206
measures for the avoidance of impact. These can be required via condition with a
confirmation from the project ecologist that the works have been carried out.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Local residents have highlighted another recent application which has been refused. This
does not appear to be directly comparable to the application site in the nature or proposal. In
any event, the LPA are obliged to determine the application on its own particular merits.
Whilst the application buildings maybe visible from the nearby Listed buildings at Bencombe
House, with the distance, difference in levels and separation it is considered that the
conversion of these existing buildings will not cause significant harm to the setting of the
nearby Listed Buildings.
HIGHWAY SAFETY
Concerns have been raised about the safe use of the access. Whilst this is acknowledged
along with the existing low key use, the existing unrestrictive agricultural access could be
used by large agricultural vehicles at a greater frequency without consent.
A speed survey has been undertaken which shows a 85th percentile speed of 26mph in both
directions. The agent has also submitted a plan of the access to demonstrate that this
average speed of vehicles warrants visibility splays 2.4m x 35m (set out in MfS). The site
entrance can provide suitable visibility and any access gates set back, the County Highways
Officer is satisfied that the site can provide a safe and adequate access onto Lampern Hill
and has no objection.
Therefore, whilst understanding the local concern, the traffic and movements of one live work
unit is unlikely to have such a severe impact given the existing potential use to warrant a
refusal. The live work unit also has the potential to reduce the need to travel off site to work.
The restricted nature and gradient of the lane may also help reduce vehicles speeds. There
is sufficient space within the site to provide space for the provision of parking and turning.
RESIDENTIAL AMENITY
There is substantial separation from the nearest dwelling and consequently there no
significant amenity implications in terms of shadowing, privacy or overbearing implications.
The position of the access track and given its existing use is also unlikely to have a material
impact.
RECOMMENDATION
The barns themselves are of appropriate construction and appearance and the conversion of
the barns can be readily accommodated without the necessity for extensive building works.
National and local planning policies are supportive of the reuse of rural buildings and there
are no overriding reasons to refuse the application. Permission is therefore recommended.
HUMAN RIGHTS
In compiling this recommendation we have given full consideration to all aspects of the
Human Rights Act 1998 in relation to the applicant and/or the occupiers of any neighbouring
or affected properties. In particular regard has been had to Article 8 of the ECHR (Right to
Respect for private and family life) and the requirement to ensure that any interference with
the right in this Article is both permissible and proportionate. On analysing the issues raised
by the application no particular matters, other than those referred to in this report, warranted
any different action to that recommended.
Page 43 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Item No:
04
Application No.
Site No.
Site Address
S.15/2313/FUL
PP-04520084
79 Regent Street, Stonehouse, Gloucestershire, GL10 2AA
Town/Parish
Stonehouse Town Council
Grid Reference
380462,204962
Application
Type
Proposal
Full Planning Permission
Applicant’s
Details
Agent’s Details
Erection of a new dwelling.
Mr Roger Telphia
2-4 Summer Hill Terrace, Birmingham, West Midlands (Met County),
B1 3CA,
Mr Michael Idowu
Page 44 of 206
101A Albion Street, Jewellery Quarter, Birmingham, West Midlands,
B1 3AA
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Case Officer
Hannah Minett
Application
Validated
12.10.2015
RECOMMENDATION
Recommended
Decision
Subject to the
following
conditions:
Permission
1.
The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the
expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
Reason:
To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the
Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
2.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in all
respects in strict accordance with the approved plans listed below:
Proposed plans and elevations of 19/11/2015
Plan number = 100 Version number = REVISED SCHEME
Reason:
To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with
the approved plans and in the interests of good planning.
3.
No construction site machinery or plant shall be operated, no
process shall be carried out an no construction-related deliveries
taken at or dispatched from the site except between the hours
08:00 and 18:00 on Monday to Fridays, between 08:00 and 13:00
on Saturdays and not at any time on Sundays, Bank or Public
Holidays.
Reason:
To protect the amenity of the locality, especially for people living
and/or working nearby, in accordance with Stroud District Council
Local Plan Policy GE1 and in accordance with the provisions of
Circular 11/95.
4.
The materials to be used in the construction of the external
surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match the
external surfaces used on 79 Regent Street.
Reason:
In the interests of the visual amenities of the area.
5.
Page
45 of openings
206
No window
or door
other than any windows shown on
the approved plans shall be formed in the first or second floor of
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
the development hereby permitted, unless otherwise agreed in
writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason:
In the interests of the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining
residential property.
6.
The dwellling hereby permitted shall not be brought into use until
provision is made for the parking, on a properly made-up surface,
of a minimum of two cars within the curtilage. This provision shall
be maintained as such thereafter.
Reason:
To ensure that sufficient parking spaces are made available.
Informatives:
1.
In accordance with Article 35 (2) the Local Planning Authority have
worked with the Applicant. The case officer contacted the
applicant/agent and negotiated changes to the design which has
enhanced the overall scheme; these have been detailed in the
Officer Report.
2.
The application site is within 250 metres of a suspected landfill
site, the applicant/developers attention is drawn to the fact that
there is the potential for production and migration of landfill gas.
You are reminded that the responsibility for safe development
rests with the owner and/or developer. Accordingly, the
applicant/developer is advised to seek independent expert advice,
regarding the possibility of the presence, or future presence, of gas
and whether any precautionary measures are necessary. The
Council’s Environmental Health Section will make available to you,
free of charge, any information or data which it has in relation to
the land to which the application applies.
CONSULTEES
Comments
Received
Environmental Health (E)
Contaminated Land Officer (E)
Not Yet
Received
CONTRIBUTORS
Letters of
Objection
Stonehouse Town Council, Town Hall, High Street
J Dickson, North Berryfield, 11 Bristol Road
P Edmonds, 7 Bristol Road, Stroud
P Beard (Practice
Manager),
Regent Street Surgery, 73 Regent
Page
46 of 206
Street
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Letters of
Support
Letters of
Comment
OFFICER’S REPORT
DESCRIPTION OF SITE
The application site is within Stonehouse and comprises part of an existing residential
curtilage associated with The Orchard, a large detached two storey house used as a House
of Multiple Occupancy (HMO). The site is accessed from Regent Street via a drive serving
the doctors surgery and other residential development. The site has several tall trees and is
otherwise rough grassland which has been fenced off from The Orchard. The site is
surrounded by residential development on all boundaries, the majority of which comprises of
large detached dwellings with generous gardens. There is a listed building 40 metres to the
east.
PROPOSAL
The applicant is seeking planning permission for the erection of a four bedroom dwelling to
be used as a HMO (C4).
Revised details
As a result of negotiation with officers the proposal has been reduced in the scale and form
from a six bedroom to a four bedroom dwelling. This would have appeared cramped.
There were also concerns that the proposed dwelling would be an extension of the planning
unit at No. 79 Regent Street, given the red line bounds both the application site and No. 79
Regent Street. The proposed use would then fall within a Sui Generis use and require
consideration as a combined larger HMO. It was ultimately concluded however that given the
physical separation with existing fencing between the sites and the internal layout of the
proposed dwelling lends itself to operate independently, the proposed dwelling would be
considered as a separate, small HMO under class C4.
The agent has also confirmed that the proposed dwelling will operate separately and has
submitted a location plan with an amended red line around the application site only.
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
S.13/2745/FUL - Erection of a detached dwelling. Permission 27/01/2014
S.13/2112/HHOLD - Erection of detached garage - Permission 14/11/13
CONSULTATION RESPONSES
Public
There have been numerous objections to the originally submitted scheme which are available
to view in full online. In summary, these make reference to the following issues;
Overdevelopment, the house is too large for the plot, inappropriate scale with
surroundings, too tall;
- Lack of amenity space, overbearing effect on neighbouring dwellings due to height,
47 of 206
proximity, loss of sunlight, loss Page
of privacy
as many of the bedroom windows of the
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
proposed dwelling will look in to neighbouring bedroom windows, would be invasive and
encroach onto neighbours' privacy excessively;
- No construction plan- how will construction vehicles access the site, access to the house
far too narrow. No dust control scheme, no ecological assessment;
- Would result in the loss of many mature trees on the site which provide visual amenity,
privacy and habitat;
- The road is unsuitable for further development, already a shortage of parking resulting in
visitors to existing HMO parking in private doctors surgery car park, unclear where parking
is proposed, not enough room on the site for proposed parking, more vehicles will come to
HMO than private dwelling including delivery vehicles, staff and visitors who will end up
parking in doctors surgery car park;
- Negative impact of HMO on social cohesion, will create more noise and anti-social
behaviour, could be dangerous for children in the area, no explanation of why they want
another HMO in the area.
Stonehouse Town Council
Object to original scheme on following grounds:
Overdevelopment, the house is too large and too close to existing houses;
Lack of good access to the site as well as parking on the site;
Loss of privacy for neighbours;
Loss of trees;
Excessive concentration of HMOs in Regent St.; and
Applicant's Design and Access Statement is very weak and unclear.
REASONS FOR DECISION
The reasons for the Council's decision are summarised below together with a summary of the
Policies and Proposals contained within the Development Plan which are relevant to this
decision:
Policy Considerations
Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in
accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
Local Plan Policy HC1 permits development within settlement limits subject to suitable scale,
density and layout that is compatible with the character and appearance of the area.
Development should not intrude into open countryside or cause loss of or damage to open
space or to wildlife habitat. Natural or built features capable of retention should be
incorporated and appropriate levels of amenity space and vehicular provision should be
included.
Chapter 7 of the NPPF stresses the importance of high quality design as well as Core Policy
CP14 which promotes high quality sustainable development. Policy ES3 maintains an
acceptable quality of life by ensuring development does not cause an unacceptable level of
noise, general disturbance, smell, fumes, loss or daylight or sunlight, loss of privacy or have
an overbearing effect.
Page 48 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Principle of Development
The site lies within the defined settlement limits where there is a presumption in favour of
development subject to design and amenity considerations and to a satisfactory means of
access being provided. A dwelling was permitted on the site in 2014 under reference
S.13/2745/FUL. In this respect the principle of further residential development on the site
can be supported.
Impact on Character and Appearance of the Area
The existing character of the area is very varied. Regent Street appears as relatively high
density, particularly towards the Town Centre to the north and on its eastern side. At the
southern end, the western side is less dense and has a much higher amount of natural
vegetation, which gives it a softer appearance. Originally, 79 Regent Street had a very large
curtilage with vehicular access onto Bristol Road to the south. There is a large amount of
history on the site however 79 Regent Street lawfully changed from a private dwelling to a
HMO in November 2014 and two high density detached dwellings were permitted on the
southern portion of the site in February 2012.
While the proposed three storey dwelling would be smaller than 79 Regent Street, the plot is
significantly narrower and smaller than the majority of sites in the surrounding area. This
would result in a much more cramped form of development than in the wider setting and it is
acknowledged that responses from the Town Council and residents express concern that the
site would be overdeveloped and not in keeping with the area. Weight must however be
given to the fact that the proposed dwelling has a very similar siting, scale and form as the
dwelling previously approved on the site under reference S.13/2745/FUL. Furthermore, the
revised scheme has reduced the massing and built form of the dwelling to a considerable
scale and the design is in keeping with the local area and the density of the proposed site
similar to the two dwellings recently built to the south of the site. In terms of materials, the
use of facing brick is appropriate however no specific details have been submitted and so it is
considered appropriate to condition external materials to match those used on No. 79 Regent
Street. On balance, the scale, form and siting would be considered acceptable.
Impact on Amenity
Public consultation responses have expressed concerns regarding loss of privacy and loss of
light, largely due to the close proximity of the dwellings. It is acknowledged that the dwelling
would be surrounded by neighbouring properties to each boundary. While the close proximity
could have a somewhat overbearing impact on the outlook from No. 79 Regent Street, there
are no first or second floor windows proposed on the side facing elevations of the proposed
dwelling and as such, the dwelling would not lead to any significant overlooking into
neighbouring properties. Furthermore, there is a sufficient separation distance between
dwellings to the front and rear and existing boundary treatment would screen the ground floor
windows of the existing and proposed dwellings.
As a further precaution, a condition is recommended restricting the insertion of any further
doors or windows. With such conditions in place, the proposal would not be significantly
detrimental to neighbouring occupier's amenities and satisfies Policy ES3.
On balance, the proposed scheme is not considered to harm the living conditions of
neighbouring occupiers to the extentPage
to warrant
refusal.
49 of a206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Highway Safety
The Town Council and a large number of residents expressed concern that the HMO would
exacerbate an already dangerous situation, in regard to a shortage of car parking spaces and
volume of traffic of visitors and staff to the doctors' surgery and 79 Regent Street since
becoming a HMO.
Initially, officers had concerns over the lack of parking, however given the revised scheme
has reduced the number of bedrooms in the proposed dwelling from six to four, the proposed
scheme would provide adequate parking. It should be considered here that a HMO falling
within use class C4 can change to a private dwellinghouse (C3) without requiring planning
permission, where no more than two car parking spaces are required in order to meet the
Council's parking standards.
Other Issues
A large number of consultation responses expressed concern over the high concentration of
HMOs within Regent Street and subsequent social problems of an additional HMO. In
particular, comments have raised concern that the use would result in danger to local
residents. No justification of the additional HMO in the vicinity has been provided by the
applicant, however the NPPF encourages inclusive communities that are safe and in other
examples, planning inspectors acknowledge the concern but consider them to be largely
perceived fears rather than real. It is officers' opinion that planning permission could not be
refused on this ground.
RECOMMENDATION
The scheme proposed is considered to accord with the policies in the development plan and
is considered acceptable. As such, it is recommended that planning permission is granted.
HUMAN RIGHTS
In compiling this recommendation we have given full consideration to all aspects of the
Human Rights Act 1998 in relation to the applicant and/or the occupiers of any neighbouring
or affected properties. In particular regard has been had to Article 8 of the ECHR (Right to
Respect for private and family life) and the requirement to ensure that any interference with
the right in this Article is both permissible and proportionate. On analysing the issues raised
by the application no particular matters, other than those referred to in this report, warranted
any different action to that recommended.
Page 50 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Item No:
05
Application No.
Site No.
Site Address
S.15/1250/FUL
PP-04219636
Dove Cottage, 5 Crawley Hill, Uley, Dursley
Town/Parish
Uley Parish Council
Grid Reference
379037,198972
Application
Type
Proposal
Full Planning Permission
Proposed new dwelling
Applicant’s
Details
Mr & Mrs Lamerton
5 Crawley Lane, Uley, Gloucestershire, GL11 5BJ, United Kingdom
Agent’s Details
Mr Simon Littlewood
Page 51 of 206
Elevation One Building Design Ltd, 25 Uley Road, Dursley,
Gloucestershire, GL11 4NJ
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
United Kingdom
Case Officer
John Chaplin
Application
Validated
02.06.2015
RECOMMENDATION
Recommended
Decision
Subject to the
following
conditions:
Permission
1.
The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the
expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
Reason:
To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the
Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
2.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in all
respects in strict accordance with the approved plans listed below:
Site Location Plan of 27/05/2015
Site Plan Proposed of 07/10/2015
Plan number = ML-010/02
Proposed floor plan of 07/10/2015
Plan number = ML-010/03
Proposed floor plan of 07/10/2015
Plan number = ML-010/04
Proposed Elevations of 07/10/2015
Plan number = ML-010/05
Reason:
To ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with
the approved plans and in the interests of good planning.
3.
No construction works shall take place until details, including
samples and colours where required, of the materials used in the
construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby
permitted have been submitted to and approved by the Local
Planning Authority. This condition shall apply notwithstanding any
indication as to these matters that have been given in the current
application. The materials to be used in the development shall be
in accordance with the approved details and retained in perpetuity
Page 52approved
of 206 by the Local Planning Authority.
unless otherwise
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Reason:
To ensure the satisfactory appearance of the development, in
accordance with Policies HC1 and ES7 of the adopted Stroud
District Local Plan, November 2015 and the provisions of the
National Planning Policy Framework.
4.
No construction works shall take place until details of the existing
ground levels, proposed finished floor levels of the dwellings and
the proposed finished ground levels of the site including the
access, relative to a datum point which is to remain undisturbed
during the development have been submitted to and approved by
the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall also provide
comparative levels of eaves and ridge heights of adjoining
properties and details of the levels of any existing or proposed
boundary treatments. The development shall be carried out in strict
accordance with the details as approved.
Reason:
In the interests of the amenities of local residents and to ensure
the satisfactory appearance of the development, in accordance
with Policies CP8, HC1, ES3 and ES7 of the adopted Stroud
District Local Plan, November 2015.
5.
The dwelling hereby permitted shall not be occupied until space for
parking has been laid out in accordance with the approved plans
and shall thereafter be similarly maintained.
Reason:
In the interests of highway safety and to comply with Policy ES3 of
the adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015.
6.
The dwelling hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the
highway widening shown on drawing no. ML-010/02 received on
07 October 2015 has been constructed in accordance with details
first submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason:
In the interests of highway safety and to comply with Policy ES3 of
the adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015.
7.
No development shall take place, including any works of
demolition, until a construction method statement has been
submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The
approved statement shall be adhered to throughout the
construction period and shall provide for:
i) the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors;
ii) loading Page
and unloading
53 of 206of plant and materials;
iii) storage of plant and materials used in constructing the
development;
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
iv) wheel washing facilities;
v) measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during
construction.
Reason:
In the interest of highway safety and neighbour amenity and to
comply with Policy ES3 of the adopted Stroud District Local Plan,
November 2015.
8.
No construction site machinery or plant shall be operated, no
process shall be carried out and no demolition or constructionrelated deliveries taken at or dispatched from the site except
between the hours 08:00 and 18:00 on Mondays to Fridays,
between 08:00 and 13:00 on Saturdays and not at any time on
Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays.
Reason:
To protect the amenity of the locality, especially for people living
and/or working nearby, in accordance with Policy ES3 of the
adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015.
Informatives:
1.
Article 35 (2) Statement - Pre-application discussions took place
on this project and the case officer has been in contact with the
applicant/agent and the community, acting in a positive and
proactive manner. Having negotiated changes to the design and
layout which have enhanced the overall scheme it is considered
the scheme is permissible and in accordance with the National
Planning Policy Framework.
2.
The Construction Method Statement referred to the above
condition will be of key importance due to the restricted nature of
the highway and the proximity to neighbouring dwellings. The
applicant and or successors in title are therefore advised that the
information submitted should be comprehensive.
3.
The area of land to be provided to the Highway Authority as a
passing place shown shaded on the site plan is likely to require a
dedication agreement for which the applicant would need to apply.
For further details please contact the GCC Highways Legal
Agreements Team
[email protected].
4.
If a protected species (such as any bat, reptile, moth and butterfly
or any nesting bird) is discovered using a feature on site all work at
the locality should cease. A suitably qualified ecological consultant
or Natural
England
should be contacted and the situation
Page
54 of 206
assessed before operations can proceed. This action is necessary
to ensure compliance with the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
amended) and the Conservation
Regulations 1994 (as amended).
5.
(Natural
Comments
Received
Parish / Town
Historic England SW
Not Yet
Received
Cotswolds Conservation Board (E)
CONTRIBUTORS
Letters of
Support
Letters of
Comment
&
c.)
The applicant should take all relevant precautions to minimise the
potential for disturbance to neighbouring residents in terms of
noise, dust, smoke/fumes and odour during the construction
phrases of the development. This should include not working
outside regular day time hours, the use of water suppression for
any stone or brick cutting, not burning materials on site and
advising neighbours in advance of any particularly noisy works. It
should also be noted that the burning of materials that gives rise to
dark smoke or the burning of trade waste associated with the
development, are immediate offences, actionable via the Local
Authority and Environment Agency respectively. Furthermore, the
granting of this planning permission does not indemnify against
statutory nuisance action being taken should substantiated smoke,
fume, noise or dust complaints be received.
For further
information please contact Mr Dave Jackson, Environmental
Protection Manager on 01453 754489.
CONSULTEES
Letters of
Objection
Habitats
Uley Parish Council, 1, The Old Printhouse, Church St.
M Ball, Dingle View, Crawley Lane
M & MC Ball, Dingle View,, Crawley Lane,
T Murphy
Wadhams, 2 Crawley Lane, Uley
V Coffey, The Old Bakery, 1 Crawley Lane
Mr And Mrs Auger, 10 Crawley Hill, Uley
C Elliot, Devonia Farm, Crawley Lane,
Mr And Mrs Auger, 10 Crawley Hill, Uley
Dr Elliot, Devonia Farm , Crawley Lane
Mr And Mrs Townsend, Cartref,, 6A Crawley Lane,
OFFICER’S REPORT
Page 55 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
SITE
The application site is an overgrown part of the garden of the existing dwelling 5 Crawley Hill.
It is located adjacent to the main Crawley Hill but would have access from Crawley Lane
which runs below the site. The site is slightly elevated with the rising slope between these 2
roads. The site is not located within the defined settlement but is within the Cotswolds Area of
Outstanding Natural Beauty.
PROPOSAL
Proposed new dwelling
REVISED DETAILS
Revised design and layout plans submitted on 07 October 2015.
MATERIALS
Walls: Natural coursed stone, timber cladding and render
Roof: Slate
Fenestration: Grey/olive timber and untreated hardwood
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
None
CONSULTATION RESPONSES
Full details of all statutory consultations and public representations are available to view on
the electronic planning file. A summary of the consultation responses and public
representations also appears below.
Uley Parish Council: Object - Outside development boundary, set an unacceptable precedent
along narrow country lane. Other applications have been refused. Does not meet HN10.
Historic England: No objection
GCC Highways: No objection
Environmental Health: Recommends conditions & informative
Local Residents:
Support comments received - Currently an unsightly gap. Large enough to allow access &
parking. Welcome use/asset of the site. Will enhance the quality of the locality. Contribution
to housing need. Makes good use of the space in the lane.
Comments received - Impact on Crawley Lane during construction - obstruction and
inconvenience. Request a Traffic management plan. Cause deterioration of road surface.
Should include parking and turning space. Impact on wildlife - slow worms on site.
Revised plans
Uley Parish Council: Object no reason to change objection - Crawley Lane is single track
road with a lack of turning. Would lead to reversing onto busy Crawley Hill. Worst for
construction vehicles which would block lane. Concerned about the glass atrium causing light
pollution in visible position given the AONB and Uley Bury ancient monument and Valley.
Against recommendations of emerging Uley and Owlpen Community Design Statement.
Contrary to Local Plan. Set a precedent.
Page 56 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Local Residents:
2 further Comments received - Not within Local Plan. Crawley Lane single track and narrow
lane. Would add additional pressure on inadequate lane and access. Turning for transit van
not possible. Surface of lane deteriorated and not suitable. Construction difficult and
disruptive. Could set a precedent.
1 further Support comment received - Lack of turning at the end of the lane is a separate
issue. The speed of vehicles on Crawley Hill needs to be addressed but is beyond the scope
of this application. No evidence of significant light pollution, there are many other
conservatories, street lights and security lights in the area. Could be mitigated by using low
energy/wattage lamps. Other developments affect the condition of the lane. Turning space
not necessary as site is located at lane entrance.
REASONS FOR DECISION
The reasons for the Council's decision are summarised below together with a summary of the
Policies and Proposals contained within the Development Plan which are relevant to this
decision:
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS - NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES
Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in
accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015 is the development plan for Stroud
District. Due weight should be given to policies in this plan according to the degree of
consistency with the National Planning Policy Framework.
The core planning principles of the NPPF (Paragraph 17) seek to enhance and improve the
places in people live, support sustainable development, secure high quality design, protect
important landscape features, encourage the use of renewable sources, conserve and
enhance the natural environment, re-use previously developed land, promote mixed use
developments, conserve heritage assets, encourage sustainable transport and improve
health, social and cultural wellbeing for all. This is echoed in Core Policy CP1 of the Local
Plan.
Policy ES3 seeks to maintain quality of life by preventing an unacceptable level of noise,
general disturbance, smell, fumes, loss of daylight or sunlight, loss of privacy or an
overbearing effect. Additionally the policy seeks to maintain highway safety including public
rights of way.
Chapter 4 (Paragraphs 29-41) of the NPPF promote the need for sustainable transport. It
outlines Governments objectives with regard to offering people access to a real choice about
how they chose to travel. It requires access to sustainable transport modes and recognises
that sustainable transport solutions will vary from urban to rural areas. Local Plan Policy ES3
maintains highway safety including public rights of way. Policy EI12 details the Councils
parking standards.
Chapter 6 (Paragraphs 47-55) of the NPPF establishes Governments objectives for housing
provision and allows for a rolling 5 year housing supply (plus 5% additional buffer). It also
considers the location of new housing
locations with the requirement for
Page in
57 sustainable
of 206
affordable housing provision. Policy HC1 of the Local Plan specifically provides guidance on
small scale housing inside settlement boundaries. Whilst this site is outside consideration still
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
has to be given to the plot size, height, size and design of the proposed unit as well as the
possible impact on car parking provision. Local Plan Policy CP2 details the Council's
strategic growth and development locations and Policy CP3 details the Districts settlement
hierarchy. Local Plan Policy CP9 details the Councils requirements for affordable housing
and their integration.
Chapter 7 (Paragraphs 56-68) of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) stresses
the importance of quality design in the provision of sustainable development. It stresses
Governments objectives for inclusive design, innovation and raising design standards. Local
Plan Policies of relevance include CP8 and CP14.
Paragraphs 28, 109-125 of the NPPF apply to development in rural areas. These highlight
the need to protect landscape character like the AONB, maintain rural housing and
communities and minimise impacts on biodiversity. This is supported by Local Plan Policy
ES7 which place priority on the protection of the AONB and conserves the distinct landscape
types in the District.
PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT
The site is located outside of any defined settlement limits and as such would not normally be
considered suitable for further development unless specific circumstances are identified. The
local plan policies seek to promote sustainable pattern of development by locating
development near to essential services and transports links and is consistent with the NPPF
which promotes sustainable development and seeks to avoid new isolated dwellings except
in certain circumstances.
Uley is defined as a 3rd tier settlement within the settlement hierarchy. Whilst there are a
limited level of facilities and services within the village they do provide the best opportunities
outside the large settlements for growth.
Whilst the site is located outside the development limit it is still located near to the village with
a footpath link providing a short walk into the settlement. Being located near the main road
also provides access to the nearby bus stops and routes through the village to Dursley or to
Stroud.
The site is also surrounded by a number of existing dwellings extending along Crawley Lane
and up Crawley Hill. With this built up nature it is therefore difficult to consider the site as
being open countryside and the proposal would not represent an isolated dwelling in the
countryside.
The slight step away from the village is noted but given the other limited harm addressed
elsewhere in the report, on balance, it is considered it would be difficult to resist the principle
of development and defend an argument that the site was so unsustainable and
environmentally harmful to warrant a refusal.
DESIGN/APPEARANCE/IMPACT ON THE AREA
The revised drawings have improved the character and appearance of the proposed
dwelling. This now has a steeper pitch and provides a more cottage-like appearance with the
fenestration detailing. However, a modern
design
is retained with the glazed link section and
Page 58
of 206
timber which helps break up the mass and form. The proposed natural stone and slate would
be appropriate for the surrounding area. The dwelling is also set into the bank and it is
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
therefore considered the proposal would not appear out of keeping or significantly harm the
character of the area.
The site is located near the Uley Bury Camp scheduled monument. The proposed dwelling
would lie at the foot of the eastern slope of this hill fort. It will be seen within the context of
other buildings as well as being partially screened by the topography and trees. It is therefore
considered the scheme will not have an impact or harm the views which form part of the
significance of the monument. This has been confirmed by Historic England who have no
objections.
Concern has been raised regarding the glass atrium that links the main sections of the
building causing light pollution in a sensitive area within the AONB. This concern is noted
however, the link is limited in scale and as the site is surrounded by other residential
properties the development would not appear as a new isolated form of lighting or create a
significant additional amount of residential light. Therefore the wider impact would be limited.
The plot size is large enough to accommodate the development providing amenity space for
both the existing and proposed dwellings without appearing cramped or overdeveloped.
Being located within other residential properties it is considered the proposal would not
appear isolated or overly prominent in wider views and therefore not cause significant wider
harm to the surrounding landscape and setting.
On sites capable of providing less than four dwellings Policy CP9 seeks a financial
contribution for affordable housing where viable. The Policy Implementation Manager has
considered this scheme and has confirmed that this application is unable to make a
contribution to affordable housing for viability reasons.
Whilst the plot is slightly unkempt at present it is located within an existing residential garden
which could be cleared at anytime and does not provide significant ecological interest. A local
resident has highlighted the possibility of slow worms on site. However, it is extremely
unlikely that the population of slow worms and other reptiles that could be affected is
sufficiently valuable for the impact to be significant. However, in order to comply with the
Wildlife and Countryside Act, an informative is recommended highlighting the applicant’s
responsibilities should protected species be evidenced on site.
HIGHWAY SAFETY
Concerns have been raised about the traffic generated from the proposed dwelling and
during the construction phases. These concerns are appreciated given the narrow nature and
surface of Crawley Lane. However, the site is located at the beginning of the lane and as a
single dwelling it will not generate a significant amount of additional traffic or have a severe
impact on highway safety. The proposal includes widening a section of the lane which would
be an improvement that could be used by all residents. On site parking has been provided.
The proposed public turning head has been removed from the scheme following discussions
with GCC Highways who felt it position at the beginning of the lane would not make it overly
beneficial for the majority of residents further along the lane and was unlikely to be adopted
by the GCC.
Whilst it is accepted there maybe some
Pageshort
59 ofterm
206 disruption during the construction phase,
the developer needs to give this careful consideration given the nature of the site and the
lane. A construction method statement can be required via condition.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
RESIDENTIAL AMENITY
The proposed dwelling is located within the existing large plot of 5 Crawley Hill and is
elevated above Crawley Lane and the neighbouring properties to the North. However, the
proposed position does create a distance between the development and these neighbours
with further protection created from the neighbour's boundary treatment. There is also space
to the neighbour to the side who is slightly higher up the Hill. With the space and position of
the proposed dwelling compared to neighbouring properties it is considered that the scheme
will not significantly harm the privacy of the neighbouring residents. The space also results in
there being no significant overshadowing or overbearing problems.
HUMAN RIGHTS
In compiling this recommendation we have given full consideration to all aspects of the
Human Rights Act 1998 in relation to the applicant and/or the occupiers of any neighbouring
or affected properties. In particular regard has been had to Article 8 of the ECHR (Right to
Respect for private and family life) and the requirement to ensure that any interference with
the right in this Article is both permissible and proportionate. On analysing the issues raised
by the application no particular matters, other than those referred to in this report, warranted
any different action to that recommended.
Page 60 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Item No:
06
Application No.
Site No.
Site Address
S.15/2418/HHOLD
PP-04557340
Mistle House, Framilode, Gloucester, Gloucestershire
Town/Parish
Fretherne With Saul Parish Council
Grid Reference
375101,210249
Application
Type
Proposal
Householder Application
Erection of garden room and utility to rear of dwelling.
Applicant’s
Details
Mr & Mrs T C Lever
Mistle House, Framilode, Gloucester, Gloucestershire, GL2 7LH
Agent’s Details
Abigail Snook
Page 61 of 206
The Pike House, Kingshill Road, Dursley, Gloucestershire, GL11 4BJ
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Case Officer
Sarah Crawley
Application
Validated
13.10.2015
RECOMMENDATION
Recommended
Decision
For the
following
reasons:
Refusal
1.
The design of the proposed development is based primarily upon
the extension for which planning permission was granted in 1993.
That development appears as a slightly quirky addition to the
original structure. However, the proposed extension detracts from
the design concept of the 1993 scheme as it cuts into the form of
the existing extension and would result in a cluttered and confused
appearance contrary to Policy HC8 of the adopted Stroud District
Local Plan, November 2015.
Informatives:
1.
In accordance with Article 35 (2) the Local Planning Authority has
worked with the applicant/agent. The case officer had previously
contacted the agent to negotiate changes to the design which
could have enhanced the overall scheme. Unfortunately these
suggestions were not considered acceptable to the applicant.
CONSULTEES
Comments
Received
Not Yet
Received
Contaminated Land Officer (E)
Parish / Town
Cotswold Canal Trust (E)
CONTRIBUTORS
Letters of
Objection
Letters of
Support
Letters of
Comment
S Kitching, Little Orchard, Framilode
OFFICER’S REPORT
DESCRIPTION OF SITE
The site comprises a semi-detached dwelling situated to the east of the Stroudwater canal in
Pageaccess
62 of 206
Framilode. The property has a vehicular
from the eastern part of the site leading to a
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
parking area. The main amenity area lies to the east of the property. The site lies within a
Conservation Area, a Key Wildlife Site and is within Flood Zones two and three.
PROPOSAL
The proposal is the erection of a utility and garden room extension to the eastern rear
elevation of the property. This is a resubmitted application after a refusal earlier this year.
Although the agent and the authority had discussions over potential alternative designs the
applicant wished to pursue the scheme as originally submitted.
MATERIALS
Brick, timber cladding and glazing.
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
Application S.10879/G permitted "Erection of extension to provide new kitchen and bedroom"
in 1993.
Application S.15/0483/HHOLD was for essentially the same development and was refused in
April this year.
CONSULTATION RESPONSES
Public
The owner/occupier of "Little Orchard" commented "I do not believe that it is in the interests
of the present owners or of future owners of this property to build over the top of the waste
tank. The present plans appear to show the proposed development covering approximately
half of the said tank."
Town/Parish
None
Consultations
The Senior Contaminated Land Officer noted the proximity of the site to a former landfill site
and so recommended a landfill informative be applied to any planning permission.
The Gloucestershire Centre for Environmental Records has noted the presence of UK
Biodiversity Action Plan Priority Species and other Nationally Important or Legally Protected
Species however the closest record was over 115m from the site and these records relate
primarily to the River Frome. The development site is managed garden land at present and
there is considered to be little potential for detrimental impact upon protected wildlife.
REASONS FOR DECISION
The reasons for the Council's decision are summarised below together with a summary of the
Policies and Proposals contained within the Development Plan which are relevant to this
decision:
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS - NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES
Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in
accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The adopted Stroud District Local Plan,
PageNovember
63 of 206 2015 is the development plan for Stroud
District
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The NPPF is a material consideration in planning decisions. The NPPF was published on 27
March 2012. This is a key part of the reforms to make the planning system less complex and
more accessible, to protect the environment and to promote sustainable growth.
RESIDENTIAL AMENITY
Policy ES3 precludes development that would lead to an unacceptable level of: noise,
general disturbance, loss of privacy or overbearing effect; environmental pollution; noise
sensitive development in unacceptable locations; increased risk of flooding, detrimental
impact upon highway safety or adverse effect on contaminated land where a risk to health or
environment.
Due to the position, height and design of the proposed extension in relation to the
neighbouring dwellings there would be no unacceptable overbearing effect, impact on light
levels or loss of privacy arising from the development. Any alterations to neighbouring
property would be a civil matter.
HIGHWAY SAFETY
Policy ES3 precludes development that would lead to an unacceptable detrimental impact
upon highway safety.
The proposal would have no direct impact upon vehicular access or parking arrangements
which would remain adequate to serve the enlarged dwelling. The potential increase in
vehicular movements associated with the proposed development is not considered to result
in any significant detrimental impact upon highway safety.
DESIGN/APPEARANCE/IMPACT ON THE AREA
Policy HC8 permits extension of residential properties subject to appropriate height, scale,
form and design which is in keeping with the existing dwelling and the wider setting. Sufficient
appropriate space must be retained for vehicular parking and the opportunity to enhance the
energy efficiency of the property should be exercised.
The design of the proposed development is based primarily upon the extension for which
planning permission was granted in 1993. That development appears as a slightly quirky
addition to the original structure. However, to base the design of a further extension upon this
non-original element of the building erodes the original character of the property. The
proposed extension would cut into the existing extension and as such would result in a
cluttered and confused appearance.
There would be adequate parking and amenity space remaining to serve the enlarged
dwelling.
HERITAGE IMPACT
Policy ES10 seeks to preserve, protect and enhance the historic environment. An
assessment of the heritage asset will be required. Proposals that conserve and where
appropriate enhance any heritage significance and setting including views will be supported.
Any harm or loss would require clear and convincing justification as to why any heritage
interest should be overridden.
Page 64 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Whilst the site lies within the Conservation Area the largely contained position of the
proposed development is such that it would not be readily evident from the public domain.
Whilst the design is not considered appropriate due to the generally screened position the
development is not considered to have a significant impact upon the Conservation Area or its
setting.
FLOOD RISK
The site lies within Flood Zones two and three. However, the structure is partially a
replacement building and flood resilience measures are proposed as part of the
development. Due to the minor nature of the works proposed the development is not
anticipated to have any significant detrimental impact upon flooding risk.
RECOMMENDATION
The application is considered to comply with the relevant policies and is therefore
recommended for permission.
HUMAN RIGHTS
In compiling this recommendation we have given full consideration to all aspects of the
Human Rights Act 1998 in relation to the applicant and/or the occupiers of any neighbouring
or affected properties. In particular regard has been had to Article 8 of the ECHR (Right to
Respect for private and family life) and the requirement to ensure that any interference with
the right in this Article is both permissible and proportionate. On analysing the issues raised
by the application no particular matters, other than those referred to in this report, warranted
any different action to that recommended.
Page 65 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Item No:
07
Application No.
Site No.
Site Address
S.14/0810/OUT
Town/Parish
Eastington Parish Council
Grid Reference
379295,206467
Application
Type
Proposal
Outline Planning Permission
Land West Of Stonehouse, Nastend Lane, Nastend, Stonehouse
A mixed use development comprising up to 1,350 dwellings and 9.3
hectares of employment land for use classes B1, B2 and B8; a mixed use
local centre comprising use classes A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, D1, D2 and B1;
primary school, open space and landscaping, parking and supporting
infrastructure and utilities; and the creation of new vehicular accesses
from Grove Lane, Oldends Lane and Brunel Way.
Refer to Appendix A for Site Location Map
Applicant’s
Details
Robert Hitchins Limited & Redrow Homes Limited
C/O Pegasus Group, Pegasus House, Querns Business Centre,
Whitworth Road, Cirencester
Gloucestershire
GL7 1RT
Agent’s Details
Pegasus Group
Pegasus House, Querns Business Centre, Whitworth Road, Cirencester,
Gloucestershire
GL7 1RT
Case Officer
David Lowin
Application
Validated
02.04.2014
RECOMMENDATION
Recommended
Decision
Subject to the
following
conditions:
Resolve to Grant Permission
(Subject to the satisfactory completion of a Section 106 Agreement)
Conditions within report.
CONSULTEES
Comments
Received
Development Coordination
Page 66 of(E)
206
Parish / Town
Highways England
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Natural England (E)
Karen Colbourn
Environmental Health (E)
Archaeology Dept (E)
Gloucestershire Education Dept (E)
Gloucestershire County Strategic
Public Rights Of Way Officer (E)
Policy Implementation Officer (E)
Contaminated Land Officer (E)
Mr David Lesser
The Environment Agency (E)
County Ecologist(E)
Severn Trent Water Ltd (E)
Health And Safety Executive
Highways England
Wales And West Utilities Limited (E)
Network Rail(E)
Sport England
Cotswold Canal Trust (E)
Standish Parish Council
Stonehouse Town Council
Whitminster Parish Council
Arboricultural Officer (E)
Natural England (E)
Historic England SW
CONTRIBUTORS
Letters of
Objection
J Rigelsford, 11 Broadfield Road, Eastington
Stonehouse Town Council, Town Hall, High Street
K.M.Redford, 2 Cressington Cottages, Westend
G Redford, 2 Cressington Cottages, Westend
H Cogan, 8 Oldends Lane, Stonehouse
D And J Spencer, Orchard House, Nupend
E Beach, Endslea, Nastend Lane
J Lee, Sans Souci , Oxlynch Lane
Psan, 1 Stable Cottages, Bread Street
Mr G Bloyce, 4 More Hall Park, Randwick
G Redford, 2 Cressington Cottages, Grove Lane
A Lazenbury, Nupend Cottage, Nupend
Mr W K Evill, 65 Mill Farm Drive, Paganhill
S Younge, 1 Cressington Cottages, Grove Lane,
S Ashton, 2 Dotloe Farm Cottages, Nupend
C Watkins, The Feathers , Middle Street
Mr Cole, Lindine, Nastend
I Stuart, Church End, Paul Mead
P McCurry, 2 Crowcumpill Cottage, Gloucester Road
Page 67 ofCottage,
206
P McCurry, 2 Crowcumpill
Gloucester Road, Standish,
GL10 3BS
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
N Lilley, 6 Perth , Stonehouse
J Telling, The Old Nursery, Kings Stanley
J Peacey, Jade Lodge, The Butts, Rodborough,
S Reakes, J. Beales, Little Court, , Bristol Rd,
M Gregory, 94 Ryelands Road, Stonehouse
M Gribble, Bridlepath Cottage, Westend
L Hughes, Castle House, Eastington
Mr D W T Lee, The Croft, Oxlynch Lane
M A West, The Sheilings Broad St, Kings Stanley
A Coull, Nastend Farm, Nastend
Major B & Mrs.J.Middlemiss, The Leaze, Oxlynch Lane
Mr D Clarke, Courtand, Nastend
D Beaumont, The Crooked Cottage, Sturmyes Road, France
Lynch
E Davies, Ingleside, Bath Road, Eastington
R Waite, 1 Palmers Court, Stonehouse
Mr R Madden, 4 Westend Cottages, Nupend
S Paskey, 61 Bath Road, Eastington
Mrs. I.E. Smith, Vine Cottage, Nupend
G Griffiths, Orchard Place, Nupend
Mr And Mrs Lauppe, William Morris House, Chipmans Platt
Mr And Mrs Willey, Half Acres, Nupend
C Sunman, White Oaks, The Hithe
L Amery, 13 Bowbridge Lock, Stroud
W A Fletcher, Julian Cottages, Middle Street
P.R.O'Neill, Recreation Cottage,, Slad,
Mrs P Fothergill, 37 Home Orchard, Ebley
M Carlyon, 215 Slad Road, Stroud
J Bayly, 4 Vale View, Field Road, Whiteshill
A F Niblett, Bourne Cottage,, Middle Street,
Letters of
Support
Letters of
Comment
N Davenport, 23 Springhill, Uplands
A Franks, Beech Cottage, Newtown
A Coull, Nastend Farm, Nastend
A Lazenbury, Nupend Cottage, , Nupend,
Mr P Widdows, 1 Westend Cottages, Westend
M Safizadeh, Westend House, Westend
Mr P Widdows, 1 Westend Cottages, Westend
C Sunman, White Oaks, Rodborough
A Stayte, 29 Bridge Mead , Ebley
C Twitchett, (ORR) Office Of Rail Regulation, 2nd Floor
R Crockford, Upton, Pearcroft Road
J Bower-Robinson, 17 Bath Road, Tetbury
W Purchese, 5 Golden Jubilee Way, Dudbridge
D Clarke, 4 Rickyard
PageWay,
68 ofWhitminster
206
C Townley, 4 Thompson Road, Uplands
L Perry, 1 Hillcrest, Springfield Rd
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
S Pickover, 81 Renard Rise, Stonehouse , GL10 2BT
OFFICER’S REPORT
THE PROPOSAL
A mixed use outline application comprising up to 1,350 dwellings and 9.3 hectares of
employment land for use classes B1, B2, and B8; a mixed use local centre comprising use
classes, A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, D1, D2 and B1; primary school, open space and landscaping;
parking and supporting infrastructure and utilities with all matters reserved except the
creation of new vehicular accesses from Grove Lane, Oldends Lane and Brunel Way. An
environmental statement has been submitted as part of the application, it covers the following
subject areas:
Socio economics
Ecology and Conservation
Landscape and visual assessment
Traffic and transport
Air quality
Noise and vibration
Hydrology, drainage and flood risk
Ground conditions
Culture heritage and archaeology, soils and agriculture.
An indicative Masterplan, design strategy statement and parameter plans dealing with land
uses, building heights, green infrastructure (GI), and movement and access are also part of
the application.
The illustrative masterplan shows the main vehicular access to the application site being from
a new access onto Grove Lane with a change to the priority giving priority to traffic entering
or leaving the application site. The details of this new access are not reserved matters and
detailed plans for this and the other vehicular access points have been submitted. The other
new access points to be formed are adjacent to Oldends Lane to the west of the existing
level crossing, and off the existing employment estate at Brunel Way. The disposition of land
uses is set out in the illustrative masterplan and explained in the submitted design evolution
document and expressed in the submitted parameter plans. In summary the employment
areas are sited immediately to the west of the main Bristol to Birmingham railway line, with
further employment land site shown to the immediate north of the existing employment areas
lying to the north of Brunel Way. The Local centre, incorporating a community hall and area
for health provision and the primary school site are proposed to the immediate north of this
employment land.
The settlement of Nastend is shown protected by a substantial are of open space to the
south of the settlement and a significant buffer area to the north, The areas reserved for the
provision of sports areas including sports pavilion are to be sited at the northwestern area of
the site between part of the housing area and to the southeast of Nupend.
The masterplan and parameter plans show the pattern of footpaths through the site which
Pageof69way
of 206
connect to already existing public rights
adjoining the application site. Generally the
existing pattern of footpaths and bridleways on the site are respected within the masterplan.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The parameter plans show the presumed densities of residential development on the site,
which in summary is higher in the east and adjoining the local centre and are significantly
lower at the northern edge of the site where it abuts open countryside and around the
settlements of Nastend and Nupend.
The internal application site road layout is also illustrated on the masterplan and within the
design evolution and parameter plans, and shows a main ‘district distributor entering the site
at Grove Lane nad then by the sports are splitting into two to form a circular route via the
local centre and housing areas with a spur to the new access at Old ends Lane.
The master plan and design evolution document as well as the parameter plans show for
illustrative purposes a linear area of open space separating the application site from the
employment areas and Nastend. Sustainable urban drainage ponds are shown in this area.
The submitted design evolution document and design vision informative (submitted in
December 2015) were informed by discussions by SDC and the applicant with the
Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) to provide guidance for
subsequent applications for approval of reserved matters to ensure high quality design and
distinctive neighbourhood characters.
SITE
The site covers approximately 98 hectares, predominantly comprising agricultural land to the
west of Stonehouse and Stroud where the incised valley of the River Frome opens out into
the Severn Vale. The proposed development will involve the loss of some 9.2 ha of best and
most versatile agricultural land (Grade 3A), approximately 10% of the application site,
distributed in a random pattern across the site. The application site is bound to the east by
the Bristol to Birmingham railway line, to the southeast by the small settlement of Nastend
and the Oldends Industrial Estate. In the west the site extends to Grove Lane and the village
of Nupend, whilst the northern boundary is bounded by agricultural land. The application site
predominantly comprises agricultural land containing a number of hedgerows and trees that
form field boundaries. The local field pattern is medium to small in scale with enclosure by
hedges and hedgerow trees frequently bordered by ditches, the masterplan generally
respects the existing field boundaries and the trees and hedges sited in those areas.
Established trees are found throughout the application site, being particularly associated with
field boundary hedges, lanes and settlement areas. A number of mature oaks are a notable
feature in the landscape to the northern margin of the application site.
The local topography comprises gently rolling agricultural land with pasture, cultivated fields
and set-aside land. The highest parts of the site are to the Western side, adjacent to Nupend
and north of Nastend Farm. The land slopes gently downwards to the south and eastwards
the River Frome and its tributary stream, Nastend Brook that runs generally along the eastern
side of the site.
Between the River Frome and the site is the course of the Stroudwater Canal that runs
parallel to the A419 road leading from the M5 to Stonehouse.
Page 70 of 206
Public rights of way (PROW), footpaths and bridleways criss-cross the site to create a dense
network of paths linking the hamlets of Westend, Nupend and Nastend. Paths also link to
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Oldends Farm and to the Stroudwater Business Park/Oldends Industrial Estate employment
area at Oldends and Stonehouse.
A landscape and visual assessment of the site has been undertaken and is included within
the Environmental Statement which accompanies the planning application as noted above.
The site is outside any landscape designations.
The character of the landscape has been defined as predominantly rural vale landscape. The
close proximity of large urban areas, the substantial commercial/industrial areas of Oldends
and the main highway and railway infrastructure greatly influence local landscape character
and visual amenity.
The small scale and enclosed landscape, visually screens all but long distance views of the
high ground to the East. From the Cotswold Scarp the site is seen in the context of
established urban and commercial built form within the Stroud Valley and clustered local
settlements within the Severn Vale.
The application site includes within its red line a narrow area of some 61m in length and with
a width of 6.5m immediately north of the Oldends Lane level crossing intended to provide the
area where a disabled compliant pedestrian and cycle bridge could be sited, subject to
approval from Network rail, and provision of a similar site on the east side of the midland
main line to provide a ‘landing’ area.
REVISED DETAILS
Revised amendment to the submitted Environmental Statement (ES) dealing with detailed air
quality matters, (the impacts of the committed energy from waste site at Javelin Park) and
noise, (clarifying the impact of railway noise) were submitted on 11 November 2015, and
advertised in accordance with the ES regulations. In addition a revised Ecological
assessment was submitted dealing with survey results on predicted visitation impact on the
Severn Estuary European site and further results of recording of riparian mammals. A non
technical summary of those revisions detailed above was also submitted.
In addition on the 11 November revised drawings of the non reserved matters concerning
access of the application were submitted showing revisions to:
Grove Lane Access H414-10E
Brunel Way Access H414-11B
Oldends Lane Access H414-12C
Finally on 10 December the applicants submitted a Design Strategy informative.
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
S.14/2083/FUL - Construction of a two storey B1, B2, B8 production unit with ancillary car
parking, loading yard and vehicular access, permitted 24.7.15. 1.83 hectares, 8,077sqm on
land immediately south of phase E4 as shown on the indicative masterplan, located North
West of the Oldends level crossing and immediately adjacent to the midland main line. This
consent safeguards land adjoining the
railway
use in the future potentially for a pedestrian
Page
71 offor
206
and cycle access bridge that is DDA compliant
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
CONSULTATION RESPONSES
Summary of Objections
132 objections (including those direct to Members of Committee) have been received in
respect of the proposed development as originally submitted. The issues raised are
summarised as follows:
•
The site is not allocated in the Local Plan (apart from employment).
•
This application is premature to the both the emerging Eastington Parish Council
Neighbourhood Plan the emerging Local Plan
•
SDC has a 5-year land supply without counting the ‘windfall’ element of housing
defined as that housing which is not in the plan. SDC has declined to use windfall
figures despite the fact that it has used it in previous appeals. Its inclusion would
further reduce the need for such applications as this.
•
The ‘West of Stonehouse’ settlement has now been removed from the local plan,
Stonehouse is no longer a Core Priority Tier 1 strategic site and therefore should be
recognised as Tier 2 with modest growth requirements over the planning period.
These proposals do not represent ‘modest growth’ and continue to treat the area as a
strategic site.
•
No case is made within the application to justify the need for additional housing locally.
The Parish Council Survey does not demonstrate need. At the Stroud Local Plan
Inquiry in 2002/2003 the Inspector found ‘no pressing need’ for development. ONS
population predictions do not justify a need.
•
The proposed development will increase congestion and create gridlock with accesses
in Grove Lane and Oldends Road impassable. The A419 is at a standstill at commuter
times. Residual impact of the proposal will be severe including the 10 year build time.
•
Proposal fails to include any upgrade to the road network infrastructure – it only
includes widening that will not deal with the pressure
•
New motorway junction required
•
Grove Lane should be a ‘no right turn’ from the new estate as people use Grove Lane
as a rat run to get to the A38
•
Proposal will create a dormitory village / new town; too far to walk into Stonehouse and
cut off by the railway line therefore heavily reliant on the car. The proposal is therefore
in an unsustainable location
•
Proposal will bring people in from other areas that will commute out of the immediate
area providing no benefit to Stroud
•
Proposal will destroy the communities of Nastend (12 houses) , Nupend (50 houses)
and Eastington
•
Housing and development will be visible along the entire stretch of the M5 from
Gloucester to Cam
•
Loss of productive agricultural land
•
Lack of community consultation on a design vision foe the development
•
Use of Greenfield land illogical when so much brownfield land available which should
be developed first
•
Smaller development sites spread around the district would represent a better option
than one large site
•
Due to the application sitesPage
proximity
to the Stroudwater Canal, from which the
72 of 206
proposed development will benefit, a Section 106 contribution to the canal project
should be required. No such contribution forms part of the proposal. The canal
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
1.
provides numerous benefits to the locality such as tourism, jobs, a safe cycling route,
fishing and a linear green park.
The planning application states that at the Stonehouse meeting of 86 attendees only 7
objected. This is incorrect as more people attended, all of whom objected.
Negative impact upon wildlife and the removal of niche environments
Inappropriate development in terms of scale and form that is out of character with the
Stroud Area/Cotswold Edge.
The character is more urban/semi-urban than rural
The proposal will harm the setting of the Cotswold area of Outstanding Natural Beauty
Increase in light pollution
Drainage issues will be exacerbated given ground conditions with loss of natural
soakaways that will lead to an increase in flooding e.g. the road at Nastend that has
been adversely affected in recent events.
The Flood Risk Assessment is old and flawed
Contrary to the wishes of Parishioners/intent of Localism Bill
Loss of existing footpath routes
Proposal includes Industrial Units when many in the District are unoccupied or
permissions not built due to lack of demand
Crime rate will increase
The proposed primary school is likely to undermine existing schools
Disruption due to noise, dust and traffic disruption
Loss of privacy and light
Loss of village facilities / shops in surrounding existing communities
Proposal will undermine the communities of Stonehouse and Eastington
Will impact broadband speeds
The proposal will affect the viability of Stroud
Stroud District Council and the applicant should respond to Network Rail’s objection by
ensuring that meaningful discussions, concerning the safety of the level crossings
likely to be affected by this development, are entered into at the earliest opportunity.
Community Consultation where it was promised that “all comments received will be
carefully reviewed and taken into account”, most of the above points will almost
certainly have been raised, yet none are considered in the ‘no development’ option
criteria within section 4.2.2 of the Environmental Statement showing a fundamental
failure to provide a balanced view within the planning application.
The houses H4 and H5 near Nupend and H9 near Nastend are too close to the
existing hamlets, a green space should be required to retain their identity. Buffer zone
details not defined
Industrial Area E1 and E2 should be open for restricted hours as housing surrounding
it
Local Action Group – Don’t Strangle Stroud, The proposed ‘West of
Stonehouse’ settlement, although adjacent to Stonehouse, is completely separated by
the railway line. This makes access to Stonehouse high Street impossible, other than
by car. It becomes therefore a new unsustainable development not part of existing
infrastructure.
The size of the proposed settlement is disproportionate and unnecessary: 1,350
Pagewith
73 of750
206homes overwhelm the existing community.
houses in the Parish of Eastington
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
2.
It sits alongside the Hamlets of Nastend (12 Homes) and Nupend (50 homes). The
scale would destroy these unique settlements with over 400 years of history.
3.
Such a large number of houses adjacent to, but disconnected by a railway line from
Stonehouse would more likely focus on retail facilities accessible from the motorway
network than Stonehouse High Street.
4.
This number of additional homes would add up to 12,000 journeys a day to the already
congested A419, the only major road from junction 13 on the motorway to the major
centre of population and jobs in Stroud and the Stroud Valleys (40% of the district’s
population). The effect on the A419 and the M5 slip-road congestion should not be
underestimated. The critical importance of this arterial road to Stroud where 60% of all
jobs in the district are based is not recognised by this development.
5.
Stroud is a struggling market town, increasing traffic congestion will further weaken it’s
viability.
6.
Increased congestion will threaten the viability of a number of commercial and retail
employers as it will be quicker and easier for shoppers to commute to Gloucester for
retail and commercial outlets. This is likely to affect the economic growth of Stroud
District adversely.
7.
Protecting the main arterial road to the District’s major centre of population and its jobs
has to be a priority. Developing brownfield land within the centre of population should
be the priority.
8.
Eastington Parish has a population of 1,500. A new development of 1,350 would add
around 3,200 additional population to the parish, overwhelming it with, effectively, a
dormitory housing estate. The district already has a problem with unbalanced,
excessive, out-commuting.
9.
The site has no connection to any existing community. It is simply a vast estate near to
a motorway junction. It will encourage further out-commuting from the district which
already has a much higher than average level of out commuting.
10.
The Stroud population is set to increase, according to the office of National Statistics
from around 113,000 today to 126,500 by 2031 (12,500 more people). Stroud district
has over 4,000 granted planning permissions today. If all of those are realised they will
accommodate an additional 9,400 people. In addition the SDC plans a further 2,000
additional permissions, (4,700 people). This is a further 14,100 people in all. It
is recognised that some of the permissions will not happen but housing permissions
that take the population projection above the ONS projection to 127,000 without this
large planning application seems to have more than provided for the districts needs.
11.
In addition to all of the existing (4,000) permissions, SDC has an evidence based
report from Evans Jones indicating a further 2,700 windfall allocation. This proposal is
excessive.
12.
Page 74 of 206
As the West of Stonehouse settlement has now been removed from the Local Plan
Stonehouse is no longer a Core Priority Tier 1 strategic site and needs to be included
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
in Tier 2. As a Tier 2 it is recognised as requiring some modest growth over the
planning period. This proposal is not ‘modest growth’, it treats the area as a strategic
site
13.
This application is premature to the emerging Local Plan and is contrary to the SDC
Full Council decision of July 2013. Developers are not democratic but consideration of
their plan should be.
14.
This application is premature to the emerging EPC Neighbourhood Plan which is
properly registered and proceeding speedily.
15.
We understand that most new businesses that are created in this area are done so by
owners who like to live here, recruit from here, and enjoy the existing rural
environment. Such estate building of this size, would therefore discourage
entrepreneurs, new businesses and jobs.
16.
We should use brownfield sites before we allocate agricultural green-field ones. The
latest guidance from Government ministers advises this. We have much brownfield
and derelict land in the Stroud valleys which the guidelines indicate we should use
first.
17.
The agricultural land proposed for this estate currently produces fodder for milk
production. We are advised that food production is becoming as critical as energy
production here, and globally. We should not support loss of milk production while we
have so much brownfield land in our district, much of it in desperate need of
rejuvenation.
18.
SDC has a 5-year land supply without counting the ‘windfall’ element of housing
defined as that housing which is not in the plan. However the National Planning Policy
Guidelines allows and encourages this windfall to be included. SDC has declined to
use it currently despite the fact that it has used it in previous appeals. Its inclusion
would reduce further the need for such applications as this.
19.
Eastington Parish is Tier 3 and without any allocation of housing in the emerging Local
Plan.
20.
No developers have claimed or even attempted to substantiate that any of the existing
Planning Permissions granted by SDC are undeliverable or unviable within the Plan
period. The full number of granted Planning Permissions, 4,200, therefore stands in
full confirming an 8 to 10 year land supply.(see N Boles letter)
21.
Sustainability: WoS is in essence a stand alone new settlement and it fails to relate to
the existing settlement of Stonehouse. It seems to us to be too small to stand alone
and yet too remote to be a logical addition to Stonehouse.
22.
The LPA has consistently increased jobs by around 200 a year. It has built houses at a
little less than 400 a year. In the years when higher numbers of houses have been
built job creation has not risen
within
the206
district. One out of every two houses built
Page
75 of
goes to a commuter these additional houses if approved would simply further distort
this ratio contrary to agreed LPA policies.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
23.
Average household income in the LPA is less than £30,000 pa. Recently built 2 bed
houses in the area are selling for around £160,000+ requiring a family income of
£45,000 minimum to afford to purchase a new home.
24.
The Stonehouse area currently provides the highest proportion of lower cost rental
homes. This new settlement if approved will further encourage this current distortion
further unbalancing the community.
25.
The large employers on the industrial estate tend to employ commuters at around 60%
to 70%. No evidence has been submitted that suggests this proposed new settlement
will do anything other than further exacerbate this problem.
26.
Nick Boles words: "We have recently published planning guidance to ensure that
emerging plans [Local & Neighbourhood] are taken into account in respect of
inappropriate speculative development". This will be purely speculative and
opportunistic development and contrary to both emerging plans [LP & NDP].
27.
This is premature with reference to the emerging LP as it is clear that the adverse
impacts of granting permission would significantly and demonstrably outweigh any
benefits of this development.
28.
We reserve the right to submit evidence at a later date.
Page 76 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Eastington Parish Council:
08/12/2015
Introduction
Eastington Parish Council [EPC] has already submitted representations on this planning
application (letter dated 21 July 2014). However since then circumstances have materially
changed through the recent adoption of the Stroud Local Plan. Whilst previously EPC
objected to the principle of development it now reluctantly accepts the allocation of land for
some 1,350 dwellings and some 10 hectares of employment land within the parish.
In making these further representations EPC wishes to be constructive in seeking to work
with the Local Planning Authority and the Applicants in aiming to achieve a sustainable form
of development that from a social and environmental perspective will integrate as comfortably
as possible into the community. To achieve this objective will be a tremendous challenge
because the extensive scale of the proposed development will have a huge impact on local
infrastructure, particularly the highway network and the visual and social character of the
existing village.
In accepting that major development is now going to take place in the parish, EPC fervently
hopes that SDC will seek to ensure that it is designed to the highest possible standard and
becomes a flagship for the future; something that the district can be justly proud of.
It is not the intention to comment in fine detail but to group observations under the following
headings: Vision and social integration; traffic impact; environmental/landscape impact; other
issues. In doing so reference will be made to Policy SA2 of the Local Plan which provides the
guiding principles against which the application should be considered.
Vision
The original justification within the draft local plan for the development this land was that it
would be a logical extension of Stonehouse and thus would both rely on and help enhance,
the services and facilities that the town provides. It became clear during the Examination in
Public of the Local Plan that this vision is impossible to achieve because of the lack of
connectivity caused by the virtually impermeable barrier of the railway line. Nevertheless the
Inspector accepted the allocation and the key question now is what form it should take. It
surely must be accepted that it cannot function adequately as an urban extension of
Stonehouse and it is remote from the centre of Eastington. Indeed it proposes almost twice
as many dwellings as currently exist in Eastington and thus could completely overwhelm the
village unless handled with care.
Unless it is merely to become a glorified housing estate in the middle of the countryside, it is
EPC’s view that the design and social vision should be carefully reappraised. This accords
fully with the introductory paragraph to Policy SA2 which states that “A development brief
incorporating a design vision and a masterplan” etc should be approved by the District
Council. EPC fully supports this intention and would be happy to work with the Council and
the applicants. It is not intended as a negative observation, but if this exercise is to be done
constructively, then it must be accepted that the masterplan as submitted, must also be
reappraised. Indeed, it is clearly impractical to work up a development brief/design vision, as
required by the policy, after the grant of planning permission. That would be a case of putting
the cart before the horse.
Page 77 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
In saying this, EPC would draw attention to the advice in Section 8 of the NPPF about the
need to promote healthy communities and the importance of involving the community in the
design and decision making process.
In reconsidering the vision it seems to EPC that two key points emerge. Firstly that the
proposed development should be seen as a stand-alone settlement and secondly that further
thought must be given to the way that it will sit comfortably within the social and
environmental framework of the parish.
As a stand-alone settlement it is critically important to establish a community identity and to
provide a range of services and facilities to serve future residents. Point 3 of Policy SA2
identifies this need but in reality what should it mean? It is insufficient merely to provide a few
shops, even with the addition of a community hall. The starting point should be to create a
focal point for this new community. A place where people can gather, meet friends and hold
community events as well as providing for local shopping needs. If one were to think of this
as a new village, one would imagine a village green and playing field around which might be
a pub, a village hall, a few shops, a cafe/ coffee/wine bar and a church. This should be a key
factor in the design philosophy of the settlement as a whole. Indeed it is entirely consistent
with the advice in Paragraph 70 of the NPPF.
In this context EPC considers that the “village centre” should be masterplanned at the outset
in order to ensure that adequate space is provided to meet all subsequent needs.
For the avoidance of doubt, EPC would be opposed to a large supermarket, but it is
considered that more than just “top-up” shopping facilities will be required to minimise car
usage.
The proposed new primary school is an essential element of community facilities. EPC would
point out that the existing village school is full to capacity and therefore it is essential that the
new school must be constructed and opened early in the development programme.
The question of community identity and how it might be integrated with the existing structure
of the parish is obviously of much concern to EPC, particularly as it will become responsible
for the expanded village. One imagines the new settlement as one of the hamlets that
distinguish the character of Eastington and it might be foolish to duplicate facilities,
particularly when one considers the cost of maintenance etc. If EPC is to be expected to
become responsible for the future control and maintenance of any of the community facilities
then it must be properly involved in deciding exactly what should be provided and how and
where they will be delivered.
Indeed whilst EPC would be willing to consider accepting responsibility for future
maintenance and operation of community facilities, it is considered unreasonable to expect
existing parishioners to subsidise new ones. Therefore EPC is unwilling to do so unless
adequate funds are made available by the developers, through a Section 106 Agreement, to
cover the first ten years running costs after commencement of development. This will need to
be properly assessed and costed before any commitment is entered into.
Transport
Page 78 of 206
EPC is extremely concerned at the impact the new development will have on the local
highway network, particularly the A419 and the roads through Alkerton which are already
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
used as rat runs. The nationally accepted TRICS database suggests that somewhere
between 10,000 and 12,000 extra vehicle movements will be generated by the residential
element of the development alone. In addition there will be even more generated by the 10
hectares of employment development. Most will decant on to the A419, which is already
known to be at capacity. In particular the growth of traffic at peak hours is likely to cause grid
lock on the A419. An unwanted knock on effect will be further growth of traffic through the
middle of Alkerton as people are forced to bypass the A419 and use the byroad through the
Stanleys.
The NPPF states clearly at Paragraph 32 that “All developments that generate significant
amounts of traffic movements should be supported by a “Transport Statement or Transport
Assessment” and that decisions should take account of whether:
•
•
•
opportunities for sustainable transport have been taken up to help reduce the need for
major transport infrastructure,
safe and suitable access is achievable,
improvements can be undertaken within the transport network that cost effectively
limits the significant impacts of development.
With regard to the first bullet point it is noted that bullet point 12 of Policy SA2 requires a
design brief to consider opportunities to improve transport connectivity with Stonehouse. In
theory this is a worthwhile objective, although meaningful solutions are thought unlikely to be
achievable in practice. Nevertheless EPC would be happy to discuss any suggestions that
might be thrown up through the design brief process.
The only proposal that seems to have been suggested by the Applicant is that of relatively
limited contributions to the establishment of local bus services. This seems to EPC to be
totally inadequate. If the objective is both to improve connectivity and as the first bullet point
of Paragraph 32 suggests, to try to reduce the need for major highway infrastructure
improvements, then a much more comprehensive approach is necessary.
This brings us back to the third bullet point. Other than some localised improvements which
were already planned before the submission of this planning application, it seems that no
thorough assessment has been made of the impact of the present proposals and what further
improvements are required to mitigate the impact of a very significant growth in traffic.
EPC do not believe that enough attention has been given to this problem. It requests SDC to
insist on the submission of a more thorough traffic impact assessment and to request the
County Council to seek adequate funding from the developers for highway improvements, not
just to the junctions which will directly service the new development, but at least from the M5
through to the start of the Ebley bypass.
A more technical commentary on this matter was provided to Stroud District Council by Helix
Transport Consultants on behalf of the parish, and a copy is attached.
Environmental/landscape impact
EPC is very concerned at the likely impact on the existing character and visual quality of the
parish. The emerging NDP has identified
importance
of the historic settlement pattern in
Page the
79 of
206
defining the character of the parish today. In essence Eastington is not a tightly grouped
settlement but one that comprises a number of hamlets, each with its own separate identity,
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
but each contributing to the whole. The largest today is Alkerton, where can be found a few
shops, two pubs, a chapel, the village hall and the playing fields and memorial hall. However
the original Eastington is the present hamlet of Churchend within which is the parish church
and primary school.
The NDP has established the importance of maintaining the separation between the various
hamlets. Indeed it is a key objective of the Plan and has been supported recently at appeals.
In refusing a proposal for up to 30 dwellings at Bath road, Eastington [LPA Ref
S.14/1049/OUT] the Inspector remarked on the important role of the site as a visual break
between the two “distinct settlement areas which differ in character” of Middle Street and
Eastington [Alkerton]. She said that “In developing much of the gap between Eastington and
Middle Street the appeal proposal would have an urbanising impact that would detract from
the rural setting of both settlements and their individual characters”. She continued that “On
this basis, having regard to the need to take account of the different roles and character of
different areas, I find the proposal would have a serious harmful impact”.
It is also relevant to the present application that she remarked on the relevance of the sites
amenity value to the local community arising from the numerous public footpaths which cross
it. She said “That value stems largely from it being an accessible and undeveloped open area
for walking and enjoyment of the countryside of which it is in part, and also from its role in
retaining the separate identities of Middle Street and Eastington”. She believed that the
amenity value, demonstrated by the evidence of well used public footpaths, was consistent
with the Frameworks aim of promoting healthy communities.
Similarly in refusing the Bath Road Bungalow appeal [application ref S.14/1709/OUT] for a
handful of dwellings, the Inspector remarked that “It would have an urbanising effect that
would seriously detract from the character and separate identities of Eastington and Middle
Street and it would have a detrimental impact in terms of landscape value and character”.
The present planning application proposes development between the hamlets of Churchend,
Westend, Nupend and Nastend. It also will have a serious impact on some very well used
public footpaths which are of great amenity value to the existing community.
Far from helping to maintain and protect the separate identities of the affected settlements,
elements of the development, as currently proposed in the indicative masterplan, would have
completely the opposite effect. This would not only be contrary to Draft NDP Policy EP3,
which seeks to maintain the separate identity of the hamlets which form the character of the
parish, but also Local Plan Policy CP 15, from which the NDP policy is partly drawn.
In preparing the NDP, a Landscape and Character Assessment has been undertaken as part
of the evidence base to support of Policy EP3 of the draft NDP. It is from this Assessment
that the following comments are drawn.
Firstly, after crossing the A419 at Chipman’s Platt roundabout, the approach from Churchend
to Westend and Nupend should not be compromised by new housing immediately to the east
of Grove Lane. At present this comprises two paddocks dividing the road from an ancient
bridleway which is very well used as a public footpath.
Development of this strip of land alongside Grove Lane would have a severe urbanising
effect and would completely undermine
Pagethe
80 policy
of 206objective of maintain separation between
settlements.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
As the road branches to rise up the hill, the open aspect of a further paddock is dominated at
the top of the rise by the front elevation of a substantial house. This is an important element
on the approach to Nupend in defining its setting. Indeed, Nupend is situated on the top of a
low hill which means that any new development towards the top of the slope will detract from
the setting of the hamlet. To some extent this seems to have been recognised by the
proposed location of playing fields, although a further extension of this open space in a
westerly direction would be desirable.
Bearing this in mind it is suggested that housing areas marked on the indicative masterplan
as H1, H2, H6 and the upper areas of H4 and H5 should remain as open space.
The ground slopes down from Nupend to Nastend, so by maintaining an open “collar” around
Nupend and containing new development on the lower land “behind” the bridleway, the sense
of division between the various hamlets should reasonably be maintained, subject to more
structural landscaping around the periphery of Nastend. This could be further supported with
a restriction on the height of buildings and dwellings to no more than 2.5 storeys.
The bridleway referred to earlier links Westend [adjoining the chapel] with Nastend from
where it rises up the slope through the middle of the proposed development. The landscape
quality of the bridleway and associated land alongside it, is of a high quality in the section
between Westend and through Nastend. It should be carefully protected and enhanced and
not allowed merely to become an urban pathway bounded by back garden fences. The
retention of the housing areas H1, H6 and H7 as open space is very important in helping
achieve this objective. In essence the bridleway would become a natural boundary to the new
development and be enhanced by further structural landscaping.
The effect of these comments is demonstrated on the attached plan.
What is suggested is consistent with the objectives of bullet point 7 of Policy SA2. EPC
strongly supports these objectives so long as they are applied in a meaningful way. Structural
landscaping to achieve buffers around Nupend and Nastend in particular, must be set out
clearly through the design brief and not left to the reserved matter stage when it would be far
too late.
Other Matters
EPC would make the following additional comments:
•
•
•
Construction traffic will obviously be a cause of nuisance for existing residents. If a
Construction Method Statement has yet to be agreed it is requested that EPC be
consulted.
Play areas should be delivered to coincide with each phase of new housing.
Litter and dog waste bins should be installed by the developers in each phase of
house building, rather than be left to the parish or SDC through a Section 106
agreement.
Finally EPC should point out that the NDP is now at an advanced stage of preparation and
arguably is a material consideration in dealing with this planning application. The previous
draft is already with SDC. It is in the course of final editing prior following comments from
your Policy colleagues and EPC reserves
right
Page the
81 of
206to submit the final draft very shortly.
Appended to this response;
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
West of Stonehouse, Policy CA2 – Representations to the Stroud District Local Plan Inquiry
on Transportation Matter May 2015 - DOC.NO WOS/TM-001
Map of Eastington Parish showing area of land to be preserve as non developed land
Both appendices are available on the planning file dated 8/12/2015.
Stonehouse Town Council:
18/07/2014
The Council sees no justification for this number of houses in this particular location as it is
neither in the current adopted Local Plan nor in the emerging Local Plan and was specifically
dropped from the draft emerging Local Plan. The Council can identify other brownfield sites
suitable for development to fulfil the housing needs of Stonehouse.
The two access points off Oldends Lane would create a bottle neck with a rat run along the
B4008. The number of HGV movements when mixed with residential traffic are not
anticipated by the developer who has merely relied on the Traffic Management Zone being in
place to deter traffic movements along the B4008 which we know will not be the case.
In common with neighbouring parishes we believe the site will tip the "at over capacity" A419
to unacceptable increased congestion, noise and air pollution from the Horse Trough
roundabout to the M5 junction.
In particular there should be no access points to the proposal site/employment land from
Oldends Lane. The area of orchard adjacent to the railway line should be protected as a
community orchard to mitigate the loss of open countryside. There is a lack of buffer zone to
maintain wildlife and clean air.
The proposed development will cause increased use of the level crossings at Oldends Lane.
We would concur with the comments of Network Rail that this would create an unacceptable
risk with pedestrians and cars using the crossing together at peak times. Not only this, but
the tailback under the narrow railway bridge will be considerable extending towards a school.
We would also concur with comments by Gloucestershire Constabulary regarding the
pressures on policing in this area. This Council has worked hard to reduce crime and antisocial behaviour and we regard the proposed community as a threat to this work with a lack
of cohesion between settlements.
Stonehouse is a designated neighbourhood plan area and we respectfully ask Stroud District
Council to reject this application and allow localism to take precedence. We can find our own
housing solutions.
Standish Parish Council:
05/07/2014
In response to your request for some initial comments by July 21st, 2014, to the above outline
application for 1,350 homes, a school,
shopping
Page 82
of 206 centre, open space and employment
development, Standish Parish Councillors wish to make clear they strongly object to this
scheme.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Standish Councillors’ view was supported by a public meeting held at Standish Village Hall
on June 26th, 2014, during which residents first received an overview of the proposal and
secondly went on to give a clear mandate – on a show of hands - to their parish council to
oppose the development on their behalf.
In essence Standish PC notes that infrastructure to support this major development is entirely
lacking and asserts that existing roads and services like doctors will simply not be able to
cope with this additional number of residents.
To detail Standish Councillors’ views in more depth they oppose this plan because:
1)
Highways – there are already considerable tailbacks and congestion caused simply by
the existing volume of vehicles on the A419 motorway feeder road from Stonehouse
past this site to and from the M5. Yet more vehicle movements would only increase
traffic jams and incite motorists to seek the alternative and already sub-standard and
accident prone B4008 through Standish. Pollution from such an overall traffic is an
additional concern of this council.
2)
There are no proposals included for pedestrian and cycle links into Stonehouse which
presents West of Stonehouse as a standalone settlement, making it entirely
unsustainable as its residents would be wholly dependent on car transport.
3)
Railway lines divide this land from Stonehouse with only the Oldends Lane level
crossing and a narrow bridge further up Oldends Lane, again making this proposal
unsustainable in that its residents would not be able to seamlessly access services in
their nearest town (Stonehouse).
4)
Meadows within the scheme site are rich in biodiversity and should at all costs be
protected.
5)
This development would have a hugely adverse effect on views from the nearby
AONB.
6)
The impact on doctors, dentists, police and similar local services cannot be overstated.
These services would simply become swamped.
Whitminster Parish Council:
Council is opposed to the proposed development for the following reasons;
The proposal is for a substantial number of residential units that is unplanned, out of kilter
and contradictory to the draft local plan. A housing development of this size needs to be
carefully considered and form part of the comprehensive plan rather than considered in
isolation without due regard to unintended consequences.
The proposed development will give rise to a significant loss of agricultural land.
Without significant improvements in Page
the local
road
83 of
206network and public transport infrastructure
the development is likely to cause severe worsening of existing congestion making it difficult
for those from Stonehouse, Stroud and the Valleys to travel west to junction 13 of the M5 and
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
for those residents in towns and villages west of the M5 motorway, including Whitminster, to
travel into Stroud and access local employment.
The proposed development does not provide any solution for existing traffic problems relating
to Grove Lane and hence poses a significant risk to highway safety at the A38 Grove Lane
junction and to the amenity of local residents.
Gloucestershire County Council:
GCC Archaeologist
I advise that the archaeological implications of this development have been investigated by
undertaking an initial desk-based assessment (CgMs Consulting, report dated May 2012),
followed by geophysical survey (Bartlett-Clark, report dated January 2013) and then trialtrenching (Headland Archaeology, report dated November 2013). I note that the results of
these investigations are considered within an Environmental Statement submitted in support
of this planning application.
The results of the archaeological investigations were positive, since significant archaeological
remains were found to be present at several locations. In the southern part of the application
site geophysical survey revealed a D-shaped enclosure measuring c. 60m across, which was
investigated by the excavation of Trenches 98 and 99. The enclosure boundary was
confirmed as a ditch measuring up to 2.4m wide by 0.7m deep, containing several episodes
of infilling. Investigation of the interior of the enclosure contained linear ditches, pits and a
post-setting. Finds indicate that the enclosure functioned during the mid – late Iron Age and
that activity continued into the Roman period. The enclosure very probably represents a
small settlement of farmstead type.
Approximately 200m to the south-west of the settlement enclosure, investigation of Trench
115 revealed a ditch measuring c. 1.7 m wide by 0.6m deep associated with a sherd of
Roman pottery. The same trench also revealed a shallow gully, and both features are
interpreted as elements of a Roman agricultural landscape.
Little evidence was found during the evaluation for further Iron Age or Roman features.
However, a number of trenches revealed discrete features which may relate to settlement or
other activity of this date. These include a post-setting found in Trench 182 (in the north-west
part of the application site), a ditch and a pit found in Trenches 47 and 46 respectively
(located in the north-eastern part of the application site), and Trench 44 also produced postsettings and linear gullies of potentially early date.
It is clear from the results of the evaluation that the archaeological deposits are not of the first
order of preservation, since they have undergone erosion from medieval and later ploughing
with the result that all surfaces associated with the remains have been destroyed. For that
reason it is my view that the archaeological remains are not of the highest significance, so
meriting preservation in situ.
Nevertheless, the results of the evaluation indicate that there is good
recovery of information relating to
Iron84Age
and Roman settlement
Page
of 206
landscape. For that reason it is my view that, the archaeological deposits
the potential to make a contribution to our understanding of the
potential for the
and agricultural
on this site have
archaeology of
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Gloucestershire and the wider region. On that basis I am pleased to confirm that I have no
objection in principle to the proposed development, with the proviso that an appropriate
programme of archaeological excavation and recording should be undertaken in advance of
the development proceeding.
To facilitate this work I recommend that a condition based on model condition 55 from
Appendix A of Circular 11/95 is attached to any planning permission which may be given for
this development, ie;
‘No development shall take place within the application site until the applicant, or their agents
or successors in title, has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological
work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the
applicant and approved in writing by the local planning authority’.
Reason: to make provision for a programme of archaeological mitigation, so as to record and
advance understanding of any heritage assets which will be lost, in accordance with
paragraph 141 of the National Planning Policy Framework
I would be pleased to provide the applicant on request with a brief outlining the scope of the
archaeological recording work.
GCC Youth Support Services
The youth support services contribution GCC would be looking for from this development
(based on the agreed youth support formula of £21 per new house per year for 8 years), for
1,350 new houses would be £28,350 pa for 8 years, or a lump sum of £226,800, payable in
equal instalments 12 & 24 months after commencement.
Page 85 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
GCC Ecology (Biodiversity):
National Planning Policy Framework policy area 11 including paragraphs 9, 99, 165 and 176
together with Natural England’s Standing Advice to Local Planning Authorities are relevant
considerations. The advice of the District Council’s consultant or in-house ecologist will help
the LPA to consider the biodiversity matters arising from this development proposal. The
comments here are only of a strategic and general nature. The Environmental Statement
(ES) and other documents have not been reviewed in detail for their ecology content.
The land in question has potential biodiversity value mainly associated with the boundary
features (field margins, hedgerows, small woods & ditches) but also the presence of a
riverine corridors, trees, scrub, buildings, grassland and a pond. The development would
result in retention of many habitat features but also notable loss of hedgerow and woodland
habitat with likely consequential impacts on protected species particularly residual effects. A
large area of land (suitably managed) would become unavailable for wildlife to colonise so to
be acceptable the development must deliver a comprehensive mitigation, enhancement and
aftercare management scheme that leads to a verifiable benefit for biodiversity in the longterm that is realistic and sustainable. A scheme of this type may be being put forward but
residual impacts are a concern. New habitats are being promised along with enhancement of
retained features. Overall with appropriate safeguards plus mitigation, enhancement and
management measures in place a net gain for biodiversity is being claimed. However Stroud
District Council needs to scrutinise the application carefully to see if appropriate biodiversity
outcomes can be delivered through any consent granted.
A programme of ecological survey and assessment work has been presented in the
Environmental Statement (ES) accompanying this application. The applicant’s conclusions of
the impacts on biodiversity have been presented under the title of ‘Ecology and Nature
Conservation’ in the Non-Technical Summary. Impact on protected sites includes the need to
screen for likely significant effect on European Site(s) for example the Severn Estuary and
Cotswold Beechwoods from increased informal recreation and water or air pollution (The
Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, Regulation 61). The Planning
Authority must carry out its own screening assessment to see if the development could have
a likely significant impact on European Sites (Habitats Regulations Assessment – HRA Stage
One). If this were concluded to be the case then an Appropriate Assessment (HRA Stage
Two) would need to be undertaken to determine impact on site integrity taking account of
conservation objectives. The Council must consider if it agrees with the assertions of the
applicant in its application and in doing so consider any additional information it thinks is
relevant and also be mindful of the views of Natural England. It is essential that the presence
or otherwise of protected species (such as great crested newts, bats, otters, water voles,
badgers, reptiles and nesting birds), and the extent that they may be affected by the
development, is established by the Planning Authority before planning permission is granted
or refused. An example of this is the installation of lighting which could disturb bats foraging
in the area. On this matter we note that lighting has been considered and that retention of
dark corridors is proposed.
The site is a location where the provision of strategic and more local Green Infrastructure
needs to be conserved and enhanced. Green Infrastructure can facilitate linkage to and
improvement of the ecological network
as defined
by Gloucestershire’s Nature Map (see
Page
86 of 206
http://gloucestershirebap.org.uk/actionplan/nature-map.php ) and the county’s main rivers.
The proposal in general makes a contribution in this respect but it does appear to be
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
restricted to mainly on-site benefits only and not to wider Green Infrastructure delivery (e.g.
the River Frome/Canal corridor). This is important given the number of new residents that will
exist so some additional contribution to this by the developer is probably justifiable and would
ensure from an ecology perspective that there is a certain overall biodiversity benefit.
The installation of a sustainable drainage system is welcomed with the creation of ponds and
watercourse enhancement which should achieve some biodiversity gain. However this needs
looking at carefully to see whether a more ambitious wetland ecosystem treatment ‘WET
system’ would be appropriate to incorporate too to provide other biodiversity and
environmental benefits. Sustainable Drainage and waste water treatment should not just
simply be deferred to the reserved matters stage as it is significant in terms of the
development footprint and how it will function when occupied. We see at 3.6.8 to 3.6.10 of
the ES that a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) is being promised
which should be assembled as a reserved matter linked to biodiversity mitigation,
enhancement and management measures which in themselves would be reserved or S.106
matters.
GCC Community Infrastructure:
12/03/15
Would seek contributions of £1,104,894.00 or adequate provision within on site primary
school. In addition as contribution towards libraries of £264,600.00 will be sought.
(The details of the draft S106 relating to library contribution and education provision are set
out below)
GCC Highways:
The planning application is for a mixed-use development including 1,350 dwellings, a 9.3Ha
extension to the Stroudwater Business Park, a local centre and a primary school, with all
matters reserved except access. The development is included as Site Allocation SA2 within
the Stroud District Local Plan.
The development will be accessed from the A419 via Grove Lane, with a proposed distributor
road which will link Grove Lane with Oldends Lane. A further access to primarily serve
employment elements of the proposed development will be provided from Brunel Way within
the Stroudwater Business Park.
The Transport Assessment (TA) and Framework Travel Plan (TP) were submitted with the
planning application in April 2014. As would be expected for a development of this scale,
there has been significant ongoing discussion between the applicant, the applicant’s
consultant PFA, Gloucestershire County Council (GCC) and Highways England (HE) through
the determination period to agree the transport details of the proposals. Much of this
discussion is summarised in this response.
Page 87 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Planning Policy
Stroud District Local Plan
On the 19th November 2015 Stroud District Council (SDC) adopted a new Local Plan. This
Plan replaces the 2005 Local Plan entirely and now provides a positive planning policy
framework for the District for the period up to 2031. Land West of Stonehouse is allocated
under Site Allocations Policy SA2 for 1,350 homes and 10 Hectares of B1, B2 and B8
employment land.
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF, March 2012) is the primary national
planning policy relevant to the proposed development.
Planning law requires that
applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development
plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The NPPF has been demonstrated to
have been taken into account in the preparation of the Local Plan. It is also a material
consideration in planning decisions. The main principles of the NPPF relevant to planning
applications in transport terms are set out in Section 4 Paragraph 32:
All developments that generate significant amounts of movement should be supported by a
Transport Statement or Assessment. Plans and decisions should take account of whether:
•
•
•
The opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken up depending on
the nature and location of the site, to reduce the need for major transport
infrastructure;
Safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people; and
Improvements can be undertaken within the transport network that cost effectively limit
the significant impacts of the development. Development should only be prevented or
refused where the residual cumulative impacts of the development are severe.
Access Proposals
Vehicular Access
Grove Lane
Grove Lane has been realigned such that a route is provided into the proposed development
site, which becomes the major road. Grove Lane itself, which runs between the Chipmans
Platt Roundabout and the A38, meets this realigned route into the site as the minor arm. This
change in priority is appropriate due to the likely changes in future traffic patterns. It is
discussed within the TA that the change in priority will also discourage drivers from using
Grove Lane as a cut through to the A38. This is accepted, although the extent to which it will
contribute to that aim is considered to be minimal.
The existing service station/hotel access onto Grove Lane is the sole egress from the facility.
This access has been built out to meet the re-aligned Grove Lane just to the north of the
junction with the route into the site. The re-aligned road layout will need to accommodate a
fuel tanker exiting the service station, turning right onto Grove Lane, and then turning right
towards Chipmans Platt Roundabout. Swept Path Analysis has been provided to
demonstrate that this movement can be made by a fuel tanker, in addition to the 16.8m
articulated lorry as shown in the TA Appendix
O.206
Page 88 of
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Grove Lane is currently subject to a 50mph speed limit between Chipmans Platt Roundabout
and the lane leading to Nupend. It is proposed to reduce the speed limit to 30mph between
Chipmans Platt Roundabout and the separate residential access on Grove Lane.
Consultation has been undertaken with the Police regarding the acceptability of such a Traffic
Regulation Order (TRO). Gateway features and footways have been incorporated into the
design shown in H414-10E in order to achieve the reduction in actual vehicle speeds
necessary to make a TRO reducing the speed limit to 30mph acceptable.
The road into the proposed development site has been designed with horizontal curvature at
the lower end of the range for a 50kph design speed (DMRB TD 9/93). The 4.5m x 70m
visibility splay to the right from Grove Lane is therefore appropriate. It must be noted that the
same level of visibility will need to be demonstrated to the left at the point when the Reserved
Matters Application for the internal site layout comes forward.
Considering the changes being made to the Grove Lane layout and speed limit, speed
surveys are not considered necessary or appropriate to determine visibility requirements.
Therefore the Applicant’s approach of providing visibility for the residential access to the
north based on design speeds and allowing a margin for speeds in excess of the speed limit
is appropriate. As well as the DMRB standards quoted, the proposed visibilities meet the
“deemed to satisfy” requirement in Manual for Gloucestershire Streets (MfGS), which is
based on data on recorded traffic speeds for roads of set speed limits. Visibility splays for the
re-aligned service station access road will be provided to the same standard. This will include
visibility along the proposed access route into the development, meaning that the build out of
land to the west of Grove Lane and south of the service station access is likely to need to be
maintained to retain visibility.
Brunel Way
The Brunel Way access point is designed to provide access for the employment land uses,
although a route into the main site is likely to be available. 2.4m x 56m visibility splays are
provided. This meets the Y distance of 54m required by the “deemed to satisfy” standards for
a 30mph speed limit as set out in MfGS.
The minimum junction spacing for an industrial access road is 90m on the same side of the
road, or 45m opposite. This has been achieved and the location is therefore acceptable.
MfGS requires that junction corner radii of 15m are provided for Industrial Access Roads. The
original plans showed radii of 12m, which have been amended to 15m in Drawing H414-11B.
The plans show a 3.2m footway/cycleway on the east side of the access road. As a principle
this is welcomed. However the existing footway on Brunel Way is not sufficiently wide to
accommodate cycling. Signage and appropriate tactile paving will need to be provided to
guide cyclists onto the main carriageway at Brunel Way to avoid conflict with pedestrians.
This has been updated in Drawing H414-11B.
Oldends Lane Access
This access point is the extension of an existing stub to the north of Brunel Way. There are
therefore no visibility requirements for the new access point. However, the extension of this
existing stub will introduce southbound traffic past the Brunel Way junction which was not
present previously. A visibility splay of 2.4m x 54m, the “deemed to satisfy” splay for a 30mph
speed limit, is required to the north from
Brunel
Page
89 of Way,
206 as shown in Drawing H414-12C.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The provision of a shared pedestrian/cycleway to the east of Oldends Lane is welcomed, as
is the proposed reduction in hedge height to aid visibility at the level crossing.
This section of Oldends Lane, particularly the existing stub, is used as on-street parking. This
is likely to remain possible following the construction of the new access, although it may be
used less due to the intensification of traffic use. Cars parking here may be displaced onto
Brunel Way but this is unlikely to have an unacceptable impact on road safety or capacity.
Stage 1 Road Safety Audit (RSA)
The Stage 1 Road Safety Audit highlighted several issues with the proposed access to Grove
Lane and these are outlined below. The issues raised are accepted as confirmed in the
updated designers response received on the 28th August 2015.
•
Proximity of the new junction of Grove Lane (north) with Grove Lane (south) and the
modified access/exit to the service area resulting in the risk of rear shunts.
This
problem was raised based on the existing speed limit of the adjacent highway being
50mph and recommended that the location of the service area access should be
relocated further north and made one way out onto Grove Lane. Additional information
and a further site visit was undertaken by the Auditor in July 2015 and the Auditor has
confirmed that the introduction of a 30mph limit immediately upon entry to the new
access/spine road and the introduction of a 10m corner radius upon entry to the Grove
Lane would result in vehicles travelling at low speeds. Adequate forward visibility was
also confirmed by the designer from the roundabout access across the proposed grass
verge to the relocated access to the service area reducing the risk of rear end shunts
and side on collisions. Significant consultation has been undertaken with both the
Police and GCC Road Safety Partnership with regard to the proposed change in speed
limit to which support was given subject to additional measures such as gateway
features being incorporated into the revised access design as shown on drawing no
H414/10 Rev E.
•
The tight turning radii of the exit from the Service area to Grove Lane may result in large
vehicles struggling to undertake the manoeuvre and drivers travelling northbound may
turn left from the southern section of Grove Lane and collide with a large turning vehicle.
The Auditor was provided with additional information showing the vehicle swept path of
large vehicles using the access (reproduced at Appendix A4 of the Designers Response
received 28th August 2015) which was accepted and also recommended a change in
speed limit from 50mph to 30mph. The proposed change in speed limit is covered in
the first bullet point above.
•
The traffic island at the Grove Lane junction may be used by pedestrians and could
result in a pedestrian/vehicle strike.
The recommendation was for adequate
carriageway widths to be provided and this has been accepted and demonstrated with
the vehicle swept path referred to above.
•
No pedestrian link from Grove Lane to the Service area could result in trips/falls and
vehicle/pedestrian conflict. This problem has been accepted and a footway and
uncontrolled crossing facilities have been provided as shown on drawing no H414/10
Rev E.
Page 90 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
It is considered that the safety issues raised in the Audit relating to the Grove Lane access
have been adequately addressed.
The Stage 1 RSA has not identified any problems with the Brunel Way access. Two problems
are raised with the Oldends Lane access design. These both relate to providing sufficient
visibility for the footway/cycleway by the level crossing. The RSA recommendations are
accepted and can be addressed by detailed design and through a note which has been
added to Drawing H414/12B.
Appropriate pedestrian and cycle provision has been provided within each of the junction
designs. The safety of these facilities has been assessed through the Stage 1 RSA.
Conclusion
The proposed vehicular access arrangements will ensure that safe and suitable access can
be achieved for vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists in line with the NPPF Paragraph 32.
Pedestrian/Cycle Accessibility.
Each of the access junctions provides safe and suitable access for pedestrians and cyclists
in line with the NPPF Paragraph 32. The key for the development is identifying desire lines
and routes between the development and local facilities, and addressing any barriers.
The TA has provided four plans identifying barriers to pedestrian and cycle movement on key
routes between the development and key facilities. This formed the basis for discussions with
GCC on improvements to the pedestrian and cycle network to be provided by the developer.
GCC has reviewed these plans and formed a view on which items it would be appropriate for
the developer to address. This has considered:
−
−
−
What level would be appropriate;
Where the most benefit can be derived; and
Whether an improvement could realistically be delivered within the applicant’s gift, e.g.
vegetation maintenance and improvements requiring third party land would not be
deliverable by the applicant.
It is understood that the applicant has agreed the provision of Mini Stop Lights with Network
Rail for railway crossings.
The proposed pedestrian and cycle works to be provided by the developer has been fully
addressed in File Note H414-FN37, and is summarised below. These improvements will be
secured by a planning condition.
Route 1: to Maidenhall School
The route between the development and the B4008 Gloucester Road along Oldends Lane is
an important route both to the school and the town centre. Furthermore, Maidenhall School is
a secondary school, a facility which is not proposed to be provided on site. It would be
expected that a reasonable number of school children will walk to the school from the
development.
The developer has agreed to address
points
2, 3, 6, 8, 9, 10, and 11. Additionally, GCC
Page
91 of1,206
has identified that there will be a desire line for a crossing point over the B4008 Gloucester
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Road between Oldends Lane and Woodcock Lane. The developer has agreed to provide this
through dropped kerbs, tactile paving and a short section of footway.
Route 2: To Park School, town centre and Stonehouse Railway Station
Items 1-6 are discussed above. It is considered most efficient to focus on Oldends Lane as
the more direct route for crossing the railway line to the town centre. Therefore items 12-25
are not requested in order to focus on routes likely to draw more pedestrian/cycle
movements. The applicant has agreed to provide measures to address points 26-31.
Route 3: To Eastington Primary School
The developer has agreed to provide appropriate pedestrian crossing facilities on the east
arm of the Chipmans Platt roundabout to address Item 39 as part of the overall junction
improvement scheme.
Route 4: Cycle routes to Stroud.
The developer has agreed to provide measures to address points 46, 48, 49, 50, 51 and 56.
Conclusion
The development identifies and provides the opportunities for walking and cycling. These
opportunities can be undertaken within the transport network and will cost effectively limit the
significant impacts of the development. The pedestrian and cycle measures also provide safe
and suitable access for all people. Thus the development accords with NPPF paragraph 32 in
respect to pedestrian and cycle access.
Public Transport Accessibility
A significant level of discussion on public transport accessibility has been undertaken
between Gloucestershire County Council and PFA on behalf of the developer. The developer
has reached a private agreement with Stagecoach as the current bus operator for services in
the area regarding enhancement to existing services which will be made to provide public
transport accessibility for the proposed development. GCC has been party to the outcomes of
the discussions and in its role as the LHA is required to ensure that the proposed agreement
delivers appropriate public transport accessibility to meet the needs of future site users.
Whilst this is a private agreement, in order to be acceptable in planning terms GCC requires
confidence in the deliverability of the services and needs to be in a position to deliver the
service in the event of either the operator or developer defaulting on the arrangement. To this
end a legal agreement will be entered into whereby the developer provides GCC with a bond
for the value of the increased level of service. This would enable GCC to provide the
necessary enhancements to public transport service if required.
Public transport service enhancement will necessarily be delivered in a phased manner as it
relies on infrastructure and level of development which is required to be served. The level of
service which will be secured by legal agreement is summarised as follows.
Phase 1 (0-300 dwellings)
−
Phase 1 will involve the diversion of existing Service No. 61 (Stroud – Stonehouse –
Dursley) to be achieved as soon as practically possible in connection with first
occupations.
−
This service will be diverted into
the 92
siteofat
the western access off Grove Lane, where
Page
206
turning facilities will be provided; and diverted into the site at the eastern access,
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
−
−
subject to availability of running time, where turning facilities will be provided no further
than 250 metres from the centre of Oldends Lane mini roundabout.
The service to run with a regular 60 minute core frequency between 07:00 and 19:00
Mondays-Fridays; and between 08:00 and 19:00 on Saturdays. No Sunday service is
proposed in Phase 1.
The service will be operated with a fully-accessible low-floor bus seating not less than
25 seats, such as an Optare Solo or larger.
Phase 2a (300-600 dwellings)
−
Phase 2a will be introduced in conjunction with the 300th residential occupation or no
later than four years after the first occupation, whichever is the sooner.
−
This service will be provided by the diversion of the existing Service No. 66 E & S, with
Service No. 64 then being extended and diverted to Gloucester each hour to replace the
facility currently provided by Service No. 66 between Stonehouse and Hardwicke via the
current route (B4008).
−
The service will run with a half-hourly frequency between 07:00 and 19:00 MondaysSaturdays, and hourly in evenings and on Sundays.
−
This pattern of service provision will also, in all probability, retain some access to the
Service No. 61 if the western turning facility is retained.
Phase 2b (600+ dwellings)
−
Phase 2b will be introduced on the opening of the spine road to be achieved in
conjunction with the 600th residential occupation. This will enable the diversion of the
Phase 2a service provision through the site via the spine road.
In addition to level of service, the development will need to include appropriate public
transport infrastructure. This has been discussed with the developer and will be secured by
planning condition. This will include bus shelters, timetables, seating, and Real Time
Passenger Information (RTPI) to be provided within 400m of every dwelling, along with
adequate turning facilities being provided prior to the spine road being opened. This planning
condition does not specifically relate to on-site provision, and could include improvements or
additional off-site infrastructure where it meets the criteria of being within 400m of dwellings.
Road Safety
The TA includes an analysis of personal injury accident data for the five year period
September 2008 to August 2013. This has been reviewed and it is observed that no junction
or link currently experiences a higher accident rate than would be expected. The DfT
computer programme COBALT (Cost and Benefit to Accidents – Light Touch) has been used
to predict accidents which would be expected to occur at junctions and links for comparison
purposes.
The details of the accident types and clusters have also been reviewed. Three collisions have
involved vehicles making U-turns at the A38 central refuge on the southbound approach to
the A38/A419 roundabout. This is likely to be due to vehicles turning left from Grove Lane at
the Grove Lane/A38 junction, and then making a U-turn as the right-turn is banned at the
junction. The effect of the proposed development on traffic flows in this location has been
examined (discussed in depth later in this response), and it is considered that the
development is unlikely to exacerbate this existing accident issue. The data does not identify
93 of 206 by the proposed development.
any further safety issues which couldPage
be exacerbated
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Development Sequencing
The development will be delivered through a phased approach. The Local Planning Authority
(LPA) has advised that the details of development phasing will be provided through the
Reserved Matters applications. A planning condition will be placed on any Outline Planning
Permission requiring details of how safe and suitable access can be provided for each phase
of development to be submitted and agreed by the LPA.
Traffic Impact Assessment
Principles of Modelling Exercise
PFA has used a network-wide PARAMICS model to assess the traffic impact of the proposed
development. This model enables the assessment of interaction between junctions, as well
as the effects of traffic diverting to different routes due to congestion. GCC considers that the
use of network-wide PARAMICS modelling to assess the impact of the proposed
development should be supplemented with local junction modelling and this has
subsequently been provided.
The parameters used in the modelling exercise have been reviewed by both GCC and HE
and refined through further discussion with PFA on behalf of the applicant.
PARAMICS Model
A review of the PARAMICS models submitted with the application has been undertaken. This
was in addition to the full baseline model audit undertaken by SIAS Ltd, the company which
developed the PARAMICS software, in 2013. Minor comments were raised and these have
been subsequently addressed. Therefore GCC considers that the PARAMICS model is
appropriate for the purpose of assessing the traffic impact of the proposed development,
notwithstanding the need for additional standalone junction modelling.
Assessment Scenarios
The TA provides PARAMICS modeling assessment of the following scenarios:
1)
2012 Base Year
2)
2024 Forecast year with no development
3)
2024 Forecast Year with Local Plan Employment Allocation on LWoS
4)
2024 with full development proposals
5)
2024 with full development plus A419 highway improvements. These are the
improvements initially proposed within the TA.
Through post-application discussions, the following additional scenarios have been
identified and modelled:
6)
2024 with full development plus SEP A419 improvements.
7)
2024 with full development plus agreed A419 mitigation package.
2024 has been chosen as the future assessment year, as it is 10 years from the registration
of the application, and corresponds with the anticipated completion of the development.
The TEMPRO/NTM exercise used to calculate 2012-2024 growth factors provides growth
rates of 1.0734 and 1.0888 for AM and PM peak periods respectively. This exercise uses the
category “Urban: Principal”. This is appropriate considering the importance of the A419
corridor and the B4008 through Stonehouse to the assessment of traffic impact.
Scenario 3 includes the employmentPage
land 94
in of
Policy
206 SA2 (appendix E) of the Local Plan presubmission draft. This scenario was presented as an earlier draft of the Stroud Local Plan
solely included employment rather than housing. This scenario is now redundant as the Local
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Plan has been adopted to include the full residential and employment land uses proposed by
this planning application. However the data remains available within the TA for information
and reference only.
Scenario 5 only includes those mitigation measures originally proposed by the TA. This
involved minor amendments to the Chipmans Platt and Horsetrough Roundabouts. The
scope of mitigation has extended through post application discussions with PFA. Scenario 6
includes junction improvements proposed as part of the SEP scheme. These improvements
have been developed and refined to form the fully agreed mitigation package, which is
modelled in
Scenario 7.
Trip rates
The residential trip rates have been calculated using a TRICS assessment, taking categories
Houses – Privately owned, and Houses for rent, as proxies for private and affordable
housing. There are a number of different ways these trip rates could have been calculated,
including using combinations of Mixed Private, Mixed non-private, and Mixed Private/NonPrivate. Furthermore, most residential developments in TRICS will have a mixture of
affordable and market housing. GCC has undertaken sensitivity tests considering alternative
methodologies. It was found that the residential trip rates applied to this development by the
applicant are within a reasonable range. Furthermore, the modelling assessment has been
undertaken for up to 1500 dwellings, as opposed to the 1350 dwellings included in the
application. Therefore the residential trip generation provides a robust assessment.
The use of the “Industrial Estate” category in TRICS is considered reasonable to assess a
mix of B1/B2/B8 land uses as applied for in this Outline Application. It must be noted that
further Reserved Matters applications will need to reflect an appropriate mix of land uses in
line with this category. For instance a higher proportion of B1 floorspace would generate a
significantly higher level of traffic and would result in a need for further assessment to support
a future application.
Further discussions between PFA, HE and GCC have identified that it would be appropriate
to apply a planning condition to ensure that the proposed mix of employment development
would not exceed the level of traffic impact assessed within the TA. This condition has been
recommended by HE and states that B1 employment should not exceed 35% of the total, and
B2 employment should not exceed 35% of the total, both equating to a maximum of 11,393
sqm of Gross Floor Area (GFA) each. This is supported by GCC.
PFA has presented a comparison of the proposed industrial estate traffic generation derived
from TRICS, and surveyed traffic generation from the Stroudwater Business Park and
Stonedale Road Industrial Estate. This showed that the TRICS methodology would result in a
higher traffic generation than locally surveyed sites and is therefore accepted as a robust
methodology.
Primary school trip rates have been reviewed and are considered to be acceptable.
The applicant rightly states that there will be a level of self-containment for a site of this scale.
This means that whilst trip generation
is calculated
Page
95 of 206for each land use in isolation, some of the
trips for the employment and school developments will be from the residential element.
Therefore it is reasonable to agree and apply reduction factors to avoid double counting trips
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
generated. The assumption that 10% of employment traffic will come from the local
residential area is reasonable and accords with assumptions made for similar sites within
Gloucestershire.
The primary school self-containment/linked trips assumptions are also reasonable. This
assumes that 75% of trips to the primary school will be from on-site, and 25% will be from offsite. However, 50% of AM departures and 50% of PM arrivals are assumed to be to/from offsite to reflect that some children will be picked up or dropped off as part of a home-work trip.
The proposed development will generate 1,056 vehicle arrivals and 1,503 vehicle departures
in the 3 hour period between 0700 and 1000 hours. Of those, 796 arrivals and 1,243
departures will travel to/from off-site. The proposed development will generate 1,493 vehicle
arrivals and 1,249 vehicle departures in the 3 hour period between 1600 and 1900 hours. Of
those, 1,368 arrivals and 1,123 departures will travel to/from off-site.
Trip Distribution
The distribution of the proposed development traffic onto the surrounding highway network
has been based on the results of the Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) survey
and traffic counts undertaken in May 2012.
The use of ANPR to validate base year models is reasonable and this has been accepted
through the baseline model audit process. Proposed residential development trips have been
distributed using the distribution determined for internal residential zones within Stonehouse.
This methodology has also been applied to primary school trips. Employment trips have been
distributed using ANPR survey results for the Oldends Lane employment zone. The
distributions generated by this methodology have been compared with those which would
arise from using Census Journey to Work data and found to be similar. This validates the use
of ANPR data to determine traffic distribution.
The PARAMICS modelling allows for traffic diverting onto alternative routes to account for
route choice to avoid congestion. Therefore the level of development traffic which will occur
on any one link does not necessarily correspond with the changes in traffic flows on that link
in future with the proposed development and mitigation package in place. Nevertheless, peak
hour development traffic flows are shown in PFA Figure 1 attached to this response. The
future levels of traffic flow under each scenario accounting for diversion of background traffic
can be seen in Figures 2 and 3, also attached to this email. This is discussed in the traffic
impact section below.
Off-site Highways Impact
Principles
The impact of the proposed development has been assessed based on journey time impact
along the B4008 and A419 corridors from the PARAMICS modelling. Additionally the
PARAMICS model has been used to derive traffic flows at individual junctions in each
assessment scenario. This has been used to assess the impact of the proposed development
using standalone junction models with industry standard modelling software.
File Note H414-FN38 provides traffic capacity results for “Scenario 7”, which includes the
fully agreed mitigation package for the
A419.
The
slight exception to this is the Oldends Lane
Page
96 of
206
roundabout, where the mitigation modelled has been updated with a minor amendment
subsequent to undertaking the modelling. This amendment is shown in Drawing H414/29 Rev
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
B and includes widening to the A419 East approach. As this amendment will result in
capacity improvement, it is considered that the results presented in Scenario 7 represent a
robust assessment as it does not include this benefit.
SEP Scheme
GCC has been awarded provisional Strategic Economic Plan (SEP) funding through the
Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) subject to approval of the Full Business Case. The
original SEP bid included concept plans for:
−
−
−
−
Improvements to the Chipmans Platt roundabout to widen A419 approaches;
Rationalising the Oldends Lane junction into a four-arm signalised crossroads;
Improvements to the Downton Road signalised T-junction; and
Replacing the Horsetrough roundabout with a signalised crossroads.
As concept plans, the SEP schemes have been required to go through a further stage of
modelling and design development to become preliminary designs. This has been
undertaken through this planning application and has resulted in updates to the designs
which will be discussed in the following sections.
GCC retains control of the scheme designs for each of the locations within the SEP funding.
The developer has identified and modelled capacity improvements which are required to
make the LWoS development acceptable in traffic capacity terms. The capacity benefits
identified will be carried forward into the detailed design. Additionally, GCC retains the ability
to provide further enhanced capacity and to incorporate design additions to provide
improvements for all users. This will be undertaken through the detailed design process
which is included within the delivery programme agreed with the LEP.
GCC notes the review of the A419 design proposals undertaken by Sustrans in November
2015. Having reviewed the comments it is felt that the potential exists through the detailed
design process to enhance the designs to improve provision for cyclists within the designs. It
is also important to ensure that the most appropriate balance of user needs is achieved along
this route, whilst also taking into account the need to accommodate the residual cumulative
traffic from the now adopted allocation in the new Stroud Local Plan. Traffic congestion along
the A419 corridor is a specific issue raised in the LTP 3 review under Connecting Places
Strategy CPS 5 – Stroud and is recognised as an important transport link connecting
Cirencester to the M5. It also has the highest concentration of work related bus travel in the
county (9%). Therefore addressing congestion and limiting impact on bus journey times are
also afforded significant weight during the decision making process.
It has been agreed that the improvement schemes to Chipmans Platt, Oldends Lane and
Horsetrough Roundabout are required to mitigate the traffic impact of the proposed
development. These improvements meet the CIL tests and will therefore be secured by
planning condition, although delivery will be through the SEP scheme. The developer has
agreed to deliver the Chipmans Platt roundabout scheme in advance of SEP funding in order
to meet the desired development programme. The developer will be able to recover limited
costs for this scheme from the SEP funding when it is available.
Chipmans Platt Roundabout
Page 97 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The SEP scheme has been developed to that shown in Drawing H414/14 Rev B. Importantly,
this includes widening the A419 exits as well as entries to ensure that traffic will evenly use
both lanes on the A419 approaches, fully realising the capacity benefits. The proposed
design provides pedestrian facilities on the east of Grove Lane, and the east of Spring Hill,
with footway tying into existing footway on the A419 with widening where necessary.
Dropped kerbs and tactile paving crossings are provided over the A419 East arm, suitable for
use by both pedestrians and cyclists.
PFA has demonstrated that the proposed scheme needs to be provided prior to the
occupation of the 201st dwelling, and therefore this is the threshold for delivery which will be
included in the planning condition. This has been agreed with HE as their concern is the
impact of traffic queues on the A419 (W) approach on the M5 Junction 13 southbound offslip. The 201st dwelling has been identified as the point at which the proposed development
has a “severe” impact on the interaction between the queue from the A419 West approach
and the M5 southbound off-slip.
The baseline modelling and site observations show the existing junction to be congested at
present. The A419 West approach is at capacity in both AM and PM peaks at present. The
A419 East approach is close to capacity in the AM peak, and over capacity in the PM peak.
These capacity issues will be exacerbated in the future year with the addition of background
traffic growth, without the proposed development.
The future year modelling with the mitigation design (H414/14B) shows that the proposed
junction will accommodate background traffic growth and the proposed development traffic
with spare capacity in the AM peak.
The A419 East approach will operate at capacity in the future PM peak with the development
in place. However this is a significant improvement in comparison with both the current and
future baselines without the proposed development, and is acceptable. The A419 West
approach will operate with spare capacity in the future PM peak with the development in
place. This is an improvement over the existing and likely future performance of the junction
in the PM peak without the proposed development. All other arms will operate with spare
capacity in the future year scenario with the development in place.
Oldends Lane
Drawing H414/29 Rev B shows the proposed mitigation scheme for Oldends Lane
Roundabout. This has been developed iteratively with consultation between PFA, GCC and
stakeholders. The proposed scheme takes into account third party land constraints, with
highways land ownership shown on the plan. This is the main reason why the proposed
design has moved away from the concept of the signalised crossroads which was included
within the SEP bid.
The primary constraint is limited land availability on Oldends Lane meaning that widening at
the mouth of the junction has not been possible, although the flare length has been increased
by upstream widening. The proposed enhancements can be summarised as follows:
1.
2.
3.
Widening of the Oldends Lane approach to two lanes over 75 metres with related
alterations to the access to thePage
SKF98
works;
of 206
Realignment of the A419 eastbound exit to achieve enlarged traffic island/refuge;
Widening of the A419 eastbound approach, and altering lane markings;
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Extending the road markings on A419 westbound approach;
Modifying the central island to ease swept paths on circulatory carriageway east to
west;
Introducing Trief kerbs on western quadrant to protect pedestrians and cyclists on
footway/cycleway;
Introducing Toucan style crossing east of roundabout to ‘carry’ National Cycle Route
No. 45;
Altering the existing shared footway/cycleway along the former alignment of Oldends
Lane;
Providing the option to realign footway/cycleway between Sperry Way and Bonds Mill
to give enhanced priority to users of the National Cycle Route No. 45; and
Related items such as repositioning a street light column outside the
footway/cycleway, placing a bus stop flag on a pole located on a section of footway,
repositioning gullies from wheel tracks and cutting back vegetation currently obscuring
traffic signs.
In addition to the proposed highways improvements at this junction, the development traffic
impact at the Oldends Lane junction is mitigated by the creation of the spine road through the
development. The spine road will provide an additional route for some existing and
development traffic which would otherwise use the A419. The timing of the delivery of the
spine road is therefore critical to relieving traffic impact at the A419/Oldends Lane junction.
As the Oldends Lane junction is currently at capacity, it is necessary to determine the point at
which the development will have a “severe” impact in order to identify the point where the
proposed mitigation becomes necessary. GCC’s position is that a “severe” impact occurs at
the point when there is a material change in traffic flows. Whilst there is no current guidance
on the definition of material, the old DfT Guidance on Transport Assessment (GTA) guidance,
which was replaced by the Planning Practice Guidance (2012) considered 5% to be material
in a congested network. We feel that it is reasonable to use this definition and therefore
consider the appropriate trigger for the Oldends Lane works to be when the development
adds 5% additional traffic to the junction. This results in a threshold of 300 dwellings and 3.25
acres of employment at which point the proposed scheme will need to be provided.
Subsequently, the point at which the spine road becomes necessary is the point at which the
further increase in traffic exceeds the capacity benefit provided by the proposed Oldends
Lane scheme. This has been shown to be 600 dwellings and 6.5 acres of employment land.
Horsetrough Roundabout
The baseline junction testing and on-site capacity observations show that the A419 South
arm is at capacity in the AM peak, and the A419 West arm is at capacity in the PM peak. For
consistency it is reasonable to work on a similar basis to A419/Oldends Lane, i.e. by
considering a 5% increase in traffic flows on a congested junction as a material and therefore
“severe” impact requiring mitigation.
An optioneering exercise for the Horsetrough roundabout has been undertaken. This has
considered minor amendments to the existing layout, the signalised crossroads originally
included in the SEP bid including adaptations, and significant enhancements to the
roundabout. It has been shown that Page
neither
minor amendments originally included in the
99the
of 206
TA, nor variations on the SEP signalised crossroads, provide sufficient capacity to
accommodate either future background traffic growth or the proposed development.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The proposed scheme can be seen in Drawing H414/24 Rev A. This incorporates the
principles and land take of the SEP signalised crossroads, but retains a roundabout as the
most efficient method of control due to traffic patterns. Both A419 approaches have been
widened to address congestion on the A419 South in the AM peak, and the A419 West in the
PM peak. A left-turn slip has been provided on the A419 South. A crossing point on the A419
is provided to the west of the junction to supplement the crossing closer to the roundabout.
The A419 South exit is widened to provide a full two-lane exit, enabling even lane usage on
the A419 West and therefore making most efficient use of road space. The B4008 North
approach is also widened to provide a longer two lane approach than currently available.
GCC notes the comments on the proposed design which have been provided by Sustrans. It
is considered that the comments raised can be addressed as the scheme progresses through
further design development, whilst retaining the fundamental benefits which are required to
make the development acceptable.
The proposed design has been modelled in the future year using ARCADY, an industry
standard software package used for modelling roundabouts. The results show that all arms
will operate within capacity in the future year with the development in place in both AM and
PM peaks. The B4008 Ebley Road approach will approach capacity in the AM peak, with
other arms within capacity. Notably the A419 South approach, which would be over capacity
without the proposed improvements, will operate with a significant level of spare capacity,
providing a major benefit to both existing and future users.
In the PM peak the A419 West will approach capacity, although this will be an improvement
over existing conditions and is therefore acceptable. The B4008 Bath road will also
experience a Ratio of Flow to Capacity of 0.9, indicating very limited spare capacity.
However, at present the RFC is 0.88, and in future without the development it will exceed 0.9.
Therefore the traffic impact of the proposed development will be mitigated by the proposed
scheme.
Downton Road Signals
The SEP scheme provides amendments to the A419/Downton Road traffic signal controlled
junction. This includes carriageway widening on the A419 westbound exit to enable ahead
traffic on the A419 east to use both lanes. The developer has modelled the SEP scheme,
which shows that the junction can accommodate development traffic and future traffic growth
without exceeding capacity. All arms will operate below 90% saturation in the 2024 AM peak
with the development. All arms will operate below 100% saturation in the PM peak, although
the A419 west and Downton Road will approach capacity.
PFA has also modelled the existing junction in 2024 both with and without the proposed
development. The modelling shows that development traffic will not have a “severe” impact
on the performance of the junction. This means that delivery of the proposed scheme is not
necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms. Thus whilst the scheme
will be delivered using SEP funding, no condition will be attached to the planning permission
requiring the scheme to be provided before a certain level of occupation.
M5 Junction 13
Highways England (HE) is the Highway
for the M5 Junction 13, and has therefore
Page Authority
100 of 206
led the discussion and analysis with the developer. HE has raised a concern with the
development traffic impact on the M5 Northbound on-slip. A scheme has been agreed
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
between the HE and applicant to enhance the merge from the slip road to the main M5
northbound carriageway to address HE’s safety and capacity concerns regarding the impact
of increased traffic from the development.
PARAMICS Model statistics
Journey times
The PARAMICS model has been used to assess traffic capacity across the wider network,
incorporating traffic diversion due to congestion and interactions of queues between
junctions. The model has been run to produce journey time statistics for the A419 corridor
and the B4008 corridor. This enables comparison of network performance at a wider scale. It
also enables the initial impact of the development to be considered over the situation in the
future year with no development, and also the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation to be
evaluated.
At present it takes just under eight minutes to drive the A419 corridor in the eastbound
direction in the AM peak. This would exceed eight minutes in 2024 without the development,
and exceed 10 minutes with the development and no mitigation. The full mitigation scheme
agreed will reduce the journey time to below the level experienced at present. The modelling
shows a similar pattern in the PM peak, although the development without mitigation would
result in major increases in journey times. The proposed mitigation will reduce journey times
to below the existing level.
In the westbound direction, existing journey times of nine minutes would reach ten minutes in
2024 AM peak with the development but no mitigation. This will reduce to six minutes with
the proposed mitigation in place. In the PM peak, the results would be similar, with the
mitigation resulting in lower journey times than at present.
The B4008 route through Stonehouse has also been modelled. In the northbound direction,
journey times will increase from just under five minutes in the 2024 AM peak without the
development, to just under six minutes with the development and with mitigation. This is not
considered to be a “severe” impact. In the PM peak the existing journey time of five minutes
is shown to not materially increase in the future year with the development and mitigation in
place, remaining at approximately five minutes.
In the southbound direction the development will have a minimal impact on journey times.
Journey times will remain at approximately four and a half minutes both with and without the
development.
Traffic Flows
The PARAMICS modelling identifies traffic levels which will be travelling along each road
within the model in each scenario. This accounts for both background traffic growth and
development traffic, and also traffic diversions which would occur as a result of changes in
network congestion and some routes becoming preferable to others. In general the modelling
shows the majority of traffic flow increases occurring on the A419 as the mitigation package
results in this becoming the preferable route for many journeys for which the route choice is
available. In this way the A419 mitigation package provides indirect mitigation for
development traffic which would route through Stonehouse and use the B4008 as it draws
existing traffic away from the B4008Page
and onto
more strategic route.
101 the
of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
In the AM peak, two way traffic flows on Oldends Lane to the east of the level crossing will be
approximately 460 vehicles in 2024 both without the development, and with the development
and mitigation package. Without mitigation this traffic level would be approximately 700
vehicles with the development in place. The results are similar in the PM peak with
approximately 500 two-way vehicle flows in 2024 without the development and with
development and mitigation. Without mitigation this level would be approximately 750 two
way vehicles. Thus the A419 mitigation package mitigates the potential development traffic
impact on traffic queues at the
Oldends Lane level crossing through traffic diversion.
The level of traffic on the B4008 north of Stonehouse will increase by approximately 50 two
way vehicles in the 2024 AM and PM peaks as a result of the proposed development. Traffic
flows on the B4008 within Stonehouse itself will be 1150-1250 two way vehicles in the AM
and PM peaks both without the development and with the development and A419 mitigation.
Without mitigation traffic flow levels would be approximately 150 two way trips higher.
GCC and stakeholders are aware of local concerns regarding potential increases in traffic
using Grove Lane as a cut-through between the A419 and A38, even despite the recent ban
on the right turn from Grove Lane to the A38. The modelling shows that two way traffic levels
on Grove Lane between the site access and A38 will reduce as a result of the mitigation
package, due to improved journey times on the A419. The accident data shows that
accidents have occurred on the A38 south of Grove Lane as a result of U-turning vehicles,
which could be due to traffic rat-running along Grove Lane, turning left, and then making a Uturn. The analysis of traffic flow changes which would occur as a result of the proposed
development shows that traffic volumes on Grove Lane will decrease through reductions in
congestion on the A419, and thus the proposed development is unlikely to exacerbate this
existing issue.
Traffic Impact Conclusions
The traffic impact assessment and design exercise has identified appropriate mitigation
schemes for the locations where the development would otherwise have a “severe” impact. It
has also identified appropriate development thresholds at which each of the schemes will
need to be delivered. In summary, the proposed mitigation will provide significant capacity
improvements to the A419 approaches at both the Chipmans Platt and Horsetrough
roundabouts. This contributes to improved peak hour journey times along the A419 in both
directions. Traffic congestion along the A419 corridor is a specific issue raised in the LTP 3
review under Connecting Places Strategy CPS 5 – Stroud and is recognised as an important
transport link connecting Cirencester to the M5. It also has the highest concentration of work
related bus travel in the county (9%). Therefore the proposed mitigation complies with LTP3
aims.
Improvements are also provided at the Oldends Lane/A419 roundabout. These represent
cost effective transport improvements in line with NPPF Paragraph 32. Furthermore there is
limited opportunity for the developer to propose greater enhancements in this location. The
main capacity benefit which the development provides to mitigate traffic impact at the
Oldends Lane roundabout is the spine road through the development. This will provide a
relief function and draw some existing traffic and some development traffic away from the
A419/Oldends Lane junction.
Page 102 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The improvements proposed for the A419 junctions also mitigate development traffic impact
on the Oldends Lane level crossing, Grove Lane, and routes through Stonehouse such as
the B4008. This is due to A419 capacity improvements drawing traffic onto the strategic route
which would otherwise be travelling along more local routes, with a neutral effect in terms of
traffic flow changes.
In conclusion the traffic impact assessment has shown that the development will not have a
residual “severe” impact at either a local junction or network wide scale due to the proposed
mitigation package.
Travel Plan
A Framework Travel Plan (TP) has been provided with the application. H414-DOC05 FTP
Issue 2 is accepted following minor amendments to Issue 1. The Framework TP is designed
to set the parameters for individual sites/users to prepare and implement subsidiary Travel
Plans (TPs), and has been considered as such. Individual TPs will need to be agreed with
GCC at the time of detailed planning applications for each site. Each TP will need to include
site-specific information relevant to the operation of that organisation/land use. Individual TPs
will need to be in line with GCC’s Travel Plan Guide for Developers.
Residential Travel Plans in Gloucestershire need to be operated based on Option 1 or Option
2 as set out in GCC’s Transport Planning Advice Sheet No.7: Residential Travel Plans
http://www.gloucestershire.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=44239&p=0
Under Option 1, the developer commits to funding and implementing the Travel Plan and
pays a monitoring fee to GCC. Additionally a bond/deposit is required, repayable on
successful completion or retained to implement remedial measures will be required. Under
Option 2, GCC absorbs all risk and is responsible for implementing the Travel Plan. This
option requires a non-refundable monitoring fee and contribution of £225,900. The developer
has chosen funding Option 2 and this will be secured through a legal agreement.
As stated in the TP, the Framework Travel Plan Co-ordinator (TPC) role will be funded by the
developer, and the workplace and school TPCs will be funded by the workplaces, and school,
themselves.
Recommendation
The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states at paragraph 32 that “development
should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative
impacts of development are severe”. The Highway Authority considers that this development
will not have a severe impact on the local highway network. The NPPF states that “safe and
suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people”, and that “opportunities for
sustainable transport modes have been taken up depending on the nature and location of the
site, to reduce the need for major transport infrastructure.” It is considered that the
development proposals will meet these criteria. It is recommended that no highway objection
be raised to this application, subject to the following obligations and conditions being
attached to any permission granted:
Obligations
Travel Plan – residential & employment
Page 103 of 206
Residential travel plan to be provided in line with Advice Sheet 7 (GCC) and that includes
payment for GCC to undertake total cost at 1350 dwellings £225,900
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Employment travel plan to be submitted within 6 months of occupation including monitoring
cost – travel plans to be submitted prior to occupation in accordance with approved
framework.
Chipmans Platt Roundabout will be front funded by Hitchins. Inclusion of clause to allow
Hitchins to invoice GCC to recover cost of junction improvements up to the value of £500,000
(PFA confirmed total costs email 28/09/15 £492,760).
Public Transport Sc106 to indemnify GCC from costs of delivery Public Transport Service
including bonding to the value of £525,000. This could be either a rolling or reducing bond as
appropriate.
Condition 1: Chipmans Platt Roundabout
No more than 200 dwellings shall be occupied until the highway improvement works at
Chipmans Platt Roundabout have been completed broadly in accordance with drawing No.
H414/14 Rev B.
Reason: To ensure that cost effective improvements are undertaken to the transport network
that mitigate the significant impacts of the development in accordance with paragraph 32 of
the National Planning Policy Framework.
Condition 2: Oldends Lane Roundabout
No more than 300 dwellings and 3.25 acres of employment use shall be occupied until the
highway improvement works at Oldends Lane have been completed broadly in accordance
with drawing No. H414/29 Rev B.
Reason: To ensure that cost effective improvements are undertaken to the transport network
that mitigate the significant impacts of the development in accordance with paragraph 32 of
the National Planning Policy Framework.
Condition 3: Horsetrough Junction
No more than 600 dwellings and 6.5 acres of employment shall be occupied prior to details of
the highway improvement works at the Horsetrough Junction being submitted and agreed in
writing by the Local Planning Authority broadly in accordance with drawing no. H414/24 Rev
A or other wise agreed in writing by the LPA.
Reason: To ensure that cost effective improvements are undertaken to the transport network
that mitigate the significant impacts of the development in accordance with paragraph 32 of
the National Planning Policy Framework.
Condition 4: The development spine road
No more than 600 dwellings and 6.5 acres of employment use shall be occupied prior to the
development spine road linking Oldends Lane to Grove Lane has been completed.
Reason: To ensure that safe and suitable access is provided and that cost effective
improvements are undertaken to the transport network to mitigate the significant impacts of
the development in accordance with Paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy
Framework.
Condition 5: Off-site pedestrian/cyclist
improvements
Page
104 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Prior to occupation of the 200th dwelling the approved off site pedestrian/cyclist
improvements as detailed in PFA Consulting’s report H414-FN37 shall be completed in all
respects.
Reason: To ensure that the opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken in
accordance with paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
Condition 7: Public transport infrastructure
Prior to the commencement of any phase of development details of public transport
infrastructure to include bus shelters with timetable, seating and Real Time Passenger
Information within 400m of any dwelling along with adequate turning facilities prior to the
spine road being opened to through traffic shall be submitted to and approved in writing by
the local planning authority, together with a timetable to be agreed for the implementation of
these works and the works to be provided in accordance with the agreed timetable.
Reason: To ensure that the opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken
up and to have access to high quality public transport facilities in accordance with paragraphs
32 and 35 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
Page 105 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Condition 8: Grove Lane Access
Prior to the first occupation of the dwellings hereby permitted the means of access to the
western end of the site as shown on drawing no. H414/14 Rev E from Grove Lane shall have
been completed in all respects and made available for use.
Reason: To reduce potential highway impact by ensuring that there is a safe and suitable
access prior to occupation in accordance with paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy
Framework
Prior to any works commencing on site from the western end of the site details of the access
serving the site from Grove Lane for construction purposes shall be submitted to and agreed
in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall be completed in all respects and made
available for use.
Reason: To reduce potential highway impact by ensuring that there is a satisfactory access
at the commencement of construction works, in accordance with paragraph 32 of the
National Planning Policy Framework.
Condition 9: Oldends Lane Access
No works shall commence on the proposed area of development to the east of the site solely
accessed from Oldends Lane until the first 20m of the proposed access road, including the
junction with the existing public road (Oldends Lane), associated visibility splays, as shown in
drawing no. H414/12 Rev C, has been completed to at least binder course level, and shall be
retained as such thereafter unless and until adopted as highway maintainable at public
expense.
Reason: To reduce potential highway impact by ensuring that there is a satisfactory access
at the commencement of construction works, in accordance with paragraph 32 of the
National Planning Policy Framework.
Condition 10: Oldends Lane Access: occupations
Prior to beneficial occupation of the residential or employment element of the proposed
development the site access from Oldends Lane shall be completed in all respects in
accordance with drawing no. H414/12 Rev C, and shall be retained as such thereafter unless
and until adopted as highway maintainable at public expense.
Reason: To reduce potential highway impact by ensuing that there is a satisfactory access
for pedestrians and vehicles, in accordance with paragraph 32 of the National Planning
Policy Framework.
Condition 11: Brunel Way Access
No works shall commence on the proposed area of development to the south of the site
solely accessed from Brunel Way until the first 20m of the proposed residential access road,
including the junction with the existing public road (Brunel Way), associated visibility splays,
as shown in drawing no. H414/11 Rev B, has been completed to at least binder course level,
and shall be retained as such thereafter unless and until adopted as highway maintainable at
public expense.
Page 106 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Reason:- To reduce potential highway impact by ensuring that there is a satisfactory access
at the commencement of construction works, in accordance with paragraph 32 of the
National Planning Policy Framework.
Condition 12: Brunel Way Access: occupations
Prior to beneficial occupation of the employment element of the proposed development the
site access from Brunel Way shall be completed in all respects in accordance with drawing
no. H414/11 Rev B and shall be retained as such thereafter unless and until adopted as
highway maintainable at public expense.
Reason: To reduce potential highway impact by ensuing that there is a satisfactory access
for pedestrians and vehicles, in accordance with paragraph 32 of the National Planning
Policy Framework.
Condition 13: Reserved Matters
No building within a phase shall be occupied until the carriageway(s) (including means of
surface water drainage and disposal, vehicular turning head(s), parking and street lighting)
providing access from the nearest public highway to that building have been submitted to and
agreed in writing by the local planning authority and once approved completed to at least
binder course level and the footway(s) to surface course level.
Reason: To minimise hazards and inconvenience for users of the development by ensuring
that there is a safe and suitable means of access for all people in accordance with paragraph
32 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
Condition 14: Fire Hydrants
Prior to the commencement of any building within a phase of development a scheme for the
provision of fire hydrants served by mains water supply shall be submitted to and approved in
writing by the local planning authority and no building shall be occupied until the fire hydrant
serving that building has been provided in accordance with the approved scheme.
Reason: To ensure adequate water infrastructure provision is made on site for the local fire
service to tackle any property fire in accordance with paragraphs 32 and 35 of the National
Planning Policy Framework.
Condition 15: Future maintenance of streets
No development shall be commenced until details of the proposed arrangements for future
management and maintenance of the proposed streets within the development have been
submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The streets shall
thereafter be maintained in accordance with the approved management and maintenance
details until such time as either a dedication agreement has been entered into or a private
management and maintenance company has been established.
Page 107 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Reason: To ensure that safe and suitable access is achieved and maintained for all people
as required by paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework and to establish and
maintain a strong sense of place to create attractive and comfortable places to live, work and
visit as required by paragraph 58 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
Condition 16: Construction Method Statement and Transport Plan
No development within a phase shall take place until a Construction Method Statement and
Transport Plan has been submitted to, and approved in writing to the local planning authority.
The approved Statement for that phase shall be adhered to and shall address and provide
for:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
The parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors;
The unloading and loading of materials;
The storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development;
Wheel washing facilities;
Measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction;
vi. A scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction
works;
vii. Details of the site access/routeing strategy/signage during the construction period.
Reason: To reduce the potential impact on the public highway in accordance with paragraph
32 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
Informative Notes:
Highways England in its role as the Highway Authority for the Strategic Road Network (SRN)
which includes the M5, has recommended three planning conditions be attached to the
proposed development. These do not contradict GCC’s position and are supported by the
LHA. The conditions are recommended in order to:
−
Ensure that the employment development contains an appropriate mix of use classes
(up to 35% B1 and up to 35% B2, with the remainder B8) in line with the level of traffic
impact assessed in the modelling exercise.
−
Ensure that the Chipmans Platt mitigation scheme is implemented prior to the 201st
dwelling to mitigate the impact of traffic queues from this junction on the A419. GCC
has recommended a similar condition, meaning that these conditions should be
rationalised by the LPA to avoid duplication.
−
Ensure that the proposed M5 northbound on-slip upgrade is implemented prior to the
development resulting in an increase of greater than 30 peak hour trips on this slip
road.
The proposed development will involve works to be carried out on the public highway and the
Applicant/Developer is required to enter into a legally binding Highway Works Agreement
(including an appropriate bond) with the County Council in its role as the local highway
authority before commencing those works.
Further guidance on the local highway authority's requirements can be found in its document
entitled ' Manual for Gloucestershire Streets' which is available on Gloucestershire County
Council's website.
Page 108 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The site is traversed by public rights of way and this permission does not authorise additional
use by motor vehicles, or obstruction, or diversion.
The developer will be expected to meet the full costs of supplying and installing the fire
hydrants and associated infrastructure.
The applicant is advised that the Local Planning Authority requires a copy of a completed
Dedication Agreement between the applicant and the local highway authority or the
constitution and details of a Private Management and Maintenance Company confirming
funding, management and maintenance regimes.
Sport England:
No comments.
EPR Ecology Consultants:
19/08/2014
Insufficient information is available to assess the effect of this Scheme on the Severn Estuary
SPA and SAC, Frampton Pools SSSI, the River Frome Key Wildlife Site, Barn Owls, Brown
Hares and the local Great-crested Newt meta-population, as set out above. It is therefore not
possible to determine whether the Scheme complies with legislation and policy.
11/06/15
The following further information is required:
1.
A project specific visitor survey and/or impact analysis to demonstrate that no likely
significant effects will arise. If such effects are identified, sufficient information will be
required to enable SDC to be confident that mitigation measures could be devised to
address any impact without affecting the deliverability of the development.
2.
Consideration of the contribution of this scheme to the cumulative effects on the way
the River Frome corridor supports riverine mammals and other valuable populations in
terms of its structure and function.
3.
Firm commitments to the improvement of the structure and function of the River Frome
corridor.
4.
Consideration of the survey long-term results of GCN surveys at Stonehouse Newt
Pond and other GCN surveys in the area, consideration of the likely causes of decline
and a clear plan to implement the actions needed to restore the meta-population within
the retained area.
5.
Given that, without successful mitigation, the effects could be significant, a detailed
and costed management plan is required, with a clear commitment to funding,
implementation and monitoring. The objectives should be measurable and monitoring
designed to flag up failure to achieve objectives. A process and funding for remedial
action is also required.
Page 109 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
07/12/15 – amended comments:
1.
Please find our amended comments below, in respect of the ecological information
submitted with the Environmental Statement Addendum dated November 2015 for
Land West of Stonehouse and the draft S106, which you forwarded after receiving my
comments of 30 November. Please be aware that the Adopted Local Plan Policies
SA2 (3.29) and ES6, together with the HRA (4.7) of the Local Plan and the
Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulation 2010 (‘the Habitats Regulations)
provide the relevant guidance.
River Frome KWS
2.
The River Frome KWS is designated for riparian mammals. Despite there having been
no recent targeted surveys, there have been regular records of Otters and occasional
records of Water Voles along the Eastington – Stonehouse section of the Frome
corridor. Water Shrew has also been noted near the river in Eastington. There have
been local projects to enhance this area, including mink control aimed at restoring the
water vole population.
3.
The applicants’ Visitor Survey shows that 90% of local people use the canal tow path
for recreation. There is no reason to suppose that the people resident in the West of
Stonehouse development would not do the same. The scheme is therefore very likely
to increase traffic on the tow path and associated footpaths in the Frome corridor.
4.
This increased pressure could combine with that arising from walkers displaced from
the footpaths in the Frome corridor to the west of Chipmans Platt during the
construction period for proposals at Junction 13 and from the Cotswold Canals Trust.
5.
Policy ES6 seeks not only conservation of natural features, but also enhancement.
Without mitigation this increase in recreational pressure will certainly not enhance the
River Frome KWS and may harm it and the features for which it is designated, through
increased disturbance (particularly by dogs) and the erosion of banks if paths are overused.
6.
I understand that the proposed canal restoration works will aim to encourage the
restoration and enhancement of the Frome corridor for Water Vole (as described in
paragraphs 2.9 and 2.10 of the Addendum) and Otters. This could be compromised by
increased levels of recreational pressure.
7.
Mitigation to avoid a likely significant effect is therefore required.
River Severn SPA
8.
As required in the HRA of the Local Plan, a Residents’ Survey has been completed to
assess the likely increase in recreational activity along the Severn arising from this
proposal. The questionnaire survey was issued to 4,129 residential addresses close to
the Site, of which 553 were completed. The aim of the survey was to “generate
information on current recreational behaviour patterns, and with the specific goal of
providing evidence to assess whether there is likely to be any significant adverse
effect on the Severn Estuary Page
SPA as
a result
110
of 206of the development proposals.”
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
9.
Though not the most popular site, 35% of survey respondents said that they visited the
Severn Estuary, albeit infrequently. This would equate to around 473 of the new
households.
10.
The survey also found that 41% of people visit the countryside and open spaces for
the purpose of dog walking, and that of those people, 44% let their dogs off the lead.
Based on 35% of new households visiting the Severn Estuary, this would equate to
around 194 visiting with a dog, of which 85 would be let off the lead.
11.
This level of visitation, even if infrequent, could contribute to an in-combination effect
on the features for which the SPA was designated. We therefore disagree with the
conclusion at paragraph 2.21 of the Addendum, which states that “potential
recreational effects being cited by SDC would not occur.” (our emphasis). The survey
results do not support this statement.
12.
We also therefore disagree with the statement at paragraph 2.22 that “Based on the
above visitor survey results it is considered that it has been demonstrated that likely
significant effects on the Severn Estuary SPA will not arise either alone or in
combination with other developments, with there being a number of alternative open
spaces that would be used in preference to the SPA. As such, it is not considered that
any mitigation or avoidance measures are necessary, particularly in the context of the
extensive green infrastructure proposed as part of the West of Stonehouse
development. Therefore, it is considered the proposals are in accordance with the
objectives of Policy SA2.” (our emphasis). Again, the survey results do not support this
statement.
13.
Mitigation to avoid a likely significant effect is therefore required.
Mitigation to avoid likely significant effects on The River Frome KWS and the Severn
Estuary SPA
14.
We require the Applicant to provide both on-site and off-site impact avoidance
measures, tailored to attract people who might otherwise visit the Severn Estuary.
These should draw on the information gathered from the residents survey on features
that attract people to existing open spaces and influence their choice of sites
(Questions 4 and 5) and changes that would encourage them to visit these sites more
or less often (Question 15).
15.
As the Addendum states, extensive green infrastructure is proposed as part of the
development and so there is considerable scope to include some tailored impact
avoidance and mitigation measures. Possibilities for on-site features to encourage
dog walkers in particular might therefore include (but are not limited to) the provision
and on-going maintenance and management of an all-weather circular walking route,
areas where dogs can exercise safely off the lead, and dog waste bins, as well as
clear signage and information for dog walkers. It will be necessary to provide routes
that are sufficiently long to attract walkers at the first occupation of the development.
16.
Off-site measures should focus on improving infrastructure along the Stroudwater
Canal towpath, as this is an Page
area that
is 206
highly likely to be visited by residents of the
111 of
proposed development – the residents’ survey found that 90% of respondents
currently visit the towpath for recreational purposes. The Addendum also states at
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
paragraph 3.35 of Appendix 1 that “Residents who go to Stroudwater Canal most often
are significantly more likely (54%) to visit more often if there were better path surfaces
or routes.”
17.
The Applicant should therefore contribute to the Cotswold Canals Trust’s plans to
improve the robustness of the towpath for dog walkers, so that it can provide an
alternative destination to the Severn Estuary without harm to the wildlife of the River
Frome. This could include implementing access management and maintenance
measures such as (but not limited to) extending, improving and maintaining allweather path surfaces, increased signage targeted at dog walkers, a regular warden
presence, and the provision of dog waste bins.
18.
SDC is currently developing a Severn Estuary Impact Avoidance Strategy. At present
there is insufficient information to determine whether the above mitigation is likely to
be sufficient to avoid the likely significant effects on the SPA. It is therefore
recommended that this issue is revisited at the reserved matters stage, by which the
time the Impact Avoidance Strategy will be more advanced. If necessary, appropriate
contributions can be required at that point (see Condition below).
Great-crested Newts
19.
Given SDC’s commitment to enhance biodiversity through development, in my June
2015 review I advised that:
‘There should be consideration of the survey results from GCN surveys at Stonehouse Newt
Pond and other GCN surveys in the area, consideration of the likely causes of decline,
and a clear plan to address these issues within the retained area.’
20.
I can find no reference to this in the Addendum to the ES.
21.
Enhancement proposals are required.
Proposed conditions and draft S106:
22.
I have suggested the following conditions pertaining to all the ecological issues arising
from this scheme, not just those addressed in the Addendum.
i.
In order to protect biodiversity, prior to the start of works on site, the LPA shall
agree a Construction Environment Method Statement. Development shall proceed
in full accordance with the CEMP. This condition shall be discharged when the
LPA has received written confirmation from the Project Ecologist that the scheme
has been constructed in full accordance with the agreed CEMP.
ii.
In order to avoid likely significant effects on the River Frome KWS and the Severn
Estuary SPA, prior to the start of works the LPA shall receive from the applicant
and shall agree a Green Infrastructure Plan, which shall demonstrate how the onsite open spaces will be managed to provide attractive recreational opportunities.
This shall set measureable targets for each phase of development, clear
monitoring and remediation procedures and appropriate long-term funding and
Page 112 of 206
implementation obligations.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
iii. In order to avoid likely significant effects on the River Frome KWS and the Severn
Estuary SPA, prior to the first occupation of the each phase of development the
relevant phase of the agreed Green Infrastructure Plan shall be implemented. This
condition shall be discharged in line with the phasing of development, when the
LPA has received written confirmation from the Project Ecologist that relevant
phase of the Green Infrastructure Plan has been implemented as agreed.
iv. In order to conserve and enhance biodiversity, prior to the commencement of
development works on the site the applicant shall submit, and the LPA shall agree,
a Biodiversity Management Plan, which shall demonstrate how biodiversity will be
conserved and enhanced within the application site. This shall set measureable
targets for each phase of development, clear monitoring and remediation
procedures and appropriate long-term funding and implementation obligations.
v.
In order to secure the conservation and enhancement of biodiversity, the relevant
phase of the agreed Biodiversity Management Plan shall be implemented prior to
the first occupation of the each phase of development. This condition shall be
discharged in line with the phasing of development, when the LPA has received
written confirmation from the Project Ecologist that relevant phase of the
Biodiversity Management Plan has been implemented as agreed.
vi. In order to avoid likely significant effects on the Severn Estuary SPA, reserved
matters applications shall trigger appropriate contributions to the emerging Severn
Estuary Impact Avoidance Strategy.
23. Further, I understand that the ‘Canal Contribution’ in the draft S106 is calculated to
enable the Cotswold Canals Trust to make the relevant stretch of tow path sufficiently
robust to both accommodate the likely increase in recreational pressure and enhance
links to other footpaths. This will add to the package designed to avoid likely significant
effects on the Severn Estuary SPA and to protect the River Frome KWS.
Conclusions
24.
Providing the suggested conditions and draft S106 Agreement are implemented, I am
confident that the development can proceed in accordance with Policy SA2, ES6, the
HRA of the Local Plan and Habitats Regulation 61.
Page 113 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
SDC Policy Implementation Manager - Planning, Housing & Regeneration:
8/12/15
Confirms that the affordable housing has been agreed in line with Policy and is reflected in
the draft S106 the main terms of which are set out below.
Highways England (formally Highways Agency):
18/06/2014
Secretary of State for Transport directs that planning permission be not granted for a period
of 3 months to give the applicant time to provide additional information to enable the
Highways Agency to satisfactorily assess the impact of the development on the SRN,
specifically M5 J13.
1.
Clarification on development phasing and how this relates to Travel Plan monitoring
2.
Trip generation for residential and education proposals better tailored to local travel
characteristics i.e. census mode splits
3.
Revised trip rates calculated for employment land uses, reflecting that B1 office
development represents a worst-case scenario in terms of peak hour trip generation
4.
Clarification on how trip distribution and assignment has been identified for M5
Junction 13 and other SRN junctions further afield
5.
Junction assessments updated to take account of any trip generation, distribution
changes made as a result of comments set out in this note (Agency note), and to
include all SRN junctions that receive an impact in accordance with Agency policy
requirements.
6.
Collision data to consider SRN junctions further afield if these are shown to receive
traffic impact in accordance with Agency policy requirements
7.
The provision of queue length analysis for forecast model scenarios from the Paramics
model
8.
The SRN slip road merges and diverges assessment in accordance with DMRB
TD22/06. Until such time as information is provided to address the outstanding
concerns the Agency will be unable to confirm that the development is acceptable.
17/10/2014
The latest information sets out to address three outstanding issues that remains of concern to
the Agency.
The Agency now accepts the point that the A410/Grove Lane/ Spring Hill Roundabout
improvement scheme would ensure queues do not extend back towards the SRN and impact
on the operation of M5 Junction 13. No further assessment is required.
Whilst PFA accept the use of a Page
planning
condition
to protect the SRN from potential
114 of
206
increases in employment traffic, beyond that assessed and included in the TA. The Agency
rejects the development mix suggested by PFA, but has put forward further consideration for
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
the applicant via an attached audit note. This issue requires further consideration before the
Agency can agree this point.
Assuming agreement can be reached on the above point, PFA are required to progress an
amendment to the M5 Junction 13 northbound merge slip road, providing a single lane merge
as identified in the PFA drawing layout H414/21. PFA are required to progress this through
the provision of a Stage 1 Road Safety Audit (RSA) and non motorised user (NMU) audit, in
accordance with Agency policy requirements, before the Agency can provide sign off on this
scheme.
23/02/15
No objection but directs the conditions to be attached to any planning permission which may
be granted.
07/12/15
Highways England has no comment to make on the revised plans.
SDC Environmental Protection Manager:
08/04/2014 and 24/11/2015
Further to the above application I would recommend that the following conditions be applied
to any eventual permission:1.
For the proposed residential areas of the development I would recommend that, prior
to construction, a detailed noise assessment should be required setting out the
measures to be taken to ensure that there is no detriment to the amenity of existing
and proposed local residents. For guidance purposes, the following standards should
be achieved:a)
b)
c)
sound levels within habitable rooms during the hours of 07:00 to 23:00 shall not
exceed 35 dB LAeq,16hour, with windows closed and an alternative means of
ventilation provided;
sound levels within bedrooms during the hours of 23:00 to 07:00 shall not
exceed 30 dB LAeq,8hour, with windows closed and an alternative means of
ventilation provided; and
sound levels on balconies and within garden areas during the hours of 07:00 to
23:00 shall not exceed 55 dB LAeq,1hour.
2.
Employment Area E4 should be restricted to land use class B1 or offices to provide
additional noise buffering for existing dwellings on Oldends Lane.
3.
Prior to commencement, a Construction Environmental Management Plan will be
required to set out proposed actions to minimise disturbance to local residents during
the construction of the proposed development, I would request that it should contain
the following in addition to the usual requirements:•
•
a scheme specifying the provisions to be made to control dust emanating from
the site;
Page
115 ofon
206
a commitment to prohibit
bonfires
the site during the development;
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
•
•
details of how it is intended to utilise “best practicable means” to minimise noise
levels; and
a scheme demonstrating how it is intended to liaise with local residents during
the construction process, including how complaints will be handled.
4.
No construction site machinery or plant shall be operated, no process shall be carried
out and no construction-related deliveries taken at or dispatched from the site except
between the hours 08:00 and 18:00 on Mondays to Fridays, between 08:00 and 13:00
on Saturdays and not at any time on Sundays, Bank or Public Holidays.
5.
For the proposed employment areas, I would recommend that, prior to construction, a
detailed noise assessment should be required detailing the measures to be taken to
ensure that there is no increase in the general background noise environment from the
development, assessed in accordance with BS 4142:2014.
For guidance purposes, the following standards should be achieved:The mechanism proposed within section 10.4.20 of the Environmental Statement may
be applied but the proposed Rating Levels need to be adjusted to account for the
lower background levels measured at locations U4 and S4. Thus, the initial Rating
Levels (prior to adjustment for cumulative effects) would be 41 dB LAeq,1hour daytime
and 38 dB LAeq,15min night-time, expressed as a Rating Level at the boundary of any
dwelling.
However, as proposed in the Environmental Statement, it is likely that there will be a
number of units in each area, which could provide a cumulative increase in noise. It is
therefore proposed that the Rating Levels for each individual unit within the relevant
employment area should be reduced by 5 dB, i.e. 36 dB LAeq,1hour daytime and 33 dB
LAeq,15min night-time, expressed as a Rating Level at the boundary of any dwelling.
[Noise restriction conditions will be imposed on successful applications for approval of
reserved matters, the construction hours and the construction environmental
management plan recommended are reflected in the conditions recommended to be
placed on this outline application].
Environment Agency:
01/07/2014
Having assessed the Environmental Statement (ES), dated March 2014, prepared by
Pegasus Group, together with other relevant supporting documentation, we have no
objections, in principle to the proposed development at this outline stage. We do however
wish to provide the following comments for your attention, and have advice and
recommendations on planning conditions if planning permission is granted.
Page 116 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Involvement to Date
As you are aware we previously provided comments in our response dated 17 August 2012,
Ref: SV/2012/106425/01-L01 to your request for a Screening and Scoping Opinion, and
recommended given the scale and nature of the development that an Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA) of the proposal be undertaken. At that time we were aware that the site
had been identified as a possible strategic allocation, as part of the Stroud Local Plan, and
we provided comments and recommendations at that time as part of the consultation process
in respect to the proposed allocation. We are also aware from continued consultation with
your Strategic Planners on the emerging Local Plan (Submission Draft, dated December
2013) that whilst the whole of this current application site has not been brought forward as a
possible mixed use development at this time, the plan does identify 9.3 hectares of land to
the north of Stroudwater Industrial Estate, (Site SA2) for B1-B8 employment uses, which does
fall within this application site boundary.
From our involvement in assessing the emerging Local Plan, and the supporting evidence
base (namely the Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) Consultation Draft, dated 17 July 1013), it
is worth noting we have raised issues based on the information contained in the IDP, which
has highlighted some significant constraints to development where waste water infrastructure
is concerned, and we will refer to this in more detail later in our response.
Whilst we accept the Local Plan has only been subject to formal examination in part at this
stage, we would still expect the supporting evidence base, policies and any site specific
recommendations to have been taken into consideration and incorporated within the design
of this application.
Flood Risk, Hydrology & Drainage
Having assessed the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) prepared by Phoenix Design Partnership
Ltd dated March 2014, and Chapter 11 of the supporting ES we have the following comments
to make:
Fluvial Flood Risk
The proposal is for a mixed used development that has been correctly identified as having a
flood risk classification of ‘More Vulnerable’ as defined in Table 2 of the Planning Practice
Guidance (PPG), Paragraph: 066 Reference ID: 7-066-20140306.
The site incorporates all 4 flood zones based on our flood map extents as shown in Appendix
B of the FRA, though we are aware that the site has been assessed as part of your
Authority’s Level 2 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) work, as detailed in section 4.8
of the FRA.
In this instance given the Oldbury/Colliers Brook is designated an ‘Ordinary Watercourse’ that
the Level 2 SFRA work is more appropriate to define flood risk. We would advise that a
combination of the two models using the worst case scenario be used to define flood zones
3a (High Risk) and 2 (Medium Risk), whilst the Level 2 SFRA work is used to define Flood
Zone 3b (Functional Floodplain) and the extents used from any culvert blockage scenarios.
It is clear from both the results and the Indicative Masterplan that all the proposed
development is to be located within Flood Zone 1 (Low Risk) area, which is in accordance
with both the site specific policy recommendations resulting from the outputs of the Level 2
Page 117 of 206
SFRA work undertaken (Site 23), and the sequential approach as advocated in Paragraph
103 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
We also acknowledge that the work undertaken as part of the Level 2 SFRA, has provided
the basis for applying the Sequential Test, as required by the NPPF and in the accompanying
PPG.
Surface Water Drainage
In line with our strategic approach to the management of surface water (in accordance with
the Flood and Water Management Act) we can confirm that the overarching principle as set
out in sections 5 and 6 of the FRA are in line with the standard requirements set out within
the NPPF, with discharges being limited to the existing greenfield run off rate and attenuation
being provided for the worst case 1 in 100 year storm event including an allowance for
climate change (30%).
We also support the inclusion of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) and welcome the
commitments set out in the proposed drainage strategy and section 11.5.27 of the ES
(hydrology, Drainage & Flood Risk) that the green infrastructure for the site will include
ponds, basins, swales and open channels, in addition to at source SuDS such as
permeable/porous surfaces and rainwater harvesting.
We acknowledge this is an outline application at this stage, and therefore accept the matter
of detailed design can be dealt with by way of a condition at the reserved matters stage. In
line with our strategic approach any subsequent detailed design should be agreed in principle
with the Lead Local Flood Authority (in this instance Gloucestershire County Council), and
your own Land Drainage Engineer.
We also acknowledge and welcome in line with our previous recommendations both at the
Screening stage and through our strategic consultations that a Water Framework Directive
(WFD) Compliance Assessment has been carried out and included in Appendix 11.1 of the
ES. We note this further assesses, surface water run-off, attenuation and water quality,
alongside other components and activities which we will comment on in more detail, where
relevant later in our response.
We do note however on drawing 273-002-01 Rev F, which forms part of the preliminary
surface water drainage strategy that ponds B and E2 encroach into the extent of Flood Zone
3 as defined by the level 2 SFRA modelling. The latter pond may also be impacted upon
should a blockage occur at the downstream culvert, resulting in the levels set out in
paragraph 4.9 of the FRA. We would therefore expect the layout to be altered to reflect this
information, to avoid any loss in floodplain storage.
To ensure the above, we would recommend the following worded condition be attached to
any permission granted:
Page 118 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
CONDITION:
There shall be no storage of any materials including soil or raising of ground levels within that
part of the site liable to flood as shown highlighted on Drawing No. 273-001 Rev C.
REASON:
To ensure that there will be no increased risk of flooding to other land/properties due to
impedance of flood flows and/or reduction of flood storage capacity.
Foul Drainage Infrastructure
As part of our screening response and through on-going strategic consultation, we have
highlighted the need to ensure under the requirements of the WFD that any new
development demonstrates there is available foul water infrastructure and capacity within that
infrastructure to meet the additional demand without causing deterioration in the water quality
of the receiving water body, in this case the River Frome.
We do therefore welcome that this issue does appear to have been recognised and
investigated as part of the proposals.
It would appear from the evidence submitted and confirmation provided throughout the
relevant sections of the ES, Drainage Strategy, and WFD Compliance Assessment that
Severn Trent Water (STW) has carried out a ‘Sewer Capacity Assessment’ (SCA), (included
in Appendix 11.2 of the FRA and Drainage Strategy), which has concluded that the current
sewerage network can accommodate all of the proposed development, that no modifications
to the sewer network are required, and that the foul flows from the development will not
generate any additional flooding.
However, we wish to bring to your attention that in our discussions with your Strategic
Planners and STW, sewer capacity and infrastructure issues at this location have been
highlighted. Our most recent discussions during May [ 2015] this year indicate that
improvement works in this location are planned by STW and that strategic scale development
will need to be phased accordingly.
Our Environment Officer has also raised concerns about the potential for development of this
scale to impact on the water environment, as we understand there are issues with the
network and surcharging sewers under storm events causing pollution. Our WFD data
suggests that currently both water quality (ammonia/phosphate) and invertebrates may be
impacted by Stanley Downton sewage works (in comparison with data taken upstream and
from the other arm of the river Frome). STW is aware of these issues and the planned works
should improve the situation, but we would welcome clarification as to whether the
improvement works are intended to accommodate a development of this scale.
Given that the information from STW submitted with the application indicates there are no
issues then we are not minded to raise an objection on this matter. However as there appear
to be conflicting views on the situation regarding both the sewerage network (pipes) and the
treatment capacity (the Stanley Downton sewage treatment works), we would advise you
discuss this matter with your strategic planners in the first instance, and have regard to policy
CP6 in the emerging Stroud Local Plan. It may also be advisable to seek a further definitive
view from STW on the situation. We
would
Page
119welcome
of 206 clarification that you are satisfied with
the foul drainage infrastructure and capacity issues, and whether the development will be
phased in accordance with the delivery of infrastructure provision.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Protection and Enhancement of the Water Environment
The land-use change of a development of this size could, if not appropriately mitigated and
designed, adversely impact on the water quality and ecological status of the Frome
Waterbody, to which the proposed development drains. The Oldbury/Colliers Brook (a
tributary of the Frome and locally significant as a key wildlife site) flows through the proposed
development site. The habitat quality of this feature, associated ditches and the receiving
watercourses will need to be protected and enhanced. Currently the lower reaches of the
river Frome are failing to meet good ecological status under the WFD on phosphate elements
(see comments above under foul drainage infrastructure section). Other pressures include
barriers to fish passage, altered hyrdromorphology as a result of historic straightening and
over deepening, and urban runoff.
We therefore welcome the fact the developer has undertaken a WFD Assessment in
appendix 11.1. We largely agree with the assessment, and providing the appropriate
mitigation measures are implemented at the detailed stages then the development would be
acceptable in terms of the WFD and ecological protection and enhancement.
The assessment has identified various aspects of the development that will need to be
carefully designed in terms of the ecological impact of the development. These include the
provision of sustainable drainage systems (SuDS), watercourse buffer zones, watercourse
crossings and outfall structures. We have the below comments regarding mitigation
measures and other considerations to protect and enhance biodiversity of the riverine
corridor and other associated aquatic habitats within the project area and downstream.
Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS)
In addition to our comments above in the flood risk, hydrology and drainage section, we
would advise that it is important that the developer adheres to the findings of their WFD
Assessment in the detailed drainage design. We would expect the detailed design on the
SuDS ponds to be installed on the site to be designed to maximise biodiversity as well as
providing water storage and quality improvements. We would expect to see a full range of
SuDS techniques and appropriate treatment trains as per CIRIA guidelines. The development
should deliver SuDS that enhance the local ecological community and provide a suitable
level of pollutant removal of runoff, and storm water attenuation to minimise impact on
watercourses and the currently failing WFD Water Body (River Frome).
Watercourse buffer zones
In the Environmental Statement Section 6.5.38 says “streams will be well buffered from any
built form by species- rich grassland and new tree planting”. The distance has not been
specified. Sufficient space will need to be provided between proposed buildings and the
watercourse to ensure a safe, attractive and wildlife friendly corridor with adequate access for
maintenance.
Page 120 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
It is important that land levels are not raised adjacent to any watercourse and a lower corridor
is retained or created. Maintaining a more naturalistic topography will help maintain or
enhance the character of the river corridor. Moreover lower river walls or banks enable better
views and enjoyment of the water environment.
Any replacement or complimentary planting along the stream corridors (and across the site)
should use native species with proven local provenance. We would recommend that any
trees/ hedgerow removal should be replaced at a minimum of a 5:1 ratio. Trees and plants of
proven local provenance significantly reduce the risk of alien diseases and pests being
introduced or spread. Using native and locally common species will integrate planting into the
local environment. Planting at a 5:1 ratio will increase the probability of plants surviving to
maturity.
As noted within the ES Part 6.3.56, invasive species are present on site adjacent to the
watercourse. We would expect the developer to adopt a management plan for invasive
species including the removal of Japanese Knotweed and Himalayan Balsam from the
watercourse corridor. This should help to reduce and prevent the further spread of these
invasive species, and assist in wider aims of eradicating invasive species from the River
Frome catchment.
As these issues are generally matters for the detailed layout and landscaping we do not
consider the buffer distance and watercourse corridor design and management measures
need to be specified at this outline stage. However we would expect any detailed designs to
incorporate an adequate river corridor buffer that maintains and enhances a robust wildlife
corridor, appropriate planting and suitable management including of invasive species.
Watercourse crossings
An important ecological requirement of the development is that any crossing must, as far as
possible, ensure that wildlife can move through the river system under a range of flood flows.
Design Manual for Roads and Bridges DMRB Volume 10 (Highways Agency, 2001) provides
guidance on much of the above; part 4 relates to otters. We would expect any detailed
designs to accord with this guidance.
We would encourage the use of open span or open arch bridges rather than culverting
watercourses to maintain mammal passage and the natural bed of the stream for both
terrestrial and aquatic species. Only if open span or open arch bridges are technically
unfeasible should culverts be considered. If a culvert is to be used it will need a depressed
invert (600 mm below design bed level) to avoid the introduction of a hard bed or invert with
the risk or creating a `step` and hydraulic jump at the inlet to the culvert or adversely affect
the sediment transport function of the watercourse .
Appropriate water depth, water velocity and flow variety will need to be maintained or created
so as to provide adequate swimming space for fish, avoid the introduction of physical or
behavioural barriers and create suitable resting areas below the entrance.
Given that the detailed design of watercourse crossings is not necessary at the outline stage,
you may feel that a suitable condition could secure these aspects at the detailed stage.
However we would note that the design would need to be submitted as part of a Flood
Defence Consent (FDC). As therePage
are 121
onlyofOrdinary
Watercourses at the site then the
206
developer will need to apply to the LLFA for FDC. We would therefore advise the developer
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
to adhere to these guidelines, and those proposed in the submitted WFD Assessment, when
submitted their FDC application(s).
Outfall structures
The potential impact of outfall structures into the existing watercourses has been referred to
in the WFD Assessment. Whilst it may be possible to use existing outfalls, opportunities to
rationalise them should be examined. The WFD Assessment states surface water outfalls will
be kept to a minimum and will discharge to a short section of channel as opposed to direct to
the watercourse. We welcome this mitigation measure, it has been the convention for many
years to site outfalls on the river bank and it is becoming increasingly apparent that the
proliferation of engineered structures is adversely affecting the natural functioning and
appearance of watercourses. We are currently advocating that new outfall structures are set
back from the bank as far as is practical with a smaller outfall discharging into a ditch or
swale, ideally a sinuous attractive feature. This has the following advantages: avoiding the
introduction of a fixed point on the river bank therefore allowing greater geomorphologic
flexibility in the channel; the structure is less vulnerable to erosion and costly remedial work;
the energy in the flow from the outfall can be reduced; reduced visual impact and an off
stream fish refuge can be created.
Again, these aspects will be a requirement of FDC and we would expect the developer to
adhere to this advice in any detailed submissions, both to the LLFA for FDC and at any future
Reserved Matters planning stage should you see fit to condition these ecological elements of
the proposed development.
SDC Water Resource Engineer:
15/04/2014
The FRA adequately demonstrates that the site is suitable for development without flood risk
and without causing an increase in flood risk to others, including allowances for climate
change. It also demonstrates how SuDS will be used to manage surface water from the
development, and to ensure that water quality in the Colliers Brook and downstream
watercourses is not adversely affected. Phasing of the SuDS build will need to be agreed to
ensure that any development is preceded by the SuDS requirements to ensure that flood risk
off site is always managed.
I have no objection to this development with detailed drainage designs forming reserved
matters based on principles defined in the FRA.
Cotswold Canals Trust:
25/04/2014
The Cotswold Canals Trust neither supports nor objects to the proposed development.
However as this is a major proposal for a development very close to the route of the
Stroudwater Navigation which passes immediately to the south of the proposed site we wish
to make the following comments.
Page 122 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The Trust is firmly of the view that, should the development receive planning permission, it
will require facilities for local travel as well as recreation that cannot be provided within the
area of the proposed development itself. The CCT therefore draws SDC's attention to all the
following:
The 2005 SAVED POLICY RL8 which states:
"Where appropriate, planning obligations will be sought that contribute towards the
improvement or restoration of the related canal and towpaths."
The CURRENT DRAFT LOCAL PLAN also has many supportive references to the
restoration of the canals.
"There are opportunities to utilise the canal corridor to achieve wider objectives, including
improving transport infrastructure, extending public access and making public realm
improvements".
In addition˜Strategic Objective SO4 - transport and travel' says:
"Development in the Stroud Valleys will contribute funds to the restoration of the canal and
towpaths, as well as potentially designing in new links across the development sites, thereby
improving direct access for surrounding communities as well as those occupying the
development."
The guiding principles for the Stonehouse cluster include:
"Focus on canal restoration and canal corridor conservation and regeneration; improve
physical accessibility between canal and town centre".
Most significantly, Delivery Policy ES11 Maintaining, restoring and regenerating the District's
canals.
"Reasonably related financial contributions may be sought via Community Infrastructure Levy
or, where appropriate, via legal agreements for contributions towards the improvement or
restoration of the related canal and towpaths".
CiL regulation 122 sets out what matters it is lawful for a Section106 to seek contributions for,
in summary contributions must mitigate only the effects of the development applied for, they
may not seek contributions towards wider community benefits, CIL will do this, and such
contributions within a section 106 must be reasonable and proportional to the development
applied for.
24/7/2015
Yesterday afternoon we were contacted by Karen Coleburn (of SDC) with regard to this
development but we have not been contacted by the applicant yet and nor has there been
any communication. Recently apart from across the room at the Local Plan Public Inquiry
where the applicant seemed to be trying to wriggle out of as much as possible. So far nothing
whatsoever has been discussed properly, let alone offered, in respect of this development.
If you look back through your records, you will find that we objected to the planning
application and made representations to the Local Plan Inquiry along with a very large
number of other people on the grounds
development was offering very little to assist
Pagethat
123this
of 206
the canal restoration project apart from the a contribution towards the towpath. The root of
the problem seemed to be the elimination of the use of CIL contributions in respect of this,
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
and apparently every other major development, within the proposed housing allocation. The
outcome of this is still awaited but I think it is important that the views of a very substantial
number of objectors are taken into account in this matter.
With regard to the towpath, it is obvious that this is going to be very heavily used by those
who move into this new development and that it needs to be upgraded. Furthermore, it has
the prospect of providing an excellent outlet for recreational use as well as forming an off
road sustainable commuting route into Stroud and also Gloucester for cyclists. The towpath
between The Ocean (where the railway crosses at Stonehouse) and Stroud has almost all
been upgraded for multi-user use as part of the Phase 1A canal restoration project led by
SDC.
There is a particular problem in installing an adequate multi-use towpath along the Bonds Mill
embankment west of The Ocean in that the top of the embankment is too narrow. To fix this
will require a new canal edge (with good erosion protection) to be created further into the
canal and backfilled to create the necessary width. We consider it essential that this work is
included within the scope of the S.106 requirement in addition to simply widening and
improving the surface elsewhere. Only doing the length Eastington to Stonehouse does not
recognise the value of a westward link to the Gloucester & Sharpness Canal to make the
connection with Gloucester? Obviously we would prefer both.
Timing of the work will be important as we are in the process of submitting a bid to the
Heritage Lottery Fund for £15 million to enable the Phase 1B canal restoration to take place.
SDC are a partner in this project which is why I have copied in Dave Marshall. We would
want any developer contribution to count as matched funding and that imposes a window
during which the work would need to be carried out. Probably the best way forward would be
a Developer financial contribution to cover the work (based on a commercial valuation) to the
Trust and we would have the work done at the appropriate time (which at the moment looks
like 2018-19 which would probably fit quite well with the timescales of the development).
Because of the need to fit in with the main HLF Phase 1B project, a S.106 that has triggers in
it related to the stage of the development itself would not be satisfactory as this makes the
funding unpredictable. A backstop date could be agreed to cover the eventuality of the HLF
matched funding opportunity not being exercisable.
(Following receipt of this consultation response a fully costed proposal to upgrade the canal
footpath in line with the adopted policy was received (30/11/15) from Jon Pontefract Canal
Project - Volunteer Manager and has resulted in a contribution being included in the S106).
Gloucestershire Constabulary:
11/06/2014
I write on behalf the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Gloucestershire (OPCC
Gloucestershire) and Gloucestershire Constabulary in connection with the above planning
application for 1350 dwellings on land west of Stonehouse. This proposed development will
impact on local policing provided by the Constabulary and will require mitigations to OPCC
Gloucestershire’s capital facilities.
To address these points, this letter sets out a request for an appropriate level of developer
contribution with supporting information
justify
how the requested developer contribution
Page to
124
of 206
has been arrived at in line with relevant planning guidance.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Our current request for a policing contribution does include automatic number plate
recognition (ANPR) - £381,183.53
Why we seek Contributions
A primary issue for Gloucestershire Police is to ensure that new development of this scale
makes adequate provision for the future Policing needs that it will generate. Like some other
public services our primary funding is insufficient to be able to add capital infrastructures to
support major new development when and wherever this occurs. Further there are no
bespoke capital funding regimes, eg like Building Schools for the Future or the Health Lift, to
provide capital re investment in our facilities. We fund capital infrastructures by borrowing.
However, in a service where 90% of our budget is staffing related, our capital programme can
only be used to overcome pressing issues with our existing facilities eg the new custody
facility, technological replacements and upgrades or to re provide essential facilities like
vehicles once these can no longer be used. This situation has been recognised by the
Association of Chief Police Officers nationally for some time and there are public statements
which explain our particular funding difficulties.
Faced with unprecedented levels of growth being proposed across our c county
Gloucestershire Police have resolved to seek developer contributions to ensure that existing
levels of service can be maintained as this growth takes place.
We are a regular and constant participant in the statutory Planning process evidencing the
impact of growth through work with local Councils in their Plan making, preparation of
guidance, preparations for CIL and the consideration of individual Planning applications
including attendance at appeals. Police nationally encourage this approach to offset the
impact of growth on the Police service.
The Policing impact of 1,350 additional houses at the site.
The proposed development will increase the population of this settlement by at least 3,240
people. It is a fact that 1350 new houses will bring additional Policing demands and
particularly as there is no Policing demand from what is currently open fields. I do not doubt
that there will be a corresponding increase in crime and demand from new residents for
Policing services across a wide spectrum of support and intervention as they go about their
daily lives at the site, in the town and across the County.
Empirical data indicates the direct and additional impacts of the development on local
Policing that will be manifested in demand and responses in the following areas•
•
•
•
•
At least 469 additional calls and responses per year via our control centre.
Attendance to at least an additional 94 emergency events as a result of the proposed
development each year.
At least 375 non emergency events to follow up with public contact as a result of the
proposed development each year.
92 additional recorded crimes as a result of the development per year based on local
parish area crime and household data. In addition at least 126 recorded anti social
behaviour incidents each year as a result of the development.
The demand for increased patrol
Pagecover.
125 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
•
•
•
Additional vehicle use relating to a contribution towards the replacement of a vehicle
over a 4 year replacement period.
Additional demand for access to beat staff from the Stroud Local Policing units.
Additional Policing cover and interventions in all the areas described when considering
staffing and functions above and for additional accommodation from which to deliver
these.
Planning Policy justifications for a Policing contribution
National Policy
The National Policy position to support our request exists in NPPF. Securing sufficient
facilities and services to meet local needs is a Core Planning Principle [para 17]. Planning is
to deliver facilities and services that communities need [para 70] and Supplementary
Planning documents can assist applicants in this. Plan policies should deliver the provision of
security infrastructure and other local facilities [para 156]. Plan policy and decision making
should be seamless [para 186]. Infrastructure Planning should accompany development
planning by LPAs [177] who should work collaboratively with infrastructure Providers [162].
NPPF seeks healthy and inclusive environments where crime and disorder and the fear of
crime do not undermine the quality of life [69].
The key statutory tests for the use of Section106 Agreements are set out in R122(2) of the
CIL regulations 2010 and echoed in paragraph 204 of the NPPF March 2012. This regulation
introduced into law three tests for planning obligations. Obligations should be:•
•
•
necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms
directly related to the development
fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development
Local Planning Policy
The currently relevant Local Plan for Development Control Purposes remains the Stroud
District Local Plan as adopted in November 2005 and covering the period to end 2011. This
Local Plan contains saved Policy GE 7 which states:
“Where development is acceptable in principle under the policies of this plan, development
proposals will be expected to have regard to existing levels of infrastructure, services and
amenities.
Where development gives rise to the need for the provision of new or extended public and
community services, the Council will assess the nature and extent of planning obligations
required as a result of new development in accordance with National Planning Guidance
Planning permission will not normally be granted until the Planning Authority is satisfied, by
imposing conditions, or where these are not appropriate or adequate, by seeking a legal
agreement, that an appropriate level of infrastructure, services and amenities required as a
consequence of and directly related to, the development is capable of being, and will be,
provided within the timescale of the proposed development and in accordance with an
agreed phasing programme.”
Page 126 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
This policy establishes a level of policy support for developer contributions towards
infrastructure and services, which includes the Police.
Stroud District Council does not have a Supplementary Planning Document dealing with
developer contributions or planning obligations.
The Stroud District Council’s Submission draft Local Plan 2014 includes Policy CP 6 which
provides guidance on infrastructure and developer contributions and states:
“The Council will work with partners to ensure that infrastructure will be in place at the right
time to meet the needs of the District and to support the development strategy. This will be
achieved by:
1.
The preparation and regular review of the Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) for the
District that will set out the infrastructure to be provided by partners, including the
public sector and utilities
2.
Securing contributions to all aspects of land use, infrastructure and services that may
be affected by development, in accordance with the District Council’s identified
priorities and objectives for delivering sustainable communities
3.
The preparation of a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)charging schedule that sets
out the level of developer contributions towards new or upgraded infrastructure to
support the overall development strategy
4.
Negotiating appropriate planning obligations to mitigate any adverse impacts of
proposed development – while avoiding duplication of payments made through CIL.
Where implementation of a development would create a need to provide additional or
improved infrastructure and amenities, would have an impact on the existing standard
of infrastructure provided, or would exacerbate an existing deficiency in their provision,
the developer will be expected to make up that provision for those local communities
affected. Where the developer is unable to make such provision, the Council will
require the developer to make a proportionate contribution to the overall cost of such
provision through a legal agreement and/or Community Infrastructure Levy.
Various types of contribution will be used, including the following:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
In-kind contributions and financial payments
Phased payments and one-off payments
Maintenance payments
Pooled contributions
A combination of the above.”
We have also delivered planning representations to the Joint Core Strategy Authorities,
Cotswolds, Forest of Dean and Stroud district Council outlining the need for developer
contributions to deliver new policing infrastructure.
Developer Obligations towards Police
Page Infrastructure
127 of 206
On the basis that an increase in population arising from the development proposals would
impact on the ability of the Police to deliver an effective and efficient service, it is reasonable
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
that developers contribute towards mitigating these impacts via Planning Obligations. In the
Association of Chief Police Officers guidance from Ian Dove QC infrastructure is defined :“The first point to note is that “infrastructure” is not a narrowly defined term. Section 216 of
the Planning Act 2008 provides a list of “infrastructure” but is clear that that list is nonexhaustive. That fact is demonstrated by the use of the word “includes” prior to the list being
set out. In my view there is no difficulty in the proposition that contributions towards Police
infrastructure can be within the definition of infrastructure for the purposes of the 2008 Act. In
policy terms this is reinforced by the reference to security infrastructure in paragraph 156 of
the National Planning Policy Framework.
Furthermore infrastructure is of course not limited to buildings. In the context of the police’s
infrastructure the kind of items which could be included have been provided in my
instructions and includes equipment such as vehicles and bicycles, communications
technology and surveillance infrastructure such as CCTV equipment.”
The Police contribution request
A total contribution request of £381,183.53 is sought to mitigate the additional impacts of this
development because our existing infrastructures do not have the capacity to meet these and
because, like some other services, we do not have the funding ability to respond to growth
proposed. We anticipate using rate revenues to pay for staff salaries and our day to day
routine additional costs (eg call charges on telephony and Airwaves, vehicle maintenance
and so on).
Police expect to agree a programme to procure these additional facilities and have no
difficulty including this as a clause in a legal agreement. We are committed to procure these
items subject to the contribution sought. Contributions are only sought that are related in
scale and kind to the development and so some infrastructures will not be entirely funded as
a result. Police will pay the remaining amount if no other developers contribute towards
Policing in the Stroud local policing area. This will mean that funds will have to be diverted
away from other areas of deployment whilst seeking to maintain our priority as far as front
line Policing is concerned.
As a further justification of our request, we confirm that the contribution will be used wholly to
meet the direct impacts of this development and wholly in delivering Policing to it. Without the
development in place it is reasonable to forecast the impacts it will generate using
information about the known Policing demands of comparable local development. We believe
the Framework encourages this and there is no more reliable comparators than those used in
this request.
The development should make provision to mitigate the direct and additional Policing impacts
it will generate and cannot depend on the Police to just absorb these within existing facilities
with limited capacities and where Police have no flexibility in our funding to do this. This has
been the situation since 2010 when Gloucestershire Police started to seek contributions. It is
not forced by current spending reductions although strictures across the public sector reenforce the need to ensure developments mitigate the direct additional impacts they cause.
Because of the very serious implications
for of
Policing
Page 128
206 of major developments, like this one,
Police nationally have taken advice about the best way to proceed in the transition period
prior to the CIL regime. As a result Gloucestershire Police no longer make requests based on
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
a formula but solely in relation to the development under consideration; its direct impacts on
Policing and the necessary mitigations that it should provide.
What follows is a detailed explanation of Methodologies used to calculate the contribution
and our application of the NPPF tests to justify each part.
Mitigation of impacts and methodologies identified by Gloucestershire Police.
Baseline background. At October 2012 total floor space occupied by the Force to deliver
Policing to this County was 32409 m2. We employed 1,199 police officers and 132 PCSOs
and 633 police staff to do this.
Existing households in the County (2009/10) was 49,500 in the Stroud local policing area.
136 police officers and 21 PCSOs delivered policing services in Stroud local policing area.
21 police staff supported delivery of policing services directly to the Stroud local policing
area.
Households to staff for Stroud is 96:1
Floorspace to staff Forcewide is 16.78 m2.
Equipping staff.
Additional staff needed to Police the development will require additional equipment.
For a Police Officer the additional equipment items are uniform £898, Workstation £1186,
IPLDP probationers induction training £5854. Uniformed officers work in shifts where
workstations can be shared and as a result start up cost will be £8422 per uniformed officer.
For other staff the additional equipment items are workstation £1853 and training £300, total
£2153.
The average cost of employing and equipping a new member of police staff is £3688.
Because the development is forecast to generate the need to employ 9 additional members
of staff the contribution for equipment should be £58,458 from this new development. (Based
the average cost of equipping a member of staff - 8422+3688 -: 2 X 9)
The Force could not have officers attending this development with less than adequate
equipment with un-necessary risks to themselves and occupiers served.
Is the contribution necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms?
Crime and community safety are Planning considerations and the Councils Core Strategy
content further demonstrates this. The Framework identifies the need to achieve security in
new development and makes provisions to deliver this through the planning system.
Deployment of equipped staff is fundamental to delivering community safety and mitigating
crime.
Is it directly related to the development?
The Policing demands of this development are identified and Police mitigation of these can
only be delivered by adequately equipped
staff.
Page 129
of 206
Is the contribution fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development?
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
This is a residential development and the Policing demands it will generate are known by
comparison with local residential development. Demand and mitigations have been
determined by the scale of the development.
Police vehicles In managing and responding to crime a number of different vehicles can be
deployed ranging GRV patrol cars, unmarked general support vehicles, Public Service Unit
vans and minibuses, scientific [eg SOCO] vehicles, pursuit vehicles - 4x4 and high speed,
motorcycles and so on. Current fleet deployment to the Stroud area is 32 vehicles serving
49,500 existing households. The average equipped cost of a vehicle is £17,300. We replace
vehicles on average every 4 years and although there is some resale value it is minimal.
Based on this existing level of deployment to the locality we forecast additional demands as a
result of this application.
3 units (vehicles) at value £553,600
Existing households Stroud 49,500 = £11.81 per H hold
In relation to this particular development additional vehicle costs to deliver Policing and meet
community safety needs will be £15,098. This will be required when the cycle of replacement
in the Stroud area and the building of the new development coincide. Impact of the
development without the contribution will be pressure to spread existing transport more thinly.
Residents of the new development and their representatives will expect the same degree of
cover as elsewhere in the locality and existing residents will expect existing cover to be
maintained and not reduced as a result of the new development.
Is the contribution necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms?
Use of vehicles is fundamental to deliver community safety and address crime especially at
Neighbourhood level.
Is it directly related to the development?
Fleet deployment is related to the known Policing demands of comparable development in
the locality. The direct demand from the new development can be accurately forecast.
Delivering Policing direct to this development will not be possible without additional vehicles
to do so.
Is the contribution fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development?
This is a residential development and the Police vehicle demands it will generate are known
by comparison with deployment to other local residential development. Level of demand and
mitigations have been determined by the scale of the development and demonstrate only a
proportion of a vehicles’ time will be spent policing it. We do not therefore seek the cost of a
whole vehicle.
Police Database capacity. This is a secured stand alone information source integrating a
variety of data nationally and allowing this to be compared over time in relation to individuals
and locations. Additional hits as a result of the development to access existing crime
information and add more crime data to be accessed by more staff generate a need to add
capacity to this system. Dedicated hardware is used with our contribution to this at £165,420
per annum. In addition, local serversPage
are replaced
every 5 years at £5k
130 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
To serve the existing households in the Stroud district costs £0.56 per household per year.
An additional 1350 houses equates to £756 per annum.
We require a one off cost of £756 to increase capacity. Failure to increase PND capacity in
step with growth the subject of this application will directly impact the capacity of the Force to
rapidly access and respond to crime information.
Is the contribution necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms?
Deployment to adequately deliver community safety will not be met where this is prejudiced
by insufficient capacity in the Police PND system.
Is it directly related to the development?
The additional demands of this development in relation to this infrastructure have been
identified as have mitigations.
Is the contribution fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development?
This is a residential development and the Policing demands it will generate, in terms of PND
use, are known by comparison with other local residential development. The development is
not built and this is a reasonable way to forecast this impact. Demand and mitigations have
been determined by the scale of the development.
Control Room telephony Police control room call handling equipment is used to capacity at
peak times. Our call handling centre at Waterwells directs all calls and deploys resources to
respond and continue monitoring. We know the capacity of the technology and the calls it
currently handles [fixed around minimum times with callers] and will be expected to handle as
a result of the new development. In order to deal with all our calls across the County
telephony, lines and licences are required at a total cost of £ 22,530 per year. This currently
cost 8p per household.
The proposed 1350 additional houses in the Local Policing Area are forecast to generate 469
additional calls per year. We request a one off contribution of £113.53 to pay for additional
lines and licences.
There will be a call handling impact and delays in response times if we attempt to serve this
development with our current telephony systems.
Is the contribution necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms?
Crime and community safety are Planning considerations and the Councils Core Strategy
content further demonstrates this. NPPF identifies need to achieve security in new
development and makes provisions to deliver this through the planning system. These
considerations will not be met where Policing delivery is prejudiced by insufficient telephony
capacity to take calls and deploy responses in good time.
Is it directly related to the development?
The additional demands of this development in relation to this infrastructure have been
identified as have mitigations.
Is the contribution fairly and reasonably
scale and kind to the development?
Pagerelated
131 ofin206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
This is a residential development and the Policing demands it will generate, in terms of use of
control room telephony, are known by comparison with other local residential development.
Demand and mitigations have been determined by the scale of the development.
ANPR CCTV Deployment These cameras are server linked to identify number plates of
vehicles in use for crime. Recent public consultation saw significant support for the extension
of this intelligence led solution to counter both local and travelling criminality impacting on the
communities of Gloucestershire. There are plans to extend coverage of this technology
initially in to Cheltenham and subsequently throughout the county.
Expansion of this system should be considered in conjunction with any new or planned
development, enabling the Constabulary to put the right resource at the right place against
the right risk and providing the opportunity for detections to become less resource intensive.
We will install these as resources permit however our financially constrained programme
makes no provision for the impacts of additional areas of housing.
Unit cost is £9,000 which includes installation and APN links. There are annual running cost
£2,484 per year for data from O2 and our managed provider Wireless logic.
We require 2 ANPR cameras on the A419/Grove Lane Roundabout and arterial route
between junction 13 of the M5 and Stroud at a cost of £18,000.
Is the contribution necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms?
Deployment of CCTV technologies significantly increases detection and deterrence with
reduced need for staff presence and particularly contributes towards achieving community
safety at neighbourhood level. This will be prejudiced where new development places
additional demands on existing deployment without mitigation and the ability of these
technologies to deliver safety is undermined where new development adds network gaps.
Is it directly related to the development?
The additional demands of this development in relation to this infrastructure have been
identified as have mitigations. The nature of the development and its size and location in
relation to the existing settlement and camera deployment are a direct consideration in these
technologies.
Is the contribution fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development?
This is a residential development and the Policing demands it will generate, in terms of
additional crime and vehicle movements, are known by comparison with other similar
residential development in the locality. Demand and mitigations have been determined by the
scale of the development.
Premises Within the Stroud local policing areas Neighbourhood Policing is delivered from
premises at Stroud and Dursley. 94 additional members of staff will need to be
accommodated to serve the development. Occupation of local and Force wide premises is
maintained to capacity. Premises cost is amount of floorspace per staff member (15.6m2) x
number of staff generated by the development (9) x Build and build cost (£1,900m2) giving a
total of £285,408 from this development. The latter is the build cost in use by Force Estates
and has been externally verified by consultants.
Page 132 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
This will be a contribution towards the refurbishment and upgrading of Stroud Police Station
and a contribution to building works required to upgrade our response facility.
Gloucestershire Police own the freeholds of these buildings and have in house expertise able
to deliver property projects.
In relation to the new premises there are proposals and estimated capital costs to replace the
main police stations in Gloucester and Cheltenham and other premises which require
refurbishment and upgrade. This programme does not take into account the predicted
growth and our requirements across the County to deliver policing as demand increases. It is
estimated that some 90,000 new dwellings will be built over the next 10 to 20 years.
A number of functions necessary to Police the new development at Stonehouse are no
longer fit for purpose.
It is estimated that the total cost of our countywide estates strategy which does not take into
account the predicted growth will already be in the region of £14 million (Appendix A).
Clearly we will be unable to fully fund this programme without contributions and our future
provision of infrastructure will be severely restricted.
Our infrastructure requirements have been made clear in the Stroud Strategy IDP report.
Is the contribution necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms?
Crime and community safety are Planning considerations and accommodating staff in the
optimum location to serve the development is essential if this is to be achieved.
Is it directly related to the development?
The additional staffing needs the development will generate have been established by
reference to existing local deployment reflecting the actual Policing demands and crime
patterns of the locality. In a similar vein the premises requirements that result from the need
to accommodate additional staff at these levels is known. A direct relationship between the
development, additional staffing and accommodation is demonstrated and it is appropriate to
mitigate this through the planning system.
Page 133 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Is the contribution fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development?
This is a residential development and the accommodation needs of staff delivering Policing to
meet local demands of development of this nature are known. It is based on the scale and
kind of residential development.
Additional Equipment for policing point serving the locality. This new development will
increase the demand for local accessibility to Policing. Police are delivering policing points to
existing communities and have a model for these reflected in current provision to serve
existing residents from Parish Council offices, libraries and similar premises. The provision
of a room in the community hub is requested and in addition a contribution of £2000 to equip
it with the necessary mobile information technology functionality.
In association with this policing point Police expect to meet the demand for additional local
crime initiatives as a result of new development. We have restricted funds to deliver crime
prevention initiatives to existing and new development which pays for equipment such as
Smartwater kits (fluid, sprays, detectors) or signage for local occupiers to use. We request
that the developer contribute £1 per new unit towards the cost of these initiatives. A
smartwater kit for example costs £16.
Is the contribution necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms?
Crime and community safety are Planning considerations and ensuring accessibility for the
public to Policing is important to community safety, combating and reducing crime and the
fear of crime.
Is it directly related to the development?
The use of a room in the community hub as a local policing point and a proportionate
contribution towards equipment there is sought.
Is the contribution fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development?
This is a residential development and accessibility to beat Policing for residents is an
increasing part of the service. More policing points are being provided to existing
communities but there is no capacity to extend these to cover additional areas of housing.
The contribution is based on the scale and kind of residential development and is
proportional.
SUMMARY OF CONTRIBUTION REQUESTED
Start up equipment
Vehicles
PND additions
Additional call handling
ANPR
Premises
Policing point equipment
Total
£ 58,458
£ 15,098
£
756
£
113.53
£ 18,000
£ 285,408
£ 3,350
£ 372,183.53
Page 134 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Conclusion
Without the necessary contribution the development will be unacceptable in planning terms
and permission should not be granted as indicated in NPPF Guidance. The lack of capacity
in existing infrastructure to accommodate the population growth and associated demands
occasioned by the development means that it is necessary for the developer of the site to
provide a contribution so the situation might be remedied. The request is directly related to
the development and the direct Policing impacts it will generate based on an examination of
demand levels in the parish, settlement, adjacent areas and existing Policing demands and
deployment in relation to this. The request is wholly related to the scale and kind of the
application development.
I am happy to provide a phased payment approach to the contributions on the understanding
that our total funding request is agreed under the S106 terms when planning permission is
granted. However I am unable to estimate when funding will be required until we have
established the phasing of your build. Therefore I believe this needs to be discussed and I
would welcome the opportunity to meet with you to clarify any of the issues of developer
contributions towards necessary Police infrastructure prior to determination of the planning
application.
(The concerns of the policing authority are understood however such concerns have been
raised in the past but have not ever been incorporated into SDC decisions and discussions
are continuing to incorporate capital projects within the to be formulated CIL schedule. In
addition the funding of capital items as well as operational costs is already catered for as part
of the GCC council tax precept).
Natural England:
06/05/2014
The Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended)
The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended)
The proposal is for 1,350 houses and 9.3ha of employment land on a 98ha site at Nastend,
west of Stonehouse. The site is 1km from the boundary of the Cotswolds Area of Outstanding
Natural Beauty (AONB). The site is 5km from the Severn Estuary Site of Special Scientific
Interest (SSSI), Special Protection Area (SPA), Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and
Ramsar site which includes internationally important populations of waterfowl, invertebrate
populations of considerable interest, large populations of migratory fish, including rare
species and estuarine habitats of European importance. The site is 5km from Woodchester
Park SSSI (notified for Greater Horseshoe maternity roost, grassland and woodland flora),
5km from Rodborough Common SAC (notified for grassland) and 2.7km from Frampton
Pools SSSI (notified for standing water habitat).
The site is also 30m from the River Frome Key Wildlife Site.
Protected Sites
Given the distances involved, Natural England does not consider the proposal will have a
significant impact on international or nationally designated sites.
Protected Landscapes
Page 135 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The site is 1km from the boundary of the Cotswolds AONB and is visible from important
public viewpoints, such as Haresfield Beacon (located on the Cotswold Way National Trail),
from within the AONB. Although some distance from the site, the proposed development is
very large and could have an adverse impact on views from the AONB if the development is
not designed very carefully and with the longer distance views in mind. For example, green
roofs on industrial buildings will be less obvious than white roofs when viewed from the
AONB.
The Cotswold Conservation Board should be consulted.
Protected Species
We have not assessed this application and associated documents for impacts on protected
species.
Soils and Land Quality
From the documents accompanying the consultation we consider this application falls outside
the scope of the Development Management Procedure Order (as amended) consultation
arrangements, as the proposed development would not appear to lead to the loss of over 20
ha ‘best and most versatile’ agricultural land (paragraph 112 of the National Planning Policy
Framework).
For this reason we do not propose to make any detailed comments in relation to agricultural
land quality and soils, although more general guidance is available in Defra Construction
Code of Practice for the Sustainable Use of Soils on Construction Sites, and we recommend
that this is followed. If, however, you consider the proposal has significant implications for
further loss of ‘best and most versatile’ agricultural land, we would be pleased to discuss the
matter further
Biodiversity enhancement
The development should aim to enhance the biodiversity of the site through the retention and
enhancement of watercourses, trees and hedges on the site. These features should be part
of a connected mosaic landscape that links to linear landscape features outside the site to
provide important commuting routes for wildlife. This is particularly important given the
proximity of the site to the River Frome Key Wildlife Site.
The application provides opportunities to incorporate features into the design which are
beneficial to wildlife, such as the incorporation of roosting opportunities for bats and the
installation of bird nest boxes for house martins, house sparrows and swifts and habitat
enhancement. The authority should consider securing measures to enhance the biodiversity
of the site.
This is in accordance with Paragraph 118 of the NPPF. Additionally, we would draw your
attention to Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006) which
states that ‘Every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is
consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving
biodiversity’. Section 40(3) of the same Act also states that ‘conserving biodiversity includes,
in relation to a living organism or type of habitat, restoring or enhancing a population or
habitat’. Page 3 of 3
Page 136 of 206
Green Infrastructure (GI)
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Well-designed green infrastructure (GI) should be a key part of the scheme, delivering
ecological mitigation and enhancements. Green infrastructure can perform a range of
functions including improved flood risk management, provision of accessible green space,
climate change adaptation and biodiversity enhancement. Evidence and advice on green
infrastructure, including the economic benefits of GI can be found on the Natural England
Green Infrastructure web pages.
7/12/15
A further consultation response was received from Natural England as follows:
Thank you for your consultation on the additional information relating to this application,
which includes an ES Addendum on visitor surveys and the potential for likely significant
effects on the Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar site.
The Local Planning Authority (LPA) as competent authority under the Habitats Regulations
has concluded that mitigation is required in order to ensure no likely significant effects on the
Severn Estuary. The LPA recommends the provision of further on-site green infrastructure to
cater for local recreational needs and a contribution towards plans to improve the
Stroudwater Canal towpath which would provide an alternative destination to the Severn
Estuary. It is the LPA’s conclusion that with this mitigation in place, there are no likely
significant effects on the Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar.
Based on the evidence we have at this time and our understanding of the issue and possible
mitigation measures more generally, Natural England agrees with the LPA’s conclusion of no
likely significant effects with the proposed mitigation. We advise that this mitigation is secured
through planning conditions, as proposed by the LPA’s retained ecologist.
Stroud District Council has commissioned an investigation of the effects of recreation on the
Severn Estuary SAC/SPA/Ramsar site. If this study changes our understanding of the
recreational impacts on the Severn Estuary by reserved matters stage then the best available
information at that time would need to be considered (as confirmed in recent case law, case
101704 [DE]). Therefore further Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) could still be
required at a later date.
.
Severn Trent:
01/05/2015
Thank you for the consultation, please find my comments below;
Condition: The development hereby proposed should not commence until written
confirmation is provided to the Local Planning Authority confirming whether any necessary off
site drainage improvements will need to be completed by Severn Trent Water.
Reason: To prevent flooding from the existing public sewerage system, and to afford Severn
Trent Water time to investigate any necessary capacity improvements.
(We would expect to be able to discharge a condition such as that within 2-3 months.)
Condition: The development herebyPage
proposed
137 ofshould
206 not be occupied until any necessary off
site sewerage improvements have been delivered by Severn Trent Water Ltd.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Reason: To prevent flooding from the existing sewerage system as a result of new
development. To allow Severn Trent Water time to deliver any necessary capacity
improvements.
(We would expect to be able to discharge this condition within 2 years if improvements are
necessary. If they aren’t we will have confirmed that under the previous condition and
discharge the two together on the grounds that nothing needs to be done.)
And finally:
Condition No surface water from the development hereby proposed should discharge to local
foul sewers.
Reason: To prevent the public foul sewerage system from flooding under storm conditions.
(Through the IDP (Infrastructure Development Plan) evidence for Stroud District Council’s
Local Plan Severn Trent Water the proposed site is within Stanley Downton sewage
treatment works catchment. Comparison of current dry weather flow against consented dry
weather flows indicates there is reasonable spare capacity at this treatment works. Should
additional capacity be required in order to accommodate future development above the
existing capacity then STW do not envisage any issues as there are no land or other physical
constraints preventing expansion.
Severn Trent Water confirmed that a maintenance programme is underway which includes
capacity upgrades to accommodate long term developments. Work planned for completion in
2017. While it is envisaged that there will be some spare capacity to accommodate the initial
phases of any development to the west of Stonehouse, it is expected that capacity
improvements will be required to accommodate later phases. As a worst case this may
require replacement of the existing pumping station and duplication /upsizing of the existing
1.3km risking main.
Severn Trent Water confirmed that a project is ongoing to ensure this capacity at the
Stonehouse pumping station. This will be sized accordingly to accommodate employment
and residential allocations and completion will be phased to coincide with development).
Wales and West Utilities:
08/04/2014
Offer no objection but advise of the presence of their intermediate / high pressure gas
main(s) in proximity to this site. No excavations are to take place above or within 10m of the
confirmed position of these mains without prior consultation with Wales and West Utilities.
Page 138 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Public Rights of Way (PROW):
07/04/2014
There is an opportunity within this scheme to link the public bridleways to enable people to
enjoy a longer ride away from the main carriage roads. In the event that this application is
permitted, a Temporary Closure will be required to ensure public safety. Please contact
Public rights of Way on the above number for further details on this. The paths proposed to
be diverted will need to be processed before any construction work is started.
Network Rail:
29/04/2014
After studying the details submitted with this proposal and consultation with our Level
Crossing Manager, Network Rail objects to this proposal in its current form for the following
reasons:The proposed development will undoubtedly cause an increase in the use of the level
crossings at this location; we note from the attached plan of the proposed development that
area E4 goes up to Stonehouse 2 footpath level crossing and area E5 north east corner butts
up to Stagholt footpath level crossing.
These areas are earmarked as employment areas and as such could attract additional usage
on these crossing with residents using Little Australia Footpath level crossing to get from the
residential areas of Stonehouse; we believe that developing this site has the possibility of
importing additional risk to the railway and therefore Network Rail objects on the grounds of
safety at this location. The increased use of these crossings cannot be looked upon
favourably by Network Rail.
Should the Applicant/Council wish to discuss the matter of the level crossings further with
regard to minimising potential safety issues, please contact the Level Crossing Manager,
Richard Atkinson email [email protected] to agree potential
improvements and investigation to the level crossings to minimise the risk of accidents from
the envisaged increased use that will result from this proposal.
Until the above issues have been resolved by the applicant to Network Rail’s satisfaction
then our objection will stand as we have serious concerns for the safety of the railway that
this proposed development will cause. (following detailed discussions with Network Rail a
revised consultation response was received on 20/11/15 as follows).
For the avoidance of doubt I can confirm Network Rail remove our objection to this outline
planning application on the basis of the incorporation of the suggested worded condition
about the level crossing (the required condition is set out within the recommended conditions)
as well as our usual requirements of Asset Protection and Safety Fencing.
Contaminated Land Officer:
08/4/2014
I have no comment or objection.
Historic England:
Page 139 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
In line with the planning Act 1990 and guidance from the Secretary of State the primary
designations that are considered within this response are the Stroud Industrial Heritage
Conservation Area and the highly graded listed buildings.
Fundamental to our advice to local authorities is the requirement of the Planning (Listed
Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 in Section 66(1) for the local authority to “have
special regards to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of
architectural or historic interest which it possesses”. Section 72 (1) of the Act requires a local
planning authority to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the
character or appearance of a conservation area.
When considering the current proposals, in line with Para 129 of the NPFF, the significance
of the asset’s setting require consideration. When considering development that has the
potential to affect setting English Heritage’s guidance the setting of Heritage Assets should
be referred to. The key principles for understanding setting are set out in page 5 of the
guidance.
The accompanying Environmental Statement divides the impact of the proposed
development into two different phases, construction and operational. The cumulative impacts
are also reviewed. In relation to the operational impact the conclusion drawn by the
consultants is that the impact as a whole on the setting of designated assets would be
moderate or negligible on the basis that the impact would be offset by landscaping and
design mitigation. As the application is Outline we would suggest that at this stage it is
difficult to give a view as to how effective any mitigation provided will be.
Listed Buildings
Within a 1km radius of the site there are five highly graded listed buildings.
To the southeast of the site beyond the Bristol Road and railway line are Stonehouse Court
Hotel (grade II*), Church of St Cyr (grade II*) and a churchyard monument (grade II*). Given
the distances between the asset and the proposed development site, topography, and the
presence of the Oldends Industrial site the intervisibility will be limited. From site inspection
we would also suggest that the new site and the assets are not seen together from any
primary viewpoint.
Southwest of the site is the grade II* Church of St Michaels and Angels. Due to the
topography and distance the impact of the development is likely to be minimal. That said as
this is an outline application the degree of impact can only be conclusively assessed once
detailed designs are submitted.
Encircled by the development site is Nastend House (grade II*). The house dates from the
late 16th century with a front wing from the 17th century. It was altered in the 18th and 20thy
centuries. The right hand return has a jetty at attic level, with moulded timber bressumer and
probably originally also had first floor jetty. The building is of a status and as noted within the
Environmental Statement, along with other buildings, forms the core of this small settlement.
The wider setting of this building, and this hamlet, is the open agricultural landscape. We are
unable to confirm these are views over the wider landscape from within the house. The
proposed development would be to the north of the site, from Nastend House, and so views
looking southwards would be maintained.
Directly
Page 140
of 206 to the north a green buffer would, to a
degree, enable Nastend House to maintain its immediate setting. That said the sense of the
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
wider setting from a wider perspective as a rural landscape would be lost and therefore harm
caused. It is our view that the harm caused would be less than substantial.
Conservation Area
The Stroud Industrial Heritage Conservation Area was designated in 1987. The portion that
runs to the south of the site is the Stroudwater Settlement. The proposed development site is
divided from the conservation area by a main road and a portion of land that would be left
‘predominately in existing use’. Whilst the wider setting of the conservation area would be
visually intruded upon its core character and setting would, we feel, be maintained.
If the council is minded to support the scheme then we recommend close involvement with
your Conservation Officer at the stage of discharging Reserved Matters to ensure that the
detrimental impact on settings of Nastend House and The Stroud Industrial Heritage
Conservation Area are minimised.
Officer for Nuclear Regulation- Programme:
25/04/2014
ONR has no comments on this application, since it does not fit the consultation criteria.
SDC Housing Strategy Manager:
No objection.
Planning Strategy Consultation Response
Thank you for consulting Planning Strategy regarding the above named planning application.
Relevant Local Plan Policies
Stroud District Local Plan (2015): Policies CP1-6, SA2, CP9, HC3, CP12, CP13, CP14, ES1,
ES11, ES14, ES15, ES16
Relevant Local Plan History
The site is a strategic mixed use allocation identified in the adopted Local Plan and was
recently considered by the Local Plan Inspector at examination (2015).
Policy Considerations
The Local Plan has very recently been adopted and full weight should be given to its
contents, in accordance with paragraphs 12 and 15 of the NPPF. There is a presumption in
favour of sustainable development as applied locally through the policies contained within the
Local Plan. Consequently, decision makers should approve proposals that accord with the
Local Plan without delay, but should refuse proposed development that conflicts with the
Local Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The application is for the development of land allocated in the adopted Local Plan for a mixed
use development including 1,350 dwellings, local centre and 10 hectares of land for B1, B2
and B8 land. The land uses set out in the application are therefore in accordance with the
strategic allocation West of Stonehouse
Page(Policy
141 ofSA2)
206 in the adopted Local Plan.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The allocation policy SA2 includes 20 criteria to address a number of detailed matters. Whilst
it is understood that this application is in outline at this stage, it will be important that any
permission ensures that the criteria set out under Policy SA2 are satisfied, or can be
satisfied, at reserve matters stages.
A design vision and masterplan should be produced and approved to ensure that the
development is of a high design quality and delivered in an integrated and coordinated way,
to include green infrastructure and a structural landscaping framework.
The proposed housing is intended to form a significant part of the delivery of the District’s
future housing requirements, also making an important contribution towards the Council’s 5
year land supply and should therefore be supported.
It will be important that at least 30% of the housing proposed on-site is affordable and that a
minimum of 2% are developed as self build or custom build housing.
It is noted that the application proposes 9.3 ha of employment land rather than the 10 ha
identified in the Local Plan. However, it is also noted that the application proposes additional
B1 uses at the local centre. It is also noted that unallocated land of 1.8 ha at Oldends Lane
immediately adjacent to the site has recently received permission for B uses. On balance, it
is considered that the employment provision proposed will be in accordance with policy,
provided that suitable phasing arrangements are put in place to ensure that employment land
is developed and completed in parallel with housing completions.
Suitable community infrastructure to meet the needs of the development should be
negotiated to meet the requirements identified in Policy SA2. This includes the on-site
provision of a two form primary school and sports pavilion/community building.
A key part of Policy SA2 is to investigate improvements to transport connectivity with
Stonehouse and Stonehouse town centre. Whilst specific improvements are not identified in
the Local Plan, potential improvements for investigation could include improvements to level
crossings, measures to secure a safe pedestrian bridge crossing at Oldends Lane and other
improvements to the local cycle and pedestrian network including canal towpath
improvements. Contributions towards new and enhanced bus services are required and
should also help with connectivity improvements. Necessary highway improvements should
be provided in accordance with a detailed transport assessment and the views of Highways
England and the local Highways Authority.
Contributions towards the reopening of the Stonehouse Bristol Road railway station should
be sought, subject to confirmation from Network Rail that this forms part of their future plans.
Negotiations over suitable infrastructure contributions must ensure that overall the site
remains viable and deliverable.
Conclusions
The proposed development is considered to be in accordance with the Local Plan and
therefore, in accordance with the NPPF, should be approved without delay.
Recommendations
Page 142 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
It is recommended that the application is approved as being in accordance with the
development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
Arboricultural Officer:
With regard to the submitted outline application, my comments are as follows.
Existing tree preservation orders.
There are two tree preservation orders (TPOs) that relate to the land. Those being: 504 (2)
and 506 (a).
TPO 504 (2) was served on the 18th January 2002 in response to a planning application that
had been submitted at the time. No objections or representations were received by the Local
Planning Authority, and the order was confirmed without amendment on the 21st March 2002.
Tree preservation 506(a) was served on the 30th July and confirmed without modification on
the 17th October 2002. The original order 506 was revoked as the owner of Oldends Farm
objected to the serving of an area order on his land.
Proposed access. Site Access and Services. The Provision of permanent and temporary site
access is an important part of the layout design stage (s), and full details will normally be
required in support of any planning application.
For safety reasons, site access layouts and visibility splays clearance may require the
removal or pruning of trees and hedges. As is the case here. Where there is such likelihood,
applicants will be expected to liaise with the appropriate Highways Authority, and seek clear
guidance of their requirements, prior to submission of an application. In general, permanent
and temporary site access designs will be expected to minimise tree and hedgerow
removals, and ensure the long term retention of all important trees and hedges. The
ecological and historical value of the hedges to be removed must be assessed prior to the
outline application being determined.
The need to make provision for temporary site access must be given due consideration. Sites
may require temporary access for long or wide loads and provision may be required for
unusually high vehicles or plant. The need to provide adequate operational space within the
site, for specialised heavy plant (including cranes) must be also considered. Any resulting
short and long term implications for trees and hedges which are to remain must be carefully
assessed, and full details submitted as part of any planning application.
Drainage and service layouts must be designed in such a way as to allow for installation and
future maintenance without adversely affecting trees and their root systems. The provision of
common service trenches may help to minimise potential conflicts.
Full details of service layouts should be submitted with any planning application. Service
layout planning and installation should be carried out in accordance with the requirements of
the National Joint Utilities Group (NJUG) Publication No 10. Guidelines for the planning,
installation and maintenance of utility services in proximity to trees.
Going forward, the reserved mattersPage
application
143 of must
206 consider the following;
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Incoming occupiers of properties will want trees to be in harmony with their surroundings
without casting excessive shade, or otherwise unreasonably interfering with their prospects of
reasonably enjoying their property. Layouts may require careful adjustments to prevent trees,
which are to retain from causing unreasonable inconvenience to future occupiers, leading
inevitably to requests for consent to fell.
Development layouts, even if no affecting trees directly, may not be acceptable if they would
result in undue pressure, in short or long term, for felling or excessive pruning of important
trees.
Site Layouts which merely avoid the exclusion zones may not, therefore, necessarily be
adequate. Other factors must be taken into account in ensuring that trees which are to retain
can reasonably be retained to maturity, thereby providing maximum amenity benefits with
minimum maintenance requirements. In considering the juxtaposition of trees and buildings,
site layout designs will be expected to ensure that trees which are to retain are given
adequate space including sufficient allowance for future growth, without the need for
excessive or unreasonable pruning.
The predicted mature height, branch spread and crown form of individual trees should be
assessed in conjunction with site factors such as aspect, topography, soil conditions and
exposure. The ultimate mature size of any individual tree will be dependent on site specifics
and a qualified assessment should be sought.
Site Layouts must ensure that trees at maturity will not dominate buildings, inevitably leading
to concerns about safety and ultimately to requests to fell the tree or heavily prune.
Site layouts should ensure that the garden areas are of adequate size, are large enough to
enable normal domestic use and can reasonably accommodate the trees, including
allowance for future growth. Garden areas should normally be sufficient to allow reasonable
extension of the main dwelling and other permitted development rights without reducing the
amount of usable garden space to unacceptable levels.
Site layouts must ensure that due consideration is given to the pruning requirements of
retained trees, (full details should be included in the tree survey). Where pruning regimes,
present or future, are recommended as a way of reducing the adverse effects of trees on
development, the Council will carefully assess whether such proposals are consistent with
prudent Arboriculture management, are likely to meet the suggested long term objectives and
whether they are reasonable, enforceable and can practically be implemented. All tree works
will be expected to comply with current arboriculture best practice, and meet the
requirements of British Standard BS3998 Recommendation for tree works.
Layout DesignCriteria:
Tree Preservation orders: A Guide to the Law and Good Practice (March 2000) states:
Tree planting provides for the future amenity of a site and its surroundings, supplements
existing tree cover or enhances areas where tree cover is sparse.
Page 144 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The aim of this section is to provide the necessary guidance to ensure that the new tree
planting on development sites contributes to the creation of a high level of amenity, and an
attractive environment, and relates to the character of a site and its surroundings.
•
Tree Planting should be recognised from the outset as an integral part of any
development scheme and should be purposefully designed to complement the
proposed features of the devilment, and those existing features intended for retention.
On sites, which have no trees whatsoever, it is especially important to plan for the
planting of trees as part of the development.
•
Tree Planting will be expected to contribute, on an effective scale, to the conservation
or enhancement of the landscape, providing an overall environmental benefit in terms
of public amenity and nature conservation.
•
Tree Planting schemes should be appropriate for the intended use of the development
and will be expected to contribute to the establishment of a well –structured framework
of diverse ages, sizes and species with the potential to be managed constructively
over decades or even centuries.
•
Developers should recognise the functional role of tree planting in enhancing the
physical characteristics of a development through providing shelter, screening,
enclosure, softening the harsh outline of the buildings, defining space or directing
routes and views, or simply in lending enhancement to the visual amenity of an area.
•
Particular attention should be given to the use of tree planting in enhancing public
areas within developments and views into the sites from surrounding public
viewpoints.
•
In locations where nature conservation objectives are recognised, planting schemes
will be expected to maximise the benefits to wildlife, through the use of a range of
native trees and shrubs suited to the ecology of the locality. Due consideration should
be given to layout configuration, planting density, choice of species mixes, proportions
and edge characteristics. Such schemes should always be prepared with input in the
form of professionally qualified ecological advice.
Accordingly I recommend that the following condition be attached to any grant of permission:
No development shall commence on the non reserved matters until a scheme for the
landscaping of those aspects of the development have been submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local planning Authority. The landscaping scheme shall include details of hard
landscaping plans, written specifications, including cultivation and other operations
associated with tree, shrubs, hedges or grass establishment. schedules of plants noting
species, plant size, and proposed numbers/ densities and an implementation programme
must be submitted to the local authority planning department.
Reason: To comply with the requirements of Stroud District Local Plan, adopted November
2015. Core policy CP 14. Point 8.
Page 145 of 206
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
National and Local Planning Policy
Planning law (Section 38 (6) Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004) requires that
applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the
Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The adopted Stroud District Local Plan, (19th November 2015) is the Development Plan for
Stroud District (The Plan). Due weight should be given to policies in this Plan according to
the degree of consistency with the National Planning Policy Framework. Members will note
that the Inspectors report dated 2nd November 2015 on the examination of The Plan found
that The Plan, with modifications as now adopted, was consistent with national policy in the
NPPF, Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) and recent Government and Ministerial
statements,(paragraph 213 Inspectors letter 2nd Nov). It is noteworthy to set out the Stroud
District Local Plan Examination Inspector’s conclusions on this strategic allocation as stated
in Paragraph 111 of his report dated 2nd November 2015.
“Despite all the local opposition to the proposed WoS development , I consider that this is an
appropriate , effective , positively prepared and fully justified proposal which would be
sustainable, viable, deliverable and soundly based, without having an unacceptably adverse
impact on the character and role of Stonehouse, the local environment and landscape, or on
existing and future traffic conditions. It is an important development which would make a
significant contribution to the provision of housing and employment land in the district, fully in
accordance with the strategy of the SDLP, is fully supported by the prospective developers,
and has a realistic prospect of completion within the current plan period.”
The National Planning Policy Framework is a material consideration in planning decisions.
The NPPF was published on 27 March 2012. This is a key part of the reforms to make the
planning system less complex and more accessible, to protect the environment and to
promote sustainable growth.
The core planning principles of the NPPF (Paragraph 17) seek to enhance and improve the
places in people live, support sustainable development, secure high quality design, protect
important landscape features, encourage the use of renewable sources, conserve and
enhance the natural environment, re-use previously developed land, promote mixed use
developments, conserve heritage assets, encourage sustainable transport and improve
health, social and cultural wellbeing for all. In summary the relevant matters within the NPPF
are:
Chapter 1 (Paragraphs 18-22) of the NPPF are committed to securing economic growth to
create jobs and prosperity. Government is dedicated to ensuring that the planning system
does everything possible to support sustainable economic growth.
Chapter 4 (Paragraphs 29-41) of the NPPF promote the need for sustainable transport. It
outlines Governments objectives with regard to offering people access to a real choice about
how they chose to travel. It requires access to sustainable transport modes and recognises
that sustainable transport solutions will vary from urban to rural areas.
Chapter 5 (Paragraphs 42-46) Page
of the
146NPPF
of 206 requires high quality communications
infrastructure as being essential for sustainable economic growth.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Chapter 6 (Paragraphs 47-55) of the NPPF establishes Governments objectives for housing
provision and allows for a rolling 5 year housing supply (plus 5% additional buffer). It also
considers the location of new housing in sustainable locations with the requirement for
affordable housing provision. .
Chapter 7 (Paragraphs 56-68) of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) stresses
the importance of quality design in the provision of sustainable development. It stresses
Governments objectives for inclusive design, innovation and raising design standards.
Chapter 8 (Paragraphs 69-78) of the NPPF details how planning can play an important role in
facilitating social interaction and creating healthy, inclusive communities. It sets out
objectives for the provision of high quality public spaces which encourage the active and
continual use of public areas.
Chapter 10 (Paragraphs 93-108) of the NPPF establishes Governments objectives in
supporting the delivery of a low carbon future which would aid in reducing greenhouse gas
emissions , minimise vulnerability and provide resilience to the impacts of climate change.
This chapter considers the implications of development on areas prone to flooding by virtue
of proximity to watercourses or management of surface water.
Chapter 11 (Paragraphs 109-125) of the NPPF details Governments objectives with regard to
protecting and enhancing valued landscapes such as the AONB whilst minimising impacts of
development on biodiversity. It requires assessment of noise generating developments or the
location of development in noise sensitive environments. It also considers pollution and land
contamination.
Chapter 12 (Paragraphs 126-141) of the NPPF is of relevance when assessing proposals on
sites with listed buildings and settings on or adjacent to them.. It establishes the importance
of the historic environment, heritage assets and archaeology and provides guidance on
conservation and enhancement.
The Development Plan
As noted above the relevant Development Plan comprises the Stroud District Local Plan 19th
November 2015 (The Plan). The Plan’s strategic objectives are set out in policies SO1 to
SO6 as follows:
•
Accessible Communities, development to be sited within or adjacent to large settlements
to allow access to existing facilities
•
Local Economy and jobs, seeks to concentrate employment and new residential
development within the M5/A38 corridor and at Stroud.
•
Town Centres and rural hinterland, concentrating development within or adjacent to the
District’s larger settlements. Stonehouse being a first tier settlement.
•
Transport and travel, development to be within or adjacent to the District’s larger
settlements.
Page 147 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
•
Climate change and environmental limits, priority to be given to sites for development
close to the District’s main settlements to reduce travel by car
•
•
New development shall incorporate sustainable drainage measures (SUDS)
Minimise impact on the distinctive qualities of the District’s area, in particular biodiversity.
Applying those strategic objectives in The Plan Policy CP2 sets out the strategic growth and
development locations which inter alia includes the site the subject of this report (West of
Stonehouse).
Site allocation Policy SA2 allocates land West of Stonehouse, consistent with the submitted
application’s site area, as a site appropriate for mixed development. The allocation of the
application site in the Local Plan plays a critical part in satisfying the overall strategy of the
Plan to provide jobs and growth, and to ensure that SDC maintains a rolling five year land
supply.
The Policy requires that a development brief including a design vision, incorporating a
masterplan will detail the way in which the land uses and infrastructure will be developed in
an integrated and co-ordinated manner addressing the following matters:
1. 1350 dwellings , including at least 405 (30%) affordable dwellings, unless viability testing
indicates otherwise.
2. 10 hectares of B1,B2 and B3 employment land
3. A local centre, incorporating local retail and community uses to meet the needs of the
development.
4. A two form entry primary school and contributions to secondary school provision
5.Contribution to local community services
6. Accessible structural natural green space , allotments and formal public outdoor playing
space , including sports pavilion /community building
7. Structural landscaping buffer around Nastend and to the East of Nupend incorporating
existing hedgerows and trees.
8. Long term management and maintenance of open spaces to deliver local biodiversity
targets.
9 The acceptable management , maintenance and disposal of surface water , including
sustainable urban drainage systems (SUDS).
10. Restored watercourse corridor that enhances biodiversity and water quality and
improves flood storage and flow rates.
11. Adequate and timely infrastructure to tackle wastewater generated by development in
agreement with the relevant water authorities.
12. Opportunities to improve transport connectivity with Stonehouse and in particular the
town centre for pedestrians, cyclists, public transport and private car.
13. Cycle and pedestrian routes through the development , connecting Nastend and Nupend
with the town centre, Stroudwater Industrial Estate and Oldends Lane and footpath links from
the development to the surrounding rural network, including improvements to the canal
towpath.
14. Primary vehicle access from the A419 Chipmans Platt roundabout and additional
vehicular access from Brunel Way and Oldends Lane.
15. Traffic calming measures within
the148
development
and locality , as approved by the
Page
of 206
Highways authority.
16. Bus stops and shelters at appropriate locations to serve the new development.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
17. Contributions towards bus services to improve bus frequencies and quality and to
connect the development with Stonehouse and Stonehouse town centre.
18. Contributions towards the provision of a new railway station at Stonehouse, subject to the
plans of Network rail.
19. Address any identified constraints and recommendations referred to in the Stroud
infrastructure Delivery Plan in this location.
20. Phasing arrangements to ensure that employment land is developed and completed in
parallel with housing land completions and community and retail provision is made in a timely
manner.
The application needs to be considered in terms of compliance with the above Policy
SA2 and the twenty detailed considerations within the policy as set out above
PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT
The principle of the development is in compliance with the provisions of the Development
Plan which is in compliance to National Policy (NPPF) as set out above. The application
provides a mixed development in accordance with Policy SA2, illustrated by a Master Plan
submitted as part of the illustrative material with the application, a design vision informative
and if permitted will be the subject of conditions requiring that subsequent applications for
approval of reserved matters will be in general accordance with the masterplan and design
strategy.
The submitted material also includes parameter plans which detail the density of the
residential areas, the height of development, the pedestrian and cycleway linkages within the
site and a Green Infrastructure (G1) Plan. These plans will together with the ‘design‘
documents and the masterplan inform and set criteria to judge subsequent applications for
approval of reserved matters. The submitted material also includes a consideration of
landscape impact of the development which demonstrated to officer satisfaction that the
effect of the development is acceptable. It is also noteworthy that as part of the consideration
of the application site as a potential allocated site at the draft stage of the Local Plan a
landscape assessment was undertaken. The site was assessed as having ‘medium-low
sensitivity’ in landscape impact assessment terms, characterised as a landscape resilient to
change and/or of limited intrinsic value as a landscape resource. In addition the Local Plan
Inspector as quoted above was also satisfied with the landscape impact of the development
(paragraph 111 refers).
The phasing of the development will be controlled by the provision of infrastructure, in
particular the highway works detailed as part of the draft S106 and recommended planning
conditions as set out below will provide an orderly implementation of the overall scheme.
The report will now consider whether the application has successfully addressed the
twenty requirements required by the Policy as detailed above.
1. The application provides for up to 1350 dwellings of which 30% will be affordable, secured
by a Section 106 agreement which sets out a delivery schedule, dwelling sizes and tenure
mix. Delivery Policy HC3 of the adopted plan requires 2% of total dwellings to be self build in
line with current government policy Page
subject
to of
SDC
149
206identifying demand via the mechanism of
a local register. To date the register has not yet been completed and the details of location
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
and numbers of plots to be provided can be dealt with at approval of reserved matters stage
and controlled by a recommended planning condition on this application.
The draft S106 deals with public open space makes provision for children’s play facilities and
these facilities are shown on the indicative masterplan and are acceptable.
2. The application provides for some 9.3 hectares of employment land and delivery is linked
to the delivery of housing via a section 106 agreement to satisfy the overall strategic aim of
the Development Plan to facilitate jobs and growth. The applicant has also agreed to develop
a marketing plan in conjunction with SDC to bring forward employment on the allocated sites.
The application site does not include a further area of land of some 1.83ha at Oldends Lane
already has the benefit of a grant of planning permission under S14/2083/ FUL on 24/7/15 for
employment use. The application complies with the requirements of the Local Plan in this
respect as recommended by the Planning Strategy response to the application as the
additional land (1.83 Ha) mitigates satisfactorily the shortfall on the 10ha identified in the
Policy. In addition the local centre has the potential to incorporate additional B1 uses.
3. The masterplan shows a local retail centre incorporating community uses, including a
community hall and provision of land for health services, a GP surgery. The size of the retail
facility is proposed to be conditioned to ensure that the level of provision will not adversely
affect Stonehouse Town centre. The delivery of the community hall is controlled by the
proposed Section 106 and will provide at a defined stage of the development a fully equipped
community hall together with a dowry payment of £30,000. Eastington Parish Council have
indicated that they are prepared to accept a conveyance of the hall and the ancillary areas
for parking together with the dowry payment. If the Parish ultimately decide to not accept the
transfer of the asset the S106 provides for the facility to be vested within the management
company that is to be set up by the developer together with open space, sports and
community health facilities.
4. The developer has via a unilateral section 106 agreement agreed to provide a one point
five form entry primary school and accommodation for 94 pre school places, the contribution
to secondary school provision after discussions with GCC are not needed. The delivery of
the school is controlled by the agreement, and secured by a bond to be in place prior to
development commencing. There are four Section 106 Agreements each of which deal with
specific areas (Education provision, Highways, Public open space and community provision
and affordable housing), of which two are unilateral as the developer considers that the tariff
monitoring fee required by GCC to be illegal following recent court rulings. Advice on this
matter has been sought from the Legal Services Manager and Monitoring Officer who
concurs with the applicant’s position.
5. The draft Section 106’s to be signed with SDC provide as set out above for contributions to
local community services including the community hall in addition refuse and recycling
facilities, and on site play areas within the residential areas, and a contribution of some
£264600 towards library services divided into four separate contributions triggered at various
stages of completion of residential properties.
6. The masterplan provides for structural natural green space, formal play areas and sports
pitches, together with the provisionPage
of a 150
sports
pavilion and changing facilities designed to
of 206
Sport England standard. The delivery of these facilities is enshrined within the Section 106
agreement and future maintenance will be undertaken by the management company to be
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
set up by the applicant. The provision of allotments will be dealt with within areas of natural
green space as required by locally assessed need undertaken during the assessment of
applications for approval of reserved matters.
7. The masterplan shows a structural landscaping buffer around Nastend and to the east of
Nupend, which will be maintained by the management company. The detailed extent of that
and other buffer areas will be dealt with in subsequent applications for approval of reserved
matters guided by the illustrative masterplan and the design strategy informative.
8. The long term management and maintenance of open spaces will be vested in the
management company that the applicant will set up as part of the overall section 106
procedure.
9. The masterplan and information submitted as part of the Environmental Statement
incorporates a sustainable urban drainage scheme (SUDS), which has been found to be
acceptable by the drainage authority and are controlled by provisions within the Section 106.
Further applications for approval of reserved matters will provide details of this scheme for
SDC approval to be managed and maintained by the management company.
10.The masterplan incorporates restoration of the watercourse corridor and assists in the
provision of a SUDS scheme. Detailed works to this area will be the subject of applications
for approval of reserved matters.
11.The applicant has supplied information on the provisions for the disposal of wastewater,
and these outline proposals have been found to be acceptable by the relevant water
authorities.
12. The applicants submitted transport assessment details improvements to public transport
serving the site which are to be secured by a unilateral Section 106 agreement the details of
which are set out in this report where GCC response is reported, these improvements will
ensure that the site is served by a frequent bus service connecting the site, via the main
distributor road to Stonehouse town centre on a frequent basis. The application also reserves
an area of land to the immediate west of the Oldends lane level crossing for the siting of a
DDA compliant pedestrian bridge.
13.The applicant’s masterplan and supporting documents detail pedestrian and cycle routes
through the development, utilising in part existing public footpaths and bridleways, such that
the proposed development is linked to Nastend, Nupend, Stonehouse and the Stroudwater
Industrial Estate. The applicants have agreed to contribute £62500 to the improvement of the
canal towpath in the area between Eastington and Stonehouse to mitigate increased
recreational usage from the development. The payment date is regulated by provision in the
Section 106 agreement to be the occupation of the 250th dwelling.
14.Detailed revised drawings have been submitted, as noted above, for the three new access
points to the developments; at Chipmans Platt, Brunel Way and Oldends Lane.
15. The applicant has agreed to a Section 106 Agreement which deals with the provision of
highway measures within the development
Page 151toofprovide
206 appropriate highways in conformity to
the masterplan and the County Council’s highway standards, these and external highway
improvements are secured by the Section 106 and a Section 38 Agreement made with GCC.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
16. The provision of appropriate bus stops and shelters forms part of the recommended
planning conditions to provide adequate new public transport provision for the site and the
Section 106 agreement provides detailed trigger points for the enhancement of bus services.
17. As set out above the section 106 that deals with highway and transport issues provides
for a payment to the bus company to provide services into the site and connecting it to
Stonehouse and its town centre, with trigger points to increase the frequency of that service
as the development proceeds.
Within the red line of the application site, but not owned by the developer, there is a narrow
strip of land adjacent to Oldends Lane level crossing which is reserved for the potential
provision of a base for a DDA compliant pedestrian and cycleway bridge over the main line.
The consent detailed in relevant planning history above has allowed for in the design of the
approved employment building this reserved area.
18. The application does not provide a contribution to a new railway station at Stonehouse,
the policy on this issue is caveated by a Network Rail requirement. Network Rail have been
consulted on whether they have any plans for such a facility and have responded that they
have no present plans for a new/ reopened station at Stonehouse.
19. The Infrastructure Delivery Plan (November 2014) at section 6.3 deals with the local Plan
allocation the subject of this application. The document notes that there are no identified
infrastructure projects that would suggest substantial delays to delivery of the strategic site.
20. The section 106 Highways and transport agreement sets out the phasing of infrastructure
associated with the site and the timing of that work. The S106 dealing with public open space
and community issues also contains clauses which require employment land to be brought
forward as residential occupations are achieved as detailed in point 2.above.
The application is judged to be in compliance with Policy SA2 in all respects, and this view is
supported by the strategic policy officers response to the application.
Other Material Policy Matters and issues
Policy ES16 requires that major residential schemes contribute to public art, in this case it is
considered that such public art can be secured though the detailed design of individual
phases of the development and the laying out of areas of public open space. The design
vision together with the masterplan and parameter plans will provide an appropriate context
for the siting and content of public art.
Policy ES12, together with CP4 and CP5, requires that the layout and design of new
development provides a well designed, socially integrated and high quality development. The
illustrative masterplan, the design evolution document, the parameter plans and the design
strategy together provide at this outline stage a clear ‘design brief’ for the subsequent
applications for approval of reserved matters applications to be judged both against these
policies and the requirements of the NPPF at section 7 ‘Requiring good design’.
Policy HC3 requires that such strategic sites shall be compliant with Government aspirations
to encourage self build housing sites
to 152
be available.
In order to comply with this policy a
Page
of 206
suggested planning condition is set out (No. 45).
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Core Policy CP5 requires that strategic sites will be constructed at an appropriate density to
the local area, the illustrative material submitted with the application demonstrates that the
density of those areas of the site which affect the adjoin areas will be developed in
accordance with that principle. The mix of housing and the density to be delivered will be
controlled by recommended conditions on this outline by requiring the density and the
number and mix of affordable housing to be delivered by means of subsequent applications
for approval of reserved matters and providing guidelines for the form and nature of that
housing. The submitted masterplan, design vision and parameter plans provide for play
areas, landscaping and community facilities in conformity to Policy CP5 and are judged to be
acceptable and policy compliant, though details will be judged when dealing with subsequent
applications for approved matters utilising the material now submitted as well as National
Policy and the emerging neighbourhood plan of Eastington.
REVIEW OF CONSULTATION RESPONSES
The summary of objections from the public, ‘don’t strangle Stroud’, and the Parish Council’s
of Standish, Eastington, and Whitminster and Town Council of Stonehouse are set out
above. The objections to the scheme in terms of policy and the specific allocation have been
superseded by reason of the adoption of the Stroud District Local Plan in November 2015
and the recognition as part of his consideration by the Inspector that the Plan is sound and
accords with the policies of the NPPF.
Specific concerns raised to individual aspects of the application have been considered as
part of the consideration of the proposals by statutory consultees and appropriately qualified
officers of this Council whose considerations are set out in this report. The principle
concerns as commented on below are considered not to raise such significant other material
matters that the recommendation of approval is put at jeopardy.
The comments seeking capital expenditure to produce a new or reopened railway station
have been explored with Network Rail who have no plans to provide an additional station.
Many comments relate to the capacity of highway infrastructure to deal with the proposed
development. The Examination Inspector and the considerable modelling work by the
applicant and a significant ongoing dialogue with GCC and Highways England have resulted
in both statutory consultees recommending planning conditions that deal with the impact and
an overall agreement that the mitigation measures are acceptable and proportional.
Comments are made on the emergence of Neighbourhood Plans and their relevance to this
proposal. Whilst neighbourhood plans are currently in production, the weight to be accorded
to them in the determination of applications increases as they move towards a referendum,
the plans in preparation are at a relatively early stage and have yet to undergo examination
or referendum and in any event have to accord to the Development Plan, the Stroud District
Local Plan 2015. It is noteworthy that the Eastington Plan is likely to be past Examination and
potentially post referendum prior to the determination of the first application for approval of
reserved matters which will accord the emerging plan considerable weight in the
determination of such applications.
In addition comments are made that the scheme by virtue of its location does not provide an
opportunity to improve connectivity with Stonehouse. The developers have been requested to
consider in detail this matter and Page
have 153
tested
in viability terms the provision of a railway
of 206
bridge to replace the railway crossing at Oldends Lane. The result of that exercise included
significant compulsory purchase and a cost that would preclude the achievement in full of
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
other policy requirements such as road improvements, affordable housing, and school
provision. In any event whilst the bridge would solve the perceived problem of the level
crossing it would not deal with the other ‘pinch point’ on Oldends Lane the single carriageway
arch under the railway embankment east of the level crossing. Nevertheless the
improvements to public transport detailed elsewhere in this report will provide for the
residents and employees in the application area a good regular bus service to Stonehouse
and its station. In addition the illustrative masterplan shows a network of footpaths connecting
all areas of the application site to footpaths leading into Stonehouse as well as other
settlements in the area. In addition land is reserved adjacent to the existing Oldends Lane
level crossing to allow a pedestrian and cycle waybridge that would be DDA compliant to be
erected on the western side of the main line. This reservation is secured by an extant full
planning permission, the details of which are set out in the relevant planning history. On the
eastern side of the main line the land needed for the other support for such a structure is
used as part of a playing field and is not within the applicant’s control.
The statutory consultees responses as set out above include both Highways England,
Gloucestershire County Council Highways , SDC’s ecology consultant, Natural England,
SDC’s arboriculture officer, Environmental health officer and drainage responses from SDC
officers, the drainage authority and SDC planning strategy officer The responses deal with
the major issues that the application raises and are supportive of the proposal.
Page 154 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
ARTICLE 35 (2) STATEMENT
The case officer was in very regular contact with the applicant/agent and the community,
acting in a positive and proactive manner, seeking dialogue and solutions. Copies of this
correspondence are on the file. Significant pre-application consultations were undertaken by
the applicant, the details of that exercise are set out in the document dealing with community
consultation submitted as part of the outline application and are detailed on the application
file.
RECOMMENDATION
The proposal is considered to comply with the provisions of Policies, CP2, CP4, CP5, ES16,
ES12, HC3 and SA2 of a Development Plan, the adopted Stroud District Local Plan, (19th
November 2015) the guidance contained within the NPPF and supplementary planning
documents and supported by statutory consultees. The proposal will not materially affect the
amenities currently enjoyed by neighbouring occupiers. The proposal does not materially
affect adversely the setting of any listed building. The proposal would not adversely affect
any protected species or habitat.
It is recommended that the application is resolved to be approved subject to the signing of
the two Section 106 agreements with SDC that deal with affordable housing and public open
space, community facilities, and bringing forward employment sites at the same time as
residential occupation. In addition the signing of two unilateral Section 106 agreements
dealing with the provision of highway infrastructure, improved public transport and
educational facilities and contribution to library services as agreed with GCC the general
principals of those agreements are set out below. In addition the Notice of decision will
contain the following conditions:
Reserved matters
1.
Details of the layout, scale, external appearance of the buildings, and the landscaping
of the site (hereinafter called the “reserved matters”) within each part of the
development hereby permitted shall (with the exception of the site accesses herewith
approved) be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority
before any development is commenced within that reserved matters area (hereinafter
referred to as “a phase”). The development shall be carried out as approved in
accordance with the submitted plans and drawings.
Reason:
To comply with the requirements of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act
1990 and Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
2.
Time limits
Applications for the approval of reserved matters shall be made to the local planning
authority not later than 5 years from the date of this permission.
Reason:
To comply with the requirements of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act
1990.
3.
Page 155 of 206
The development hereby permitted shall begin no later than two years from the date
of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Reason:
To comply with the requirements of Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act
1990.
Design
4.
Submissions for the approval of the reserved matters for any phase shall be
submitted in general accordance with parameter plans (H.0324_08-2F, H.0324_083F, H.0324_08-4F and H.0324_08-5F), approved indicative masterplan, reference
H.0324_08-1F, the Design and Access Statement (reference H.0324_27-1, dated
March 2014) and design strategy informative submitted to the Council in December
2015 and be supported by a design and landscape statement describing how the
proposals for that phase contribute to the overall design vision as submitted as part
of this outline application and objective for the development as described at
paragraph 3.4 of the Design and Access Statement dated March 2014 and should
have regard to the Design Strategy Informative appended to this permission.
Reason:
To accord with Policies CP14 (9), ES12 and SA2 of the Stroud District Local Plan
(19th November 2015)
5.
No work to construct any building shall commence on site until details and samples of
the material to be used for the external walls and roofs for that building have been
submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development
shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
Reason:
Tto accord with Policy ES12 of the Stroud District Local Plan (19th November 2015)
Protection of existing trees and hedgerows
6.
Within each phase of the development hereby approved no hedges or trees shall,
with the exception of those required to implement the approved accesses, be
removed or felled unless the removal or felling is part of an approved landscaping
scheme.
Reason:
To accord with Policy ES8 of the Stroud District Local Plan (19th November 2015).
7.
Details of fencing for the protection of existing trees within any phase of the
development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning
authority. The fencing shall accord with BS 5837:2005 (Trees in Relation to
Construction). Before any equipment, machinery or materials are brought into that
phase for the purpose of the development, the fencing shall be erected in
accordance with the approved details. The fencing shall be retained until all
equipment, machinery and surplus materials have been removed from that phase.
Nothing shall be stored or placed within any fenced area, and the ground levels
within those areas shall not be altered, nor any excavation be made without the prior
written consent of the Local Page
Planning
156 Authority.
of 206
Reason:
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
To accord with Policy ES8 of the Stroud District Local Plan (19th November 2015).
8.
No development shall commence on the non reserved matters until a scheme for the
landscaping of those aspects of the development have been submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local planning Authority. The landscaping scheme shall
include details of hard landscaping plans, written specifications, including cultivation
and other operations associated with tree, shrubs, hedges or grass establishment
schedules of plants noting species, plant size, and proposed numbers/ densities and
an implementation programme must be submitted to the local authority planning
department.
Reason.
To comply with the requirements of Stroud District Local Plan, adopted November
2015. Core policy CP 14. Point 8.
9.
All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping for
each phase shall be carried out and completed in the first planting and seeding
seasons following last occupation of that phase. Any trees, plants or areas of turfing
which within a period of five years from the completion of that phase of the
development become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next
planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Head of
Development Services of Stroud District Council or an officer of equivalent rank gives
written consent to any variation.
Reason:
For the avoidance of doubt and in accordance with Policies ES12 and SA2(6) of the
Stroud District Local Plan (19th November 2015).
Landscaping/public open space/ecology
10.
The details submitted under condition 1 shall include all areas of landscaping, public
open space, play areas, allotments and nature conservation/biodiversity areas,
indicating the facilities to be provided and management measures for the following
species: bats, breeding and wintering birds, Great Crested Newts, reptiles and
invertebrates where appropriate. Development shall be carried out and completed in
accordance with the approved details.
Reason:
For the avoidance of doubt and in accordance with Policies ES12, CP14, ES6 and
SA2(6) of the Stroud District Local Plan (19th November 2015)
Page 157 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Archaeology
11.
No development shall take place within a phase (excluding works to the existing
public highway) until a programme of archaeological work for that phase has been
secured in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been
submitted to and approved in writing by the LPA.
Reason:
In accordance with Policy ES10 of the Stroud District Local Plan (19th
November2015) to safeguard heritage assets and paragraph 141 of the National
Planning Policy Framework.
Access and highways
12.
The accesses shall be carried out and completed in strict accordance with the details
shown on the following approved plans:
H414/10 Rev E Grove Lane
H414/11 Rev B Brunel Way
H414/12 Rev C Oldends Lane
Reason:
For the avoidance of doubt.
13.
No building shall be occupied until the access parking and turning facilities serving
that building have been provided in accordance with the details approved pursuant to
condition 1.
14.
The employment development hereby approved shall not exceed a total of
32,550sqm gross floor area. Development of use class B1 shall not exceed 35% of
the total gross floor area (11,393sqm) and development of use class B2 shall not
exceed 35% of the total gross floor area (11,393sqm). The use classes referred to in
this condition are those defined in The Town and Country Planning (Use Classes)
Order 1987 (as amended).
Reason:
In accordance with Policy SA2 of the Stroud District Local Plan ( 19th November
2015) to create a mixed use development and to accord with the Transport
assessment submitted as part of the outline application.
15.
No more than 200 dwellings or any other development mix generating the same level
of peak hour traffic shall be occupied or brought into use until a scheme to improve
the Chipmans Platt roundabout generally in accordance with PFA Consulting's
drawing no. H414/14 has been constructed and is available for use by the travelling
public.
Reason:
To ensure that cost effective improvements are undertaken to the transport network
that mitigate the significant impacts of the development in accordance with paragraph
32 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy SA2(14) of the Stroud District
Local Plan ( 19th November Page
2015)158 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
16.
No more than 550 dwellings (based on a 30% affordable and 70% private mix) or
any other development mix generating greater than 30 peak hour trips on the M5
Junction 13 northbound on-slip based on agreed trip rates and distributions to be
submitted to and approved by the LPA shall be occupied or brought into use until a
scheme to improve the M5 Junction 13 northbound on-slip as shown on PFA
Consulting's drawing no. H414/21 has been constructed and is available for use by
the travelling public. No occupation or use of the development beyond the threshold
stipulated shall occur until the approved works have been completed.
Reason:
To ensure that timely cost effective improvements are undertaken to the transport
network that mitigate the significant impacts of the development in accordance with
paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy SA2 of the
Stroud District Local Plan ( 19th November 2015).
17.
No more than 300 dwellings and 1.3 hectares of employment use shall be occupied
until the highway improvement works at Oldends Lane have been completed
generally in accordance with drawing No. H414/29 Rev B.
Reason:
To ensure that timely cost effective improvements are undertaken to the transport
network that mitigate the significant impacts of the development in accordance with
paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy SA2(14) of the
Stroud District Local Plan ( 19th November 2015).
18.
No more than 600 dwellings and 2.6 hectares of employment shall be occupied
prior to details of the highway improvement works at the Horsetrough Junction
being submitted and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority generally in
accordance with drawing no. H414/24 Rev A or other wise agreed in writing by the
LPA.
Reason:
To ensure that timely cost effective improvements are undertaken to the transport
network that mitigate the significant impacts of the development in accordance with
paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy SA2(14) of the
Stroud District Local Plan ( 19th November 2015)
19.
No more than 600 dwellings and 2.6 hectares of employment use shall be occupied
prior to the development of the spine road linking Oldends Lane to Grove Lane has
been completed.
Reason:
To ensure that safe and suitable access is provided and that timely cost effective
improvements are undertaken to the transport network to mitigate the significant
impacts of the development in accordance with Paragraph 32 of the National
Planning Policy Framework and Policy SA2(14) of the Stroud District Local Plan (
19th November 2015).
Page 159 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
20.
Prior to occupation of the 200th dwelling the approved off site pedestrian/cyclist
improvements as detailed in PFA Consulting’s report H414-FN37 shall be
completed in all respects.
Reason: To ensure that the opportunities for sustainable transport modes have
been taken in accordance with paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy
Framework and Policy SA2(13) ) of the Stroud District Local Plan ( 19th November
2015).
21.
Prior to the commencement of any phase of development details of public transport
infrastructure to include bus shelters with timetable, seating and Real Time
Passenger Information within 400m of any dwelling along with adequate turning
facilities prior to the spine road being opened to through traffic shall be submitted to
and approved in writing by the local planning authority, together with a timetable to
be agreed for the implementation of these works and the works to be provided in
accordance with the agreed timetable.
Reason:
To ensure that the opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken
up and to have access to high quality public transport facilities in accordance with
paragraphs 32 and 35 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy
SA2(16) of the Stroud District Local Plan ( 19th November 2015).
22.
i) Prior to the first occupation of any dwellings hereby permitted the means of
access to the western end of the site as shown on drawing no. H414/14 Rev E from
Grove Lane shall have been completed in all respects and made available for use
and:
ii) Prior to any works commencing on site from the western end of the site details
of the access serving the site from Grove Lane for construction purposes shall be
submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and shall be
completed in all respects and made available for use.
Reason:
To reduce potential highway impact by ensuring that there is a satisfactory access
at the commencement of construction works, in accordance with paragraph 32 of
the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy SA2 of the Stroud District Local
Plan (19th November 2015).
23.
No works shall commence on the proposed area of development to the east of the
site solely accessed from Oldends Lane until the first 20m of the proposed access
road, including the junction with the existing public road (Oldends Lane), associated
visibility splays, as shown in drawing no. H414/12 Rev C, has been completed to at
least binder course level, and shall be retained as such thereafter unless and until
adopted as highway maintainable at public expense.
Page 160 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Reason:
To reduce potential highway impact by ensuring that there is a satisfactory access
at the commencement of construction works in accordance with paragraph 32 of the
National Planning Policy Framework. and Policy SA2 of the Stroud District Local
Plan (19th November 2015).
24.
Prior to beneficial occupation of the residential or employment element of the
proposed development the site access from Oldends Lane shall be completed in all
respects in accordance with drawing no. H414/12 Rev C, and shall be retained as
such thereafter unless and until adopted as highway maintainable at public
expense.
Reason:
To reduce potential highway impact by ensuing that there is a satisfactory access
for pedestrians and vehicles, in accordance with paragraph 32 of the National
Planning Policy Framework and Policy SA2 of the Stroud District Local Plan ( 19th
November 2015).
25.
No works shall commence on the proposed area of development to the south of the
site solely accessed from Brunel Way until the first 20m of the propose access road,
including the junction with the existing public road (Brunel Way), associated visibility
splays, as shown in drawing no. H414/11 Rev B, has been completed to at least
binder course level, and shall be retained as such thereafter unless and until
adopted as highway maintainable at public expense.
Reason:
To reduce potential highway impact by ensuring that there is a satisfactory access
at the commencement of construction works, in accordance with paragraph 32 of
the National Planning Policy Framework. and Policy SA2 of the Stroud District Local
Plan ( 19th November 2015).
26.
Prior to beneficial occupation of the employment element of the proposed
development the site access from Brunel Way shall be completed in all respects in
accordance with drawing no. H414/11 Rev B and shall be retained as such
thereafter unless and until adopted as highway maintainable at public expense.
Reason:
To reduce potential highway impact by ensuing that there is a satisfactory access
for pedestrians and vehicles, in accordance with paragraph 32 of the National
Planning Policy Framework and Policy SA2 of the Stroud District Local Plan (19th
November 2015).
27.
No building within a phase shall be occupied until the carriageway(s) (including
means of surface water drainage and disposal, vehicular turning head(s), parking
and street lighting) providing access from the nearest public highway to that building
have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the local planning authority and
once approved completed to at least binder course level and the footway(s) to
surface course level.
Page 161 of 206
Reason:
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
To minimise hazards and inconvenience for users of the development by ensuring
that there is a safe and suitable means of access for all people in accordance with
paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policy SA2 of the
Stroud District Local Plan (19th November 2015).
28.
Prior to the commencement of any building within a phase of development a
scheme for the provision of fire hydrants served by mains water supply shall be
submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority and no building
shall be occupied until the fire hydrant serving that building has been provided in
accordance with the approved scheme.
Reason:
To ensure adequate water infrastructure provision is made on site for the local fire
service to tackle any property fire in accordance with paragraphs 32 and 35 of the
National Planning Policy Framework.
29
No development shall be commenced until details of the proposed arrangements for
future management and maintenance of the proposed streets within the
development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning
authority. The streets shall thereafter be maintained in accordance with the
approved management and maintenance details until such time as either a
dedication agreement has been entered into or a private management and
maintenance company has been established.
Reason:
To ensure that safe and suitable access is achieved and maintained for all people
as required by paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework and to
establish and maintain a strong sense of place to create attractive and comfortable
places to live, work and visit as required by paragraph 58 of the National Planning
Policy Framework.
Railways
30.
If not already in place, the Developer must provide a suitable trespass proof fence
(of at least 1.8m in height) adjacent to Network Rail’s boundary and make provision
for its future maintenance and renewal. Network Rail’s existing fencing / wall must
not be removed or damaged”.
Reason:
In the interests of public safety.
31.
Prior to the first occupation of the residential or employment sites is permitted a
‘level crossing monitoring scheme’ shall be submitted to and approved in writing by
the Local Planning Authority following consultation with Network Rail setting out
details for monitoring usage of the Stonehouse 2 pedestrian level crossing,
identifying thresholds. The developer shall, if the thresholds set out therein are
exceeded, complete a public footpath diversion/closure application or erect signage
in consultation with Gloucestershire
Page 162 ofCounty
206 Council, the Local Planning Authority
and Network Rail and/or allow improvements to the boundary within its land in the
location of the Stonehouse 2 pedestrian crossing.”
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Reason:
In the interests of public safety.
Drainage
32.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the
approved Flood Risk Assessment, including Surface Water Drainage Strategy,
(FRA (dated March 2014). No development shall take place within a phase until
details of foul and surface water disposal serving that phase has been submitted to
and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be
carried out in accordance with the approved details and completed before any
buildings within that phase are occupied unless otherwise agreed.
Reason:
In accordance with Policies SA2 and ES4 of the Stroud district Local Plan (19th
November 2015)
33.
There shall be no storage of any materials including soil or raising of ground levels
within that part of the site liable to flood as shown highlighted on drawing No. 273001 Rev C.
Reason:
In accordance with Policies SA2 and ES4 of the Stroud district Local Plan (19th
November 2015).
34.
The development hereby permitted should not commence until written confirmation
is provided to the Local Planning Authority confirming whether any necessary off
site drainage improvements will need to be completed by Severn Trent Water.
Reason:
In accordance with Policies SA2 and ES4 of the Stroud district Local Plan (19th
November 2015).
35.
The development hereby permitted should not be occupied until any necessary off
site sewerage improvements have been completed.
Reason:
In accordance with Policies SA2 and ES4 of the Stroud district Local Plan (19th
November 2015).
36.
No surface water from the development hereby permitted shall discharge to local
foul sewers.
Page 163 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Reason:
In accordance with Policies SA2 and ES4 of the Stroud district Local Plan (19th
November 2015)
Construction Method Statement, Transport Plan and Construction Environmental
Management Plan
37.
No development within a phase shall take place until a Construction Method
Statement and Transport Plan has been submitted to, and approved in writing to the
local planning authority. The approved Statement for that phase shall be adhered
to and shall address and provide for:
1
The parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors;
2
The unloading and loading of materials;
3
The storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development;
4
Wheel washing facilities; and
5
Measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction;
6 A scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and
construction works;
7 Details of the site access/routing strategy/signage during the construction
period.
Reason:
To reduce the potential impact on the public highway in accordance with paragraph
32 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Policies ES1and SA2 of the
Stroud district Local Plan (19th November 2015)
38.
Prior to commencement, of development a Construction Environmental
Management Plan and method statement will be submitted to and approved by the
LPA setting out the proposed actions to minimise disturbance to local residents and
ecology during the construction of the proposed development scheme including
protection of ecology, specifying the provisions to be made to control dust
emanating from the site including;
•
•
A commitment to prohibit bonfires on the site during the development;
Details of how it is intended to minimise noise levels; and a scheme
demonstrating how it is intended to liaise with local residents during the
construction process, including how complaints will be handled.
This condition shall be discharged in full when the LPA has received written
confirmation from the Project Ecologist that the scheme and consequent approvals
of reserved matters havePage
been164
constructed
in full accordance with the agreed
of 206
CEMP.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Reason:
In accordance with Policies ES1and ES3 of the Stroud district Local Plan (19th
November 2015).
39.
In order to avoid likely significant effects on the River Frome KWS and the Severn
Estuary SPA, prior to the start of works the LPA shall receive from the applicant and
shall agree a Green Infrastructure Plan, which shall demonstrate how the on-site
open spaces will be managed to provide attractive recreational opportunities. This
shall set measureable targets for each phase of development, clear monitoring and
remediation procedures and appropriate long-term funding and implementation
obligations.
Reason:
In accordance with Stroud district Local Plan 2015 policy SA2.8.
40.
In order to avoid likely significant effects on the River Frome KWS and the Severn
Estuary SPA, prior to the first occupation of the each phase of development the
relevant phase of the agreed Green Infrastructure Plan shall be implemented. This
condition shall be discharged in line with the phasing of development, when the LPA
has received written confirmation from the Project Ecologist that relevant phase of
the Green Infrastructure Plan has been implemented as agreed.
Reason:
In accordance with Stroud district Local Plan 2015 policy SA2.8.
41.
In order to conserve and enhance biodiversity, prior to the commencement of
development works on the site the applicant shall submit, and the LPA shall agree,
a Biodiversity Management Plan, which shall demonstrate how biodiversity will be
conserved and enhanced within the application site. This shall set measureable
targets for each phase of development, clear monitoring and remediation
procedures and appropriate long-term funding and implementation obligations.
Reason:
In accordance with Stroud district Local Plan 2015 policy SA2.8.
42.
In order to secure the conservation and enhancement of biodiversity, the relevant
phase of the agreed Biodiversity Management Plan shall be implemented prior to
the first occupation of the each phase of development. This condition shall be
discharged in line with the phasing of development, when the LPA has received
written confirmation from the Project Ecologist that relevant phase of the
Biodiversity Management Plan has been implemented as agreed.
Reason:
In accordance with Stroud district Local Plan 2015 policy SA2.8.
43.
In order to avoid likely significant effects on the Severn Estuary SPA, reserved
matters applications shall trigger appropriate contributions to the emerging Severn
Estuary Impact AvoidancePage
Strategy
by the Stroud District Local Plan.
165as
of required
206
Reason:
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
In accordance with the Stroud District Local Plan 2015 Policy ES6.
Hours of Construction/Demolition
44.
Demolition or construction works outside a building shall not take place outside
0730 hours to 1830 hours Mondays to Fridays and 0800 hours to 1700 hours on
Saturdays nor at any time on Sundays or Bank Holidays).
Reason:
In accordance with Policy ES3 of the Stroud district Local Plan (19th November
2015.
Self Build Housing
45.
Applications for approval of reserved matters of individual residential phases of the
development shall unless otherwise agreed by Stroud District Council allocate
within each phase a site or sites for self build development .
Reason:
In accordance with Policy HC3 of the adopted Local Plan (2015).
INFORMATIVES
a)
b)
No work should be carried out on the application site that may endanger the safe
operation of the railway or the stability of Network Rail’s structures and adjoining land.
In view of the likely close proximity of some works to the railway boundary the
developer should contact Richard Selwood at Network Rail.
[email protected] before works begin
The proposed development will involve works to be carried out on the public highway
and the Applicant/Developer is required to enter into a legally binding Highway Works
Agreement (including an appropriate bond) with the County Council in its role as the
local highway authority before commencing those works.
Further guidance on the local highway authority's requirements can be found in its
document entitled ' Manual for Gloucestershire Streets' which is available on
Gloucestershire County Council's website
c)
The site is traversed by public rights of way and this permission does not authorise
additional use by motor vehicles, or obstruction, or diversion.
The developer will be expected to meet the full costs of supplying and installing the fire
hydrants and associated infrastructure.
The applicant is advised that to discharge condition 29 the LPA requires a copy of a
completed dedication agreement between the applicant and the local highway
authority or the constitution and details of a Private Management and Maintenance
Company confirming funding, management and maintenance regimes.
d)
For the proposed residential areas of the development that applications for approval of
reserved matters pursuant to
this166
permission
Page
of 206 include a detailed noise assessment
setting out the measures to be taken to ensure that there is no detriment to the
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
amenity of existing and proposed local residents. For guidance purposes, the following
standards should be achieved:i) sound levels within habitable rooms during the hours of 07:00 to 23:00 shall not
exceed 35 dB LAeq,16hour, with windows closed and an alternative means of ventilation
provided;
ii) sound levels within bedrooms during the hours of 23:00 to 07:00 shall not exceed 30
dB LAeq,8hour, with windows closed and an alternative means of ventilation provided;
and
iii)sound levels on balconies and within garden areas during the hours of 07:00 to
23:00 shall not exceed 55 dB LAeq,1hour.
iv) For the proposed employment areas of the development applications for approval
of reserved matters pursuant to this permission shall include detailed noise
assessment detailing the measures to be taken to ensure that there is no increase in
the general background noise environment from the development, assessed in
accordance with BS 4142:2014.
SECTION 106: FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTIONS
A summary of the contributions contained in S106 agreements and obligations to mitigate the
effects of the developments are set out below:
Public Transport
A financial contribution up to a maximum of £525,000 payable in instalments - £200,000 prior
to 300 occupation, followed by £140,000, £95,000, £60,000 and £30,000 on subsequent
anniversaries. Indexed to CPT.
The specific Bus service enhancements to be achieved are summarised below.
Prior to 1st occupation served off the western access , to provide a turning facility sufficient to
accommodate a 12.8m MAN 18.240 single deck bus together with a bus stop incorporating
bus boarder kerbing and a shelter at the western access and no further than 250 metres from
the centre of the Chipmans Platt roundabout.
Prior to 1st occupation served off the eastern access, to provide a turning facility sufficient to
accommodate a 12.8m MAN 18.240 single deck bus together with a bus stop incorporating
bus boarder kerbing and a shelter at the eastern access and no further than 250 metres from
the centre of the Oldends Lane mini roundabout.
To use its reasonable endeavours to provide the spine road linking the western and eastern
accesses prior to 600th occupation and thereafter to provide bus stops at intervals of
approximately 300 metres along the identified bus routes.
Developer to enter into Bus Service Enhancement Agreement with Stagecoach prior to 50th
occupation.
Page 167 of 206
Travel Plan (Residential)
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
A financial contribution of £242,700 payable to in 2 instalments, £112,800 prior to
commencement and £129,900 prior to 600 occupations. Indexed to RPI (Commercial Travel
Plan dealt with by condition on submission of applications for approved matters approval.)
Off-site Highways
Implement improvements to the Chipmans Platt roundabout as agreed with GCC and
complete prior to 200 residential occupations.
GCC to reimburse when and if, it receives LEP funding.
Land West of Stonehouse: Bus service provision
Stagecoach West agrees that a phased service build-up to serve the site is appropriate and
prudent.
Three phases are proposed; they are outlined below.
Phase 1
Phase 1 will involve the diversion of existing Service No. 61 (Stroud – Stonehouse – Dursley)
to be achieved as soon as practically possible in connection with first occupations.
This service will be diverted into the site at the western access off Grove Lane, where turning
facilities will be provided; and diverted into the site at the eastern access, subject to
availability of running time, where turning facilities will be provided no further than 250 metres
from the centre of Oldends Lane mini roundabout.
The service to run with a regular 60 minute core frequency between 07:00 and 19:00
Mondays-Fridays; and between 08:00 and 19:00 on Saturdays. No Sunday service is
proposed in Phase 1.
The service will be operated with a fully-accessible low-floor bus seating not less than 25
seats, such as an Optare Solo or larger.
Phase 2a
Phase 2a will be introduced in conjunction with the 300th residential occupation or no later
than four years after the first occupation, whichever is the sooner.
This service will be provided by the diversion of the existing Service No. 66 E & S, with
Service No. 64 then being extended and diverted to Gloucester each hour to replace the
facility currently provided by Service No. 66 between Stonehouse and Hardwicke via the
current route (B4008).
The service will run with a half-hourly frequency between 07:00 and 19:00 MondaysSaturdays, and hourly in evenings and on Sundays.
This pattern of service provision will also, in all probability, retain some access to the Service
No. 61 if the western turning facility is retained.
Phase 2b
Page 168 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Phase 2b will be introduced on the opening of the spine road to be achieved in conjunction
with the 600th residential occupation. This will enable the diversion of the Phase 2a service
provision through the site via the spine road.
Funding
Stagecoach will fund the costs of diversion into the site under Phase 1.
The Developer(s) will fund the costs of the turning facilities including turning circle, bus stop
and waiting facilities including bus shelter in accordance with Bus Stop specification in
Manual for Gloucestershire Streets (Appendix L). The turning circle is to be sufficient to
accommodate a 12.8m MAN 18.240 single deck bus.
While no developer funding shall be payable in conjunction with Phase 1, a Bus Service
Enhancement Agreement is to be entered into with the Developer(s) no less than 90 days
before the service is required, and the service above shall be operated under the terms of
that Agreement until such time as the Phase 2 is initiated.
Either party may exercise a break clause on the 250th residential occupation to postpone the
implementation of the Phase 2 service provision.
Under Phase 2, the Developer(s) is to make the following payments to Stagecoach West.
West of Stonehouse Phase 2a and 2b Service (66 or as TBC) diversion MondaysSaturdays minimum 2 buses per hour frequency enhancement
Revenue support contribution £
Year 1 contribution £200,000
Year 2 contribution £140,000
Year 3 contribution £95,000
Year 4 contribution £60,000
Year 5 contribution £30,000
TOTAL £525,000
Funding shall be payable over the revenue support period over each calendar year in 13
prorated equal instalments, at four weekly intervals in arrears, until such time as the 5 year
revenue support period above ceases.
All contributions are subject to an inflationary increase in line with the CPT Bus Operators'
Cost index for Southern England.
From the date of inception of the Phase 2a frequency enhancement payments according to
the schedule below will commence and the annual anniversaries thereafter, save that,
should the initial Phase 1 and Phase 2a bus service prove successful and at Stagecoach’s
sole discretion, Stagecoach may operate the Phase 2b bus service within the funding
proposed ata frequency of 3 buses per hour or 20 minutes overall as part of the Phase 2
overall revenue support period, which shall not prejudice the ongoing support of the service
thereafter according to the schedule set out below.
Page 169 of 206
For the avoidance of doubt, Stagecoach may elect to apply the funding towards the
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
operation of the service frequency enhancement, serving the site via either Phase 2a or
Phase 2b route, towards operating the service at a higher frequency than every 20 minutes
from time to time, should it consider this appropriate, and with the agreement of developers,
such agreement not to be unreasonably withheld.
There is a condition relating to off-site footpath and cycleway improvement to be
implemented prior to 200 occupations which will cost some £75,000.
There is also a condition requiring works to improve the northbound on slip at junction 13,
prior to 500 occupations.
Open Space, Recreation and Communities
On Site Play and Recreation Facilities Provision
1.
With each submission of an ARM (Approval of reserved matters) the Owners shall
provide to the District Council for approval:
2.
a)
A scheme for the provision of On Site Play and Recreation Facilities in respect
of that Phase (“the Open Space Scheme”) such scheme to include details of
how the On Site Play and Recreation Facilities are to be laid out and equipped
as a local area of play to at least the standard of ‘Planning and Design for
Outdoor Sport and Play’ published by Fields In Trust (and applicable as at the
date of the relevant ARM) or such other standard as the District Council may
agree.
b)
A scheme of ongoing maintenance for the On Site Play and Recreation
Facilities (including details of the maintenance programme and the funding
arrangements for the same) which will be put in place to ensure the long term
management and maintenance of the relevant Phase to a standard which is at
least as high as the standard to which the District Council would maintain public
open space owned or managed by it (‘the Management Plan’).
Following the implementation of an ARM for the relevant Phase:
a)
Where the location of the On Site Play and Recreation Facilities within the
relevant Phase and the layout of the Development within that Phase permits,
the Owners shall construct and lay out such parts of the On Site Play and
Recreation Facilities within that Phase (which have been first approved by the
District Council pursuant to paragraph 1) as can be safely completed and made
available for use by the general public as soon as practical, having regard to the
timing and nature of construction works to be undertaken within that Phase;
and
b)
The relevant Phase of the On Site Play and Recreation Facilities which has
been approved by the District Council pursuant to paragraph 1 shall be
constructed and/or laid out by the Owners as appropriate in accordance with the
conditions of the Planning Permission, the ARM and the said approved scheme
and in any event prior Page
to the170
endofof206
the planting season following completion of
the relevant Phase; and
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
c)
On completion of the works referred to in Paragraph 2.1.2 above the Owners
shall give the District Council notice of that fact and the District Council shall
confirm on inspection whether such Phase of the On Site Play and Recreation
Facilities has been satisfactorily completed in accordance with the conditions of
the Planning Permission and the ARM and if so shall certify the same to the
Owners (‘the On Site Play and Recreation Facilities Certificate’).
d)
Within 3 months from the date of any On Site Play and Recreation Facilities
Certificate the Owners shall implement and thereafter secure the on-going
delivery of the Management Plan relevant to the particular Phase and serve on
the District Council one or more notices in writing proposing that the future
ownership of the On Site Play and Recreation Facilities the subject of the said
On Site Play and Recreation Facilities Certificate should be vested in:
(a)
a public authority or statutory undertaker (to be agreed by the District
Council) or
(b)
a Management Company or
(c)
any other person (subject to compliance with provisions of this
agreement).
Canal Contribution
To pay the Canal Contribution to the District Council prior to first Occupation of the
200th Dwelling £62500
Refuse and Recycling Contribution
To pay 50% of the Refuse and Recycling Contribution to the District Council prior to
first Occupation of the 250th Dwelling and the remaining 50% prior to first Occupation
of the 750th Dwelling.
3.
4.
Changing Facilities
To construct:
a)
The First Changing Rooms substantially in accordance with the First Changing
Rooms Specification, such that a building control completion certificate in
respect of the First Changing Rooms is issued prior to the date of first
Occupation of the 500th Dwelling and also to ensure that the sports pitches
associated with the First Changing Rooms are in a playable condition to the
written satisfaction of the District Council prior to the date of first Occupation of
the 500th Dwelling;
b)
The Second Changing Rooms substantially in accordance with the Second
Changing Rooms Specification, such that a building control completion
certificate in respect of the Second Changing Rooms is issued prior to the date
of first Occupation of the 1000th Dwelling and also to ensure that the sports
pitches associated with the Second Changing Rooms are in a playable
condition to the written satisfaction of the District Council prior to the date of first
Occupation of the 1000th Dwelling.
Community Hall
Page 171 of 206
Not to allow first Occupation of the 700th Dwelling until the Owners have offered to
transfer the Community Hall to the Parish Council.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The Parish Council may accept the Offer Notice by serving an acceptance notice on
the Owner at any time within 6 months of service of the Offer Notice (Prescribed
Period.
Not to allow first Occupation of the 1000th Dwelling until the Owners have:
a)
constructed the Community Hall substantially in accordance with the approved
plan and Sport England’s Design Guidance Note for Village and Community
Halls, and a building control completion certificate in respect of the Community
Hall has been issued;
b)
fit out the interior of the Community Hall to an agreed specification to the
reasonable satisfaction of the District Council;
c)
Paid the Community Hall Commuted Sum to the Parish Council in the amount
of £30000
d)
subject to paragraph 4.5, following compliance with paragraph 4.3.1, 4.3.2 and
4.3.3, transferred the Community Hall to the Parish Council on the terms as set
out. and,
e)
subject to paragraph 4.5, paid the Parish Council’s reasonable legal costs in
connection with the transfer of the Community Hall.
Subject to paragraph 4.5, to consult and collaborate with the Parish Council during the
design process (but, for the avoidance of doubt, this shall not require the Owners to
construct a Community Hall that is substantially different from that specified in
paragraph 4.3.1 above).
In the event that the Parish Council does not serve an acceptance notice within the
Prescribed Period the Owners may either:
retain the Community Hall and will insure and maintain or procure the insurance and
maintenance of the Community Hall in perpetuity; or
the Community Hall Commuted Sum will be paid to a Management Company and the
Community Hall will be transferred to such Management Company on the terms as
are set out in the Fourth Schedule and such Management Company will insure and
maintain or procure the insurance and maintenance of the Community Hall in
perpetuity
5.
Healthcare Facilities
To reserve the Healthcare Facilities Site for a period of 10 years from the date of this
Agreement and, during that period, to use its reasonable endeavours to secure use of
the Healthcare Facilities Site for Healthcare Provision PROVIDED THAT in the event
that the Owners are unable to secure use of the Healthcare Facilities Site for
Healthcare Provision within the said 10 year period, then the Healthcare Facilities Site
Page 172 of 206
shall no longer be required to be used for Healthcare Provision and the Owners
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
covenant to use the land for such purposes as are permitted in relation to the Local
Centre as may be agreed by the District Council.
6.
Employment Provision
To prepare and submit to the District Council within 6 months following the grant of
Planning Permission the Marketing Plan in respect of the Employment Land for
approval by the District Council.
As soon as is commercially expedient following agreement of the Marketing Plan, to
commence the marketing of the Employment Land (or such part or parts thereof as
have been agreed to be marketed) in accordance with the Marketing Plan.
To notify the District Council of the date on which the marketing of the Employment
Land (or relevant part of it) commenced.
To continue to implement the Marketing Plan until all parts of the Employment Land
has been occupied for the relevant employment purposes.
Not less than every six months, to review the Marketing Plan with the District Council,
report on progress made in relation to the implementation of the Marketing Plan
(including a written summary of marketing activities undertaken, details of interested
parties and of Offers received and transactions completed) and, where appropriate,
make such changes to the Marketing Plan as may be agreed with the District Council
with a view to ensuring the Marketing Plan is achievable and reflects the then current
market conditions.
a)
Prior to the first Occupation of the 400th Dwelling, to provide parcel E4 as a fully
serviced site;
b)
Prior to the first Occupation of the 700th Dwelling;
i) to provide parcels E1, E2 and LC1 as fully serviced sites and
ii) to have secured an Offer for parcel E1, E2 or E4 (the “First Offer”);
7.
c)
Prior to the first Occupation of the 1000th Dwelling;
i) to provide parcels E5 and LC2 as fully serviced sites and
ii) to have secured an Offer (other than the First Offer) for parcel E1, E2, E4 or
E5; and
d)
Prior to the first Occupation of the 1,100th Dwelling, to provide E3 as a fully
serviced site.
Affordable Housing
The Affordable Housing shall be provided in the following sub-proportions or as
otherwise agreed by the Council in writing in accordance with paragraph 3 of Schedule
1 above
Page 173 of 206
1.
If less than 1350 dwellings are constructed pursuant to the Permission then:
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
a)
15% rounded up to the nearest whole Dwelling of the total number of
Dwellings permitted by the Permission shall be Affordable Rented
Housing Units of which:
10% rounded up to the nearest whole Dwelling shall be 1 bed
flats.
10% rounded up to the nearest whole Dwelling shall be 2 bed
flats.
66% rounded up to the nearest whole Dwelling shall be 2 bed
terrace or semi detached houses.
8% rounded up to the nearest whole Dwelling shall be 3 bed
semi detached houses.
6% rounded up to the nearest whole Dwelling shall be 4 bed
semi detached houses.
b)
2 person
4 person
4 person
6 person
8 person
15% rounded up to the nearest whole Dwelling of the total number of
Dwellings permitted by the Permission shall be Intermediate Affordable
Housing Units of which:
10% rounded up to the nearest whole Dwelling shall be 2 bed 4 person
bed flats.
70% rounded up to the nearest whole Dwelling shall be 2 bed 4 person
terrace or semi detached houses.
20% rounded up to the nearest whole Dwelling shall be 3 bed 6 person
semi detached houses.
Page 174 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
2.
If 1350 Dwellings are constructed pursuant to the Permission
a)
202 of the total number of Dwellings shall be Affordable Rented Housing
Units of which:
20 shall be 1 bed 2 person flats.
20 shall be 2 bed 4 person flats.
134 shall be 2 bed 4 person terrace or semi detached houses.
16 shall be 3 bed 6 person semi detached houses.
12 shall be 4 bed 8 person semi detached houses.
b)
202 of the total number of dwellings permitted by the Permission shall be
Intermediate Affordable Housing Units of which:
20 shall be 2 bed 4 person flats.
142 shall be 2 bed 4 person terrace or semi detached houses.
40 shall be 3 bed 6 person semi detached houses.
8.
Education and Libraries
Bonds
The Developer and the Owners will not cause or permit the Commencement of
Development until such time as the Bondsman shall have entered into one or more
First Bond(s) securing:a)
the Library Contribution in the sum of two hundred and sixty four thousand six
hundred pounds (£264,600) (“the Library Basic Sum”) or such sum as may be
equal to the Library Basic Sum multiplied by the library Variable Factor; and
b)
the Education obligations hereof in the sum of Six Million Pounds (£6,000,000)
(“the Education Basic Sum”) (being the estimated cost of providing the School)
or such sum as may be equal to the Education Basic Sum multiplied by the
education Variable Factor.
Six (6) months before the expiry of the First Bond (if the same has not already been
released in full by the Head of Legal Services in accordance with clause 3(a) of the
First Bond) the Developer and the Owners shall procure that the Bondsman (which for
the avoidance of doubt need not be the same Bondsman as in the First Bond but shall
fulfil the criteria specified in the definition of ‘the Bondsman’ in clause 1 of this Deed)
shall have entered into the Further Bond with the Council.
9.
Library Obligations
For the purpose of providing a contribution towards new furniture and/or increasing
stock and/or computer resources and/or the cost of extending opening hours and/or
the cost of capital works in libraries in Stonehouse and/or Stroud the following sums
shall be paid to the Council by the Developer and the Owners.
Page 175 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
a)
b)
c)
d)
£66,150 (together with any payments in accordance with Clauses 14 and 15) on
or before the expiry of six (6) months following Commencement of
Development.
£66,150 (together with any payments in accordance with Clauses 14 and 15) on
or before the First Occupation of the 250th Residential Unit.
£66,150 (together with any payments in accordance with Clauses 14 and 15) on
or before the First Occupation of the 500th Residential Unit.
£66,150 (together with any payments in accordance with Clauses 14 and 15)
on or before the First Occupation of the 1000th Residential Unit.
School Construction
The Developer and Owners shall construct the School on the School Site in accordance with
Schedule Four hereto such that a completion certificate within the meaning of that schedule
can be issued (i) in respect of Phase 1 on or prior to the 31st May following the date on which
the 250th Residential Unit is First Occupied pursuant to the Planning Permission and (ii) in
respect of Phase 2, either on the 31st May following the date on which the 500th Residential
Unit is First Occupied pursuant to the Planning Permission or in accordance with such
timeframe as may be agreed with the Council pursuant to clause 3.3.3.
The Developer and Owners shall comply with the following in providing the School:
i)
All requirements of Part III of the Act. Copies of all relevant permissions approvals and
certificates shall be provided to the Council on transfer of the School Site (or Phase 1
of it).
ii)
All construction shall be carried out to meet all the Building Regulations requirements
current during the construction of the School. The Department for Education – Advice
on Standards for School Premises current during the construction of the School shall
be followed where those are set at a higher level standard or requirement than the
Building Regulations.
iii)
The design shall comply with the guidance and regulations then current in the
Department for Education guidance with which a school built by the Council must
comply set out below:
Building Bulletins
BB100 – Fire
BB101 – Ventilation
BB103 – Area guidelines for mainstream schools
BB94 – Inclusive School Design
BB93 – Acoustic Design of Schools
BB91 – Access for Disabled People to School Buildings: Management and Design
BB90 – Lighting Design for Schools
BB87 – Guidelines for Environmental Design
BB85 – School Grounds: A Guide to Good Practice
BB78 – Security Lighting Crime Prevention on Schools Series
BB75 – Closed Circuit TV Surveillance Systems in Educational Buildings Crime
Prevention in Schools Series
BB71 – The Outdoor Classroom
Page 176 of 206
BB69 – Crime Prevention in Schools: Specification, Installation and Maintenance of
Intruder Alarm Systems
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
BB67 – Crime Prevention in Schools: Practical Guidance
Regulatory Information
The Education (School Premises) Regulations 1999
DfES Circular ‘The School Premises Regulations’
DfES Constructional Standards
iv)
The Developer will supply to the Council three sets of the design documentation.
v)
The School shall be constructed in accordance with the Specification the detailed
design and detailed specification (the second and third being as approved pursuant to
paragraph 3.13 of the First Schedule) subject to any amendment thereto as may be
requested from time to time by the Developer and as has been agreed in writing by the
Council.
vi)
The Council’s Representative shall be provided with full contract and construction
documentation by the Developer, be given access to the School Site at all times
during construction of the School and be invited to all contract progress meetings. The
function of the Council’s Representative shall be to ensure that the standards agreed
for design construction and materials are adhered to throughout the construction of the
School. For the avoidance of doubt the Council’s Representative (or any other servant
contractor or agent of the Council given access to the School or the School Site) shall
have no role or responsibility in relation to health and safety matters save in respect of
his personal conduct to comply with all health and safety requirements pertaining.
vii)
For the duration of the construction of the School the Developer shall arrange, at their
own cost, for the use and to the reasonable satisfaction of the Council’s Representative
(or other authorised officer of the Council) of site office accommodation with telephone
heating toilet and working and lighting facilities. This may be shared accommodation.
viii)
Defects shall be identified and their rectification monitored in accordance with the
procedure at Schedule Four Part II.
ix)
The procedure and timescale for handover for the School shall be in accordance with
that in Schedule Four Part II.
x)
The construction of the School shall only be carried out by the employment of a
contractor or sub-contractor approved in writing by the Council xi) In the event of the
Developer entering into a contract with a contractor or subcontractor they shall do so
using the appropriate current Joint Contracts Tribunal 2011 contract terms and
conditions or such other form or contract as the Developer considers appropriate given
the subject matter of the contract and is approved in writing by the Council.
xii)
The Developer shall give the Council at least ten days notice of commencement of
works for the construction of the School.
xiii)
Reasonable steps shall be taken to ensure that the construction of the School is
properly supervised and the Developer will provide stage certificates to the Council as
to compliance with the designPage
and Specification
177 of 206 on completion of each of the following
stages:
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Completion of the superstructure
On the School being watertight
Completion of all first fixings
Completion of the School or relevant Phase of it
the Council Representative being invited to attend the meetings intended to result in
the issue of those stage certificates and for the avoidance of doubt the Developer
hereby agrees that in the event that the Council’s Representative raises an objection in
writing to the issue of a stage certificate in accordance with this clause that certificate
will not be issued until that objection has been considered .
xiv)
The Developer shall be responsible for the rectification (at their own expense and
within a reasonable time limit specified by the Council) of any defects arising in any
part of the School (but not caused as a result of damage after Handover) for a period
of twelve months from the date of issue of the completion certificate pursuant to
Schedule Four Part II Paragraph i and thereafter until the issue of a final certificate
pursuant to Schedule Four Part II Paragraph ii.
xv)
Four weeks after the date of issue of a completion certificate pursuant to Schedule
Four Part II Paragraph i and in any event prior to the expiry of twelve months there
from the Developer shall provide five sets of “as built” drawings, site plans, land
surveys, capable of showing the School Site at scales from at least 1:500 to 1:2500
identifying site boundaries and dimensions and reference points in paper and
electronic form in accordance with BS 1192:2007 full specifications, plans and details
of all services and guarantees of materials and installations.
xvi)
A programme for the timing for the detailed design construction and handover of the
School in accordance with this Deed shall be submitted to the Council before
construction of the School or relevant Phase of it commences. The programme shall
be updated by the Developer on a monthly basis with detailed reasons for the failure to
meet any target dates, or slippage in the forecast and proposals for recovering any
such slippage but for the avoidance of doubt this paragraph is without prejudice to the
Councils right’s in accordance with paragraphs 3.5 and 3.6 of the First Schedule.
xvii) All construction shall be undertaken in accordance with Health and Safety Executive
requirements and the Construction (Design and Management) Regulations then
current in respect of which the Developer shall be “the Client”.
xviii) For the avoidance of doubt the School will be constructed to be ready for occupation
upon handover in so far as the Developer is reasonably able to do so subject to timely
performance of the Council and its servants contractors and agents pursuant to
Schedule Four Part I Paragraph xx and Schedule Four Part II Paragraph iii.
xix)
In respect of each Phase, the Developer is to provide such of the following as are
applicable to that Phase: fixtures and fittings on, in and outside the School including
fixed gym equipment, wall bars, line markings, storage facilities, a fully operating
kitchen suitable for cooking school meals (including kitchen units), W.C.’s, basins,
sinks, showers, floor finishes,
window
and
Page
178 of
206door furniture, built-in cupboards, blinds,
fitted electrical equipment, telephone points, fire fighting equipment, shelving, notice
boards, cloakroom fixtures and fittings together with all external works on the School
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Site including landscaping, external lighting, security measures, gates, paths, cycle
path facilities, boundary fences and boundary treatment, all connections to mains
services including wiring for voice and data telemetry from the service to the point of
use but excluding telephony and computer installation and commissioning. All Service
Media and equipment as provided or supplied by the Developer to be operational at
handover.
xx)
Interactive electronic white boards, projectors including telephony and computer
installation and commissioning and other freestanding equipment will be provided by
the Council and fixed by the Developer such fixing to include connection to services.
xxi)
The accommodation shall be provided at least to the areas specified in the Schedule of
Accommodation annexed to this Deed.
xxii) All buildings comprised within the School shall be designed, specified and the
construction supervised by the Developer engaging a RIBA Architect and such
specialist consultants and construction firms as are necessary (to be approved in
writing by the Council).
xxiii) The Council shall be given the room tender sheets and such comments as it may give
shall be considered prior to tender documentation being completed.
Part II
The Developer will request that the Council:
i)
Issue a completion certificate to the Developer upon
(aa) completion of the School or relevant Phase of it to the reasonable satisfaction of
the Council; and
(bb) the delivery to the Council of the Health and Safety file in relation to the School
or relevant Phase of it in accordance with the Construction (Design and Management)
Regulations.
(cc) the delivery to the Council of an environmental consultant’s certificate in favour
of the Council certifying that the School Site is suitable for use (i.e. not contaminated
land within the meaning of Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990) as a site
for a primary school in accordance with the terms of this Deed.
ii)
Issue a final certificate to the developer in respect of the School or relevant Phase of it
upon
- the expiry of twelve months from issue of the completion certificate, and
- the Developer making good to the reasonable satisfaction of the Council such
works as may be required pursuant to Schedule Four Part I Paragraph xiv, and
- the Developer having delivered to the Council any additional matters in its
possession necessary to be added to the Health and Safety file in relation to the
School in accordance with the Construction (Design and Management)
Regulations, and
- the Developer having delivered to the Council the items required by Schedule
Four Part I Paragraph xv.
HUMAN RIGHTS
Page 179 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
In compiling this recommendation we have given full consideration to all aspects of the
Human Rights Act 1998 in relation to the applicant and/or the occupiers of any neighbouring
or affected properties. In particular regard has been had to Article 8 of the ECHR (Right to
Respect for private and family life) and the requirement to ensure that any interference with
the right in this Article is both permissible and proportionate. On analysing the issues raised
by the application no particular matters, other than those referred to in this report, warranted
any different action to that recommended.
Page 180 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Item No:
08
Application No.
Site No.
Site Address
S.13/2668/OUT
PP-03034892 (251)
Wimberley Mill, Knapp Lane, Brimscombe, Gloucestershire
Town/Parish
Minchinhampton Parish Council
Grid Reference
387435,202014
Application
Type
Proposal
Outline Planning Permission
Demolition and clearance of the existing buildings and hardstanding,
residential development of up to 104 dwellings, vehicular and pedestrian
access, Internal access roads, car parking, surface water drainage and
related works, various engineering operations including changes to site
levels, de-culverting the River Frome and works to create new flow and
flood channels, associated landscaping including a play area. (Revised
Plan 21st November 2014, revised description of development and plans
13.5.2015).
Page 181 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Applicant’s
Details
Mr Alvin Lindley
Wimberley Park, Knapp Lane, Brimscombe, Gloucestershire, GL5 2TH
Agent’s Details
Mr David Hutchison
Pegasus Planning Group, Pegasus House, Querns Business Centre,
Whitworth Road, Cirencester, GL7 1RT
Case Officer
Pippa Moore
Application
Validated
05.12.2013
RECOMMENDATION
Recommended
Decision
Subject to the
following
conditions:
Resolve to Grant Permission
1.
Before any development is commenced, approval shall be
obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing of the details
of the layout (plot 50 only as defined on plan ref. C.0480_24)
scale, appearance of the buildings and the landscaping of the site
(hereinafter called "the reserved matters").
Application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to
the local planning authority not later than three years from the date
of this permission.
The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than two
years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters
to be approved.
Reason:
To comply with the requirements of Section 92 of the Town and
Country Planning Act 1990.
2.
The Reserved Matters applications submitted pursuant to condition
no.1 shall be in broad accordance with the guiding design
principles of the addendum to the Design and Access Statement
dated May 2015..
Reason:
In the interests of ensuring the development proceeds in
accordance with the approved parameters in the interest of good
design.
3.
Plans and particulars submitted pursuant to condition 1 above
shall include the following details:
i.
Details of access arrangements including surface material
Page
206
finishes
for182
the of
highways,
footpaths, cycle ways, private drives
and all other hard surfaces;
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
ii.
The soft and hard landscaping of the site and details of screen
walls, fences and other means of enclosure
iii. details of existing and proposed ground levels and proposed
finished floor levels and building heights;
Reason: to ensure that sufficient information is provided in the
interests of good design.
4.
No building hereby permitted shall be occupied until surface water
drainage works have been implemented in accordance with details
that have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. The detailed design should follow principles as
detailed in the drainage strategy submitted with the planning
application. Before these details are submitted an assessment
shall be carried out of the potential for disposing of surface water
by means of a sustainable drainage system in accordance with the
principles set out in Annex F of PPS25 (or any subsequent
version), and the results of the assessment provided to the Local
Planning Authority. Where a sustainable drainage scheme is to be
provided, the submitted details shall:
i. provide information about the design storm period and intensity,
the method employed to delay and control the surface water
discharged from the site and the measures taken to prevent
pollution of the receiving groundwater and/or surface waters;
ii. include a timetable for its implementation; and
iii. provide a management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of
the development which shall include the arrangements for
adoption by any public authority or statutory undertaker and any
other arrangements to secure the operation of the scheme
throughout its lifetime.
Reason:
To ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory
means of drainage as well as to reduce the risk of creating or
exacerbating a flooding problem and to minimise the risk of
pollution for the lifetime of the development.
5.
The finished floor levels of the development hereby permitted shall
be set no lower than 62.64m AOD (600mm above the modelled 1
in 100 year floor level including an allowance for climate change).
Reason:
To ensure
that183
the of
development
is free from flooding and remains
Page
206
safe for the lifetime of the development in accordance with Chapter
10 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
6.
The first Reserved Matters submitted pursuant to condition 1 shall
include details of the siting and design of a single clear spanning
pedestrian footbridge over the River Frome with a soffit level set at
a minimum of 600mm above the modelled 1 in 100 year flood level
(including an allowance for climate change).
Reason:
To ensure that the development provides safe pedestrian access
which is free from flooding and remains safe for the lifetime of the
development in accordance with Chapter 10 of the National
Planning Policy Framework.
7.
For the purposes of condition 6 above the pedestrian bridge shall
be solely sited in the general location marked A, B or C on the
Indicative Footbridge and Maintenance Margin Locations Plan (ref.
C.0480_22E). It shall be constructed in accordance with the
approved details prior to the occupation of the 100th dwelling
hereby approved.
Reason:
To ensure that the development provides safe pedestrian access
which is free from flooding and remains safe for the lifetime of the
development in accordance with Chapter 10 of the National
Planning Policy Framework.
8.
In the event that the pedestrian footbridge is to be sited in the
general location marked "C" on the Indicative Footbridge and
Maintenance Margin Locations Plan (ref. C.0480_22E) the siting
and design of the bridge shall allow for maintenance vehicle
access to the River Frome between the bridge position and plot
44.
Reason:
To ensure vehicular access to the River Corridor for the ongoing
maintenance of the corridor, in the interests of water management
in accordance with Chapter 10 of the National Planning Policy
Framework
9.
The first Reserved Matters submitted under condition 1 shall
include a continuous maintenance margin with a width of up to 8m
on the northern side of the River Frome and a continuous
maintenance margin with a width of up to 4m on the southern side
of the River Frome between the positions identified as " A" to "B"
and "B" to "C" on the Footbridge and Maintenance Margin
Locations Plan (ref. C.0480_22E).
Reason:
To ensure
vehicular
to the River Corridor for the ongoing
Page
184 of access
206
maintenance of the corridor, in the interests of water management
in accordance with Chapter 10 of the National Planning Policy
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Framework
10.
The River Frome maintenance margins shall be left unobstructed
at all times and shall be landscaped in accordance with details that
shall first be submitted and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority prior to the commencement of development.
The details shall include a timetable for implementation and shall
proceed and be maintained in accordance with the approved
details.
Reason:
To ensure suitable landscaping and management of the
maintenance margins to enable access to the River Corridor for
the ongoing maintenance of the corridor, in the interests of water
management in accordance with Chapter 10 of the National
Planning Policy Framework
11.
The development hereby permitted shall not commence until
further details of the proposed means of maintenance vehicular
access to and from the maintenance margin on the southern side
of the River Frome between the positions identified as "P" and "C"
on the Footbridge and Maintenance Margin Locations Plan (ref.
C.0480_22E) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority. Development shall then proceed and be
maintained in accordance with the approved details.
Reason:
Information required as part of the detailed design phase in order
to ensure vehicular access to the River Corridor for the ongoing
maintenance of the corridor, in the interests of water management
in accordance with Chapter 10 of the National Planning Policy
Framework.
12.
No development comprising the erection of the buildings hereby
permitted shall take place above slab level until the River Frome
Culvert has been reopened. The works to reopen the River Frome
Culvert shall accord with the Sections detailed on drawings
C.0480_23C-1 and C.0480_23C-2.
Reason:
To ensure that the development is free from flooding and remains
safe for the lifetime of the development in accordance with Chapter
10 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
13.
Following demolition but prior to the commencement of
development a scheme to deal with ground contamination,
controlled waters and/or ground gas has been submitted to and
approvedPage
by the
Local
185 of
206 Planning Authority. The scheme shall
include all of the following measures, unless the Local Planning
Authority dispenses with any such requirement specifically in
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
writing:i.
A Phase I site investigation carried out by a competent person
to include a desk study, site walkover, the production of a site
conceptual model and a human health and environmental risk
assessment, undertaken in accordance with BS 10175:2011
Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites - Code of
Practice.
ii.
If identified as required by the above approved Phase 1 site
investigation report, a Phase II intrusive investigation report
detailing all investigative works and sampling on site, together
with the results of the analysis, undertaken in accordance with
BS 10175:2011 Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites
- Code of Practice. Where required, the report shall include a
detailed quantitative human health and environmental risk
assessment including off site receptors.
iii. If identified as required by the above approved Phase II
intrusive investigation report, a remediation scheme detailing
how the remediation will be undertaken, what methods will be
used and what is to be achieved. A clear end-point of the
remediation should be stated, such as site contaminant levels
or a risk management action, as well as how this will be
validated. Any ongoing monitoring should also be outlined. No
deviation shall be made from this scheme without prior written
approval from the Local Planning Authority.
No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied
until:1. Any previously unidentified contamination encountered during
the works has been fully assessed and an appropriate
remediation scheme submitted to and approved the Local
Planning Authority.
2. A verification report detailing the remediation works undertaken
and quality assurance certificates to show that the works have
been carried out in full accordance with the approved
methodology has been submitted to, and approved by, the
Local Planning Authority. Details of any post-remedial sampling
and analysis to show that the site has reached the required
clean-up criteria shall be included, together with the necessary
documentation detailing what waste materials have been
removed from the site.
Reason:
Information
required
Page
186 of as
206part of further investigations, in order to
protect the health of future users of the site and ground and
surface water receptors from any possible effects of contaminated
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
land in accordance with the guidance within the National Planning
Policy Framework in particular, Paragraph 120.
14.
The development hereby permitted shall not commence until
details (including samples) of the walling, roofing and fenestration
to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the
building works hereby permitted have been submitted to and
approved by the Local Planning Authority. This shall include a
schedule of which materials shall be used on each buildings.
Development shall then only be carried out in accordance with the
approved details.
Reason:
Information required as part of the detailed design phase in the
interests of the visual amenities of the area.
15.
The development hereby permitted shall not commence until
details of the proposed Local Equipped Area of Play (LEAP)
including details of its siting, the hard surfaced areas, means of
enclosure and boundary treatments and details of the play
equipment, and any signs and lighting (if applicable) together with
a programme for their implementation, have been submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The features
shall then only be developed in accordance with the approved
details and in accordance with the approved implementation
programme.
Reason:
Information required as part of the detailed design phase in order
to ensure that adequate recreation facilities are provide on site.
16.
All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of
landscaping shall be carried out in the first complete planting and
seeding seasons following the occupation of the buildings, or the
completion of the development to which it relates, whichever is the
sooner. Any trees or plants which, within a period of five years
from the completion of the development, die, are removed, or
become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the
next planting season with others of similar size and species.
Reason:
In the interests of the visual amenities of the area.
17.
The development hereby permitted shall not commence on site
until a plan indentifying the trees and/or hedges to be retained and
those to be removed as part of this development, and the method
and timetable for implementation of the protection of the retained
trees/hedges
construction has been submitted to and
Page during
187 of 206
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development
shall then proceed in accordance with the approved details.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Reason:
Information required as part of the detailed design phase in order
to ensure the health and safety of the trees on the site and to
ensure continuity of the visual amenity that they provide and the
ecological habitat potential and to comply with Policy ES6, ES8 of
the adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015 and
guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework.
18.
The development hereby permission shall not commence until a
Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and
approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved
Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period.
The Statement shall:
i. specify the type and number of vehicles;
ii. provide for the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors;
iii. provide for the loading and unloading of plant and materials;
iv. provide for the storage of plant and materials used in
constructing the development;
v. provide for wheel washing facilities;
vi. measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during
construction
vii hours of working
viii measures to protect the water course during construction
ix measures to protect ecological habitat during construction
phase.
Reason:
The provision of further information in order to reduce the potential
impact on the public highway during the construction phase in
accordance with Policy ES3 of the adopted Stroud District Local
Plan, November 2015 and the National Planning Policy Framework
Chapter 4.
19.
The development hereby permitted shall not commence until
details of the proposed improved connection of the PROW to the
canal towpath has been submitted to an approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority, together with a timetable for the
implementation of the highway works. The works shall then be
completed in accordance with the approved timetable and shall be
maintained as such thereafter unless and until adopted as highway
maintainable at public expense.
Reason:
Information is required as part of the detailed design phase to
ensure that there suitable access details are provided to reduce
potential Page
highway
188impact,
of 206 in accordance with paragraph 32 of the
National Planning Policy Framework.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
20.
The dwellings hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the
highway works as shown on approved plan H816-101 Rev D, shall
be completed in all respects and the works shall be maintained as
such thereafter unless and until adopted as highway maintainable
at public expense.
Reason:
To reduce potential highway impact, in accordance with paragraph
32 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
21.
The development hereby permitted shall not commence until
details of the highway works has been submitted to and agreed in
writing by the Local Planning Authority, including:
i.
Bus infrastructure improvements at the bus stops on
Toadsmoor Road
ii. Improvements to the existing steps on Knapp Lane providing
access to Toadsmoor Road
iii. 30mph speed limit signage along Knapp Lane
The dwellings hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the
approved works have been completed, the works shall be
maintained as such thereafter unless and until adopted as highway
maintainable at public expense.
Reason:
Information is required as part of the detailed design phase to
ensure that suitable access details are provided to reduce potential
highway impact, in accordance with paragraph 32 of the National
Planning Policy Framework.
22.
No house building operations shall commence on site until the first
20m of the proposed access road which provide access to the site
from Knapp Lane, including the junction with the existing public
road and associated visibility splays, has been completed to at
least binder course level and the works shall be maintained as
such thereafter unless and until adopted as highway maintainable
at public expense.
Reason:
To minimise hazards and inconvenience for users of the
development by ensuring that there is a safe, suitable and secure
means of access for all people that minimises the conflict between
traffic and cyclists and pedestrians in accordance with the National
Planning Policy Framework.
23.
No building on the development shall be occupied until the
carriageway(s)
surface water drainage/disposal,
Page 189(including
of 206
vehicular turning head(s) and street lighting) providing access from
the nearest public highway to that dwelling have been completed
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
to at least binder course level and the footway(s) to surface course
level.
Reason:
To minimise hazards and inconvenience for users of the
development by ensuring that there is a safe, suitable and secure
means of access for all people that minimises the conflict between
traffic and cyclists and pedestrians in accordance with the National
Planning Policy Framework.
24.
No dwelling hereby permitted shall be occupied until a
Management Strategy, has been submitted to and approved in
writing by the Local Planning Authority, for the management and
maintenance for the following;
i. Drainage - proposals outlined in the approved Drainage
Scheme,
ii. Open space areas - including any formal and informal play
areas,
iii. Ecological enhancement measures as outlined in the approved
plans, and
iv. The River Frome maintenance margins
v. All other areas of open space not subject to adoption by public
authorities,
The Management Strategy shall include a programme for
implementation,
long
term
management
responsibilities,
maintenance schedules and details of any Management Company
proposed and its terms of reference. The areas shall then be
managed in accordance with the approved Strategy.
Reason:
To ensure that adequate safeguards are provided to ensure the
ongoing management of these spaces within the development in
accordance with Policies CP14, ES3, ES4, ES6, ES8 of the
adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015 and the
guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework.
25.
The development hereby permitted shall be implemented in
accordance with the Bat Report by Ecology Solutions Ltd
(November 2013), Ecology Survey Report by Applied Ecology Ltd
(August 2013) and Ecological Assessment by Corylus (November
2012) and the approved plans, with particular reference to the
need to fully accord with all the recommendations and evaluation
made within the reports.
Reason:
To protect features of recognised nature conservation importance
in accordance with Policy ES6 and CP14 of the Local Plan and
Chapter 11
of the
Page
190NPPF.
of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
26.
Prior to the commencement of development, a plan detailing the
position of fire hydrants on the site to be served by mains water
supply shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. Development shall then be carried out in
accordance with the approved details with the hydrants provided
prior to the occupation of the units to which they relate.
Reason:
In the interest of community safety.
27.
No development shall take place within the application site until the
applicant, or their agents or successors in title, has secured the
implementation of a programme of archaeological work in
accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been
previously submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority.
Reason:
To make provision for a programme of archaeological mitigation,
so as to record and advance understanding of any heritage assets
which will be lost, in accordance with paragraph 141 of the
National Planning Policy Framework.
28.
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in
accordance with the following approved plans and documents:
Master plan dwg no. C.0480_14N-2
Sections Location Plan dwg no. C.0480_23C
Sections through River Frome Corridor dwg no. C.0480_23C-2
Indicative Footbridge and Maintenance Margins Locations dwg no.
C.0480_22E
Extent of Plot 50 dwg no. C.0480-24
General Road Arrangement Road 2 dwg no. H.816-301 Rev G
General Arrangement Road dwg no. H.816.302 Rev F
Tracking for Refuse Vehicle (Northern) dwg. H.816-TRO1 Rev E
Tracking for Refuse Vehicle (Southern) dwg. H.816-TRO2 Rev E
All received by the LPA on the 14th May 2015.
Reason:
For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of good planning.
CONSULTEES
Comments
Received
Contaminated Land Officer (E)
Mr David Lesser
Environmental Health (E)
The Environment Agency (E)
Page 191 ofRevised
206
Development Coordination
Details (E)
Natural England (E)
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Parish / Town
Historic England SW
Brimscombe With Thrupp Parish Council
Archaeology Dept (E)
Not Yet
Received
Property Shared Services Centre British Waterways
Canal Team (E)
Gloucestershire Education Dept (E)
Gloucestershire Wildlife Trust (E)
CONTRIBUTORS
Letters of
Objection
Letters of
Support
Letters of
Comment
D Miles, Pencarrow, Quarhouse Lane, Brimscombe
W B Peytan, The Dockyard,, Brimscombe,
A Holman, Hyde Green Cottage, London Road, Brimscombe
P Wilkie, The Old Coach House, Hyde
Brimscombe And Thrupp Parish Council,
Broadstone Close, Barnwood
P Cole, Foresters Lodge, London Road
S Cole, Foresters Lodge, London Road
G And T Callow, Hyde House Cottage, Knapp Lane, Hyde,
Stroud,
G Wheeler-Carmichael, Hyde Grange (Knapp Lane), Chalford,
Stroud,
G Foxley, Badgers Bank, Knapp Lane, Hyde, Chalford
J Leake, 4 Knapp Cottages, Knapp Lane, Brimscombe
B Flectcher, Cristley, London Road
J And R Leake, 4 Knapp Cottages, Knapp Lane, Brimscombe,
B Fletcher, Cristley, London Road
J Clifford, Knapp House, Knapp Lane
Mr W B Petyan, The Dockyard, Brimscombe
Graham Foxley, Badgers Bank, Hyde
Mr And Mrs Wilkie, Old Coach House, Hyde
N Webb, Pencarrow,, Quarhouse Brimscombe
C And I Shearman, Ivy Cottage, Hyde
Mr T Howell-Hughes, Greendale, Churchill Road
R Watt, 4 Knapp Cottages, Knapp Lane
Mr & Mrs I R Shearman, Ivy Cottage, Hyde
Mr & Mrs Shearman, Ivy Cottage, Hyde
Minchinhampton Parish Council, The Trap House, West End
Chalford Parish, Chalford Parish Centre, Gerals Way
Cotswolds Conservation Board, Fosse Way, Northleach
G Wheeler-Carmichael, Hyde Grange, Chalford
Page 192 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
OFFICER’S REPORT
SITE
The application site consists of a largely linear site known as Wimberley Mills located at the
bottom of the Frome valley. The site is currently made up of a series of occupied and
unoccupied commercial buildings as well as hard surfaced areas. The land sits alongside the
canal to the north boundary with the River Frome culverted through the site.
The land is broadly flat at the northern most part of the site and then rises steeply at the
southern boundaries. The site has a mix of mature and semi mature hedgerow and trees.
There is a public right of way running through the site from the southern edge across to the
north eastern corner.
The site falls within the Industrial Heritage Conservation Area, as well as forming part of a
designated flood plain.
The site is within the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).
PROPOSAL
The proposal seeks outline permission for the erection of up to 104 dwellings with the matters
of layout and access being considered and all other matters reserved. In relation to Plot 50,
the matter of layout is also a reserved matter for future consideration because the position
and design of the bridge is yet to be determined and this will have some bearing on the
position of the house on plot 50.
The proposed access is taken from the existing access into the industrial site from Knapp
Lane.
REVISED DETAILS
Revisions have been made to the initial scheme to clarify the proposal and remove the
sheltered housing units. Further revisions have been made to the layout of the scheme and
the supporting documentation including an Addendum to the Design and Access Statement.
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
S.12/2264/OUT – an application for the redevelopment of the site for 96 dwellings and up to
20 sheltered units was withdrawn in March 2013.
The site is an allocation in the adopted Local Plan, November 2015 as part of the Stroud
Valley Allocation SA1 which promotes a mixed use redevelopment of this site.
Page 193 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
CONSULTATION RESPONSES
Public: A number of objections to the proposed development, covering the following issues;
* Access – Knapp Lane and Toadsmoor Road junctions including the bridge, drivers wanting
to go south may find using Knapp Lane attractive and highway safety aspects of this have not
been addressed
* Traffic generation exacerbating existing congestion
* Flooding
* Unsustainable Location with limited access to facilities.
* Wildlife impact
* Loss of Employment
* Impact on operation of other commercial premises in the area. Conflict of proposed
residential use with existing industrial use.
* Development appears cramped and out of keeping, limited parking provision will add to
traffic problems
Minchinhampton Parish Council: Object – access, the safety of potential traffic to use
Knapp Lane, and the lack of affordable or social housing,(adopted policy reference HN5).
Cllrs had concerns about access, traffic flows, and site clean-up costs. Car parking was
inadequate leading to displacement to other areas. There was also potential for traffic
congestion under the bridge which would itself need reconstruction. Site clean-up costs have
been under estimated. The application misses the opportunity to look at canal regeneration to
enable manageable traffic to go through. The Knapp Lane South junction needs serious reconsideration.
Brimscombe with Thrupp Parish Council: (adjoining Parish) Object – Knapp Lane and
Toadsmoor/A419 Junctions are already overstretched with traffic and any additional traffic
without road improvements will cause significant highway problems
Chalford Parish Council: (adjoining Parish) – we are concerned that the increase in traffic
will add to the existing congestion at the junction of Toadsmoor Road and the A419. While
we would not wirsh to oppose the redevelopment of brownfield sites to meet housing needs
and generate employment opportunities, we believe improvements to the road junction are
required.
Local Highway Authority: The LHA has considered the information provided and originally
objected on the basis that the submission has not demonstrated that a safe and suitable
access can be provided. Further work has been undertaken regarding a road safety audit.
The LHA has been reconsulted and raises no objection subject to conditions. This is on the
basis that the NPPF states at paragraph 32 that development should not be refused on
transport grounds unless the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe. It is
considered that impacts are not severe.
GCC Archaeological Officer: Recommend that no objection is raised providing that a
condition requiring a scheme of investigation to be secured be added to any permission
granted.
Page 194 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
SDC Housing and Policy Implementation Manager: The District Valuer has confirmed that
the scheme is not financially viable if affordable housing is included within it. However, I
would expect there to be a s.106 agreement with an overage clause such that if the scheme
yields a profit in excess of 20% gross development value, 50% of this excess should be
secured to provide affordable housing.
Environmental Protection Manager: no objection and makes suggestions of conditions
controlling delivery times and dust management. The need for conditions controlling
contaminated land has also been requested.
Environment Agency: has no objection to the proposed development subject to conditions
controlling the associated impacts of the development.
Natural England: identify the potential impact on Rodborough Common SAC and advise that
appropriate mitigation is provided in line with the interim strategy. No comment is made on
protected species.
Historic England: The application should be in line with national and local guidance, and on
the basis of the Council’s specialist conservation advice. However, there are some concerns
about the loss of building 4 which exhibits some characteristics of value.
Gloucestershire Police: make comments on the layout of the site and make suggestions on
the physical changes that could be made to improve security. A request for a contribution
towards policing is outlined.
Severn Trent Water: no objection but suggest condition regarding surface water run off
Ecologist: no objection subject to a condition requiring an ecology mitigation and
enhancement plan.
Water Resources Engineer: Comments on the increase in number of dwellings from 96 to
104 and suggests a condition relating to surface water drainage.
PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS - NATIONAL AND LOCAL PLANNING POLICIES
Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in
accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
The adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015 is the Development Plan for Stroud
District. This plan has recently been found sound by the Appeal Inspector and adopted and is
therefore considered consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework. The National
Planning Policy Framework sets out the Government’s core planning principles and a
statement on achieving sustainable development. The document then provides guidance in a
series of 13 chapters covering the range of planning considerations.
Core Policy CP1 of the adopted Stroud District Local Plan, November 2015 and the core
planning principles of the NPPF (Paragraph 17) seek to enhance and improve the places in
people live, support sustainable development, secure high quality design, protect important
landscape features, encourage the use of renewable sources, conserve and enhance the
natural environment, re-use previously
Pagedeveloped
195 of 206land, promote mixed use developments,
conserve heritage assets, encourage sustainable transport and improve health, social and
cultural wellbeing for all.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Local Policy CP2 sets out the overall strategy for distributing future housing growth and
meeting the District's strategic housing needs throughout the Plan period. This spatial plan is
backed up by CP4 which, together with CP5, aims to ensure that future development
responds to local needs and local characteristics, and is well built and well integrated into
local communities. Policy SA1 identifies Wimberley Mills as a site suitable for mixed use
development, subject to viability and site specific circumstances. SA1 indicates 100 dwellings
and employment uses would be appropriate.
Policy CP15 seeks to protect the separate identity of settlements and the quality of the
countryside and only seeks to permit essential development under identified circumstances.
This aims to discourage unplanned development outside of the main urban areas and
defined settlement boundaries.
Local Policy CP14 (together with ES12) places the quality of design and development right at
the heart of the Local Plan and stresses the importance of careful design and layout in
achieving development (of all kinds) that is truly integrated into its setting, with good, safe
and convenient connections to surrounding facilities and amenities. This is consistent with
Chapter 10 (Paragraphs 93-108) of the NPPF which establishes the Governments objectives
in supporting the delivery of a low carbon future which would aids to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions, minimise vulnerability and provide resilience to the impacts of climate change.
This chapter considers the implications of development on areas prone to flooding by virtue
of proximity to watercourses or management of surface water. Local Plan Policy ES4
considers water resources, quality and flood risk. Chapter 7 (Paragraphs 56-68) of the
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) also stresses the importance of quality design in
the provision of sustainable development.
Local Policy CP13 sets out what will be expected of new development, in terms of
sustainable travel and transport planning. Chapter 4 (Paragraphs 29-41) of the NPPF also
promote the need for sustainable transport. These outline the need to offer people access to
a real choice about how they chose to travel and require access to sustainable transport
modes. Sustainable transport solutions will vary from urban to rural areas is also recognised.
Local Plan Policy ES3 maintains highway safety including public rights of way. Policy EI12
details the Councils parking standards.
Local Plan Policy ES3 seeks to maintain quality of life by preventing an unacceptable level of
noise, general disturbance, smell, fumes, loss of daylight or sunlight, loss of privacy or an
overbearing effect. Additionally the policy seeks to maintain highway safety including public
rights of way.
Local Plan Policies ES6 - ES9, ES11, ES13 and ES14 have particular regard to landscape
character, green space and biodiversity, stressing the need to avoid harm and erosion, as
well as identifying opportunities to enhance and reinforce the quality and quantity of the
District.
Local Plan Policy CP9 details the Councils requirements for affordable housing and their
integration and seeks to ensure an adequate and well-targeted supply of affordable housing
across the District.
Page 196 of 206
Local Plan Policy CP7 sets out how new development will be expected to contribute towards
meeting the needs of all sections of the community and should help to encourage community
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
cohesion through the provision of facilities for community use, for health, social care, leisure,
education or play. This is consistent with Chapter 8 (Paragraphs 69-78) of the NPPF which
details how planning can play an important role in facilitating social interaction and creating
healthy, inclusive communities and sets out objectives for the provision of high quality public
spaces which encourage the active and continual use of public areas.
Local Plan Policy ES10 and Chapter 12 (Paragraphs 126-141) of the NPPF are relevant
when assessing proposals on sites designated as Conservation Areas, or listed buildings and
their setting. They establishes the importance of the historic environment, heritage assets
and archaeology and provides guidance on conservation and enhancement.
The proposal should also be considered against the guidance laid out in SPG Residential
Design Guide (2000), SPG Residential Development Outdoor Play Space Provision, SPG
Stroud District Landscape Assessment, SPD Affordable Housing (Nov 2008) and SPD
Housing Needs Survey (2008).
For the full content of the Stroud District Local Plan Policies (adopted November 2015)
mentioned above, together with the preamble text and associated supplementary planning
documents are available to view on the Councils website http://www.stroud.gov.uk/localplan.
Full details of the NPPF are available to view at:
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/2116950.pdf
PARISH PLANS
Where there are prevailing Parish Plans in place, these form part of the Development Plan.
At the time of writing there are no Parish Plans which have been consulted on or adopted as
part of the Development Plan.
PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT
The site lies within the Stroud Urban Area and is identified in policy SA1 as a site suitable for
mixed use redevelopment. Policy SA1 sets out criteria against which applications should be
assessed. The policy sets out 11 criteria including provision of affordable housing (where
viable); contributions to education and community uses; outdoor playspace/accessible
greenspace and/or landscaped canalside public realm; landscape; drainage; flood risk;
improvements to river corridor for biodiversity and flood risk improvements; cycle and
pedestrian routes; towpath restoration; contributions to bus services.
The Local Plan acknowledges that several mill sites along the valley bottom are underused
and redevelopment could achieve sustainable locations for living and to support canal
conservation, recreation and tourism opportunities. The key priority for Wimberley Mills is to
deculvert the River Frome, to take the site out of the flood plain. The intention of the
Wimberley Mills and Dockyard sites is to achieve satisfactory access through Knapp Lane
and Toadsmoor Road to the A419. The Local Plan aspires to have residential and high
quality employment space at Wimberley Mills.
The site is a brownfield site and thePage
NPPF
strongly
197
of 206encourages the reuse of brownfield land,
such as this site, outlined in Chapter 11 of the NPPF. Para 111 states;
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
“Planning policies and decisions should encourage the effective use of land by re-using land
that has been previously developed (brownfield land), provided that it is not of high
environmental value.”
The NPPF places a number of objectives and promotes a sequential type of approach in the
consideration of residential development land. The allocation of the site for redevelopment in
the Local Plan has addressed the sequential approach promoted in the NPPF.
In considering applications there has to be a balance between some of the somewhat
competing objectives. In this case, the site is a brownfield site which the NPPF places a
priority for redevelopment ahead of greenfield development, and is located inside the
settlement boundary and has reasonable access to facilities, shops and services albeit
localised. The site has footpath access and links to surrounding facilities and should not be
considered as unsustainable. Brownfield sites such as this pose unique challenges for
redevelopment and may not be able to achieve all the aims of the policy. In these cases a
balance has to be made as to whether the benefits of the proposed development outweigh
any negative impacts.
CONSIDERATION OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The main issues relating to this development are loss of employment land; impact on
highway safety; flood risk; design and landscape; heritage impact and ecological impact.
These are discussed below.
LOSS OF EMPLOYMENT LAND The proposed development is for residential development
with no provision for mixed uses or commercial uses. The application has been accompanied
by an appraisal of the commercial opportunities for the site. The site is allocated for mixed
use development.
The proposal involves the loss of the key employment site, and needs to be considered
against the objectives of the Local Plan Policy and its intentions. The main objective of
including mixed uses is to ensure that there are sufficient levels of employment site available
to provide jobs across the District as part of the relationship of providing jobs alongside
housing and creating sustainable communities. This is balanced against the provision of
housing.
The Local Plan process looked at eh need to protect employment sites. Evidence was
gathered which seeks to identify trends and requirements for employment provision in the
future plan period. To defend a decision on the basis of the loss of employment land,
evidence would need to show the demonstrable harm that would result from the loss of this
land, and that there is an identifiable demand for this provision. If the site has no future
demand, then its ongoing protection is unreasonable. Therefore, this application has to
demonstrate that there is no demand or future need for employment uses on the site.
Current Employment There is limited demand for the current occupancy on the site with
occupancy rates reducing to approximately 21% of the site with limited interest in the
remaining 79% of the site.
The site has been marketed since Page
February
2008
198 of
206 with limited interest and rents that have
been secured are on short term basis which are unsustainable in the long term compounded
by the physical constraints of the site.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Continued Employment Uses Having had regard to authorised uses of the site,
consideration should also be given to the potential continued employment uses. Review work
has assessed against a number of indicative criteria such as the ownership, building age,
building quality, general external environment, void periods, existing tenants, market
attractiveness, and accessibility – strategically and locally.
The conclusions for continued employment use (B1, B2 and B8) are heavily restricted given
the highly restricted nature of the site and the level of capital investment required for
remediation/demolition/conversion and the lack of suitable HGV access limits the site’s
commercial attractiveness. This is further impacted by the lack of road frontage and limited
site size as well as proximity to sensitive adjoining land users. The market attractiveness of
this site has to be weighed up against the attractiveness of the other opportunities that exist
elsewhere in the District.
Alternative Commercial Uses As indentified above, the site has a number of limitations
which restrict the market attractiveness and these issues equally apply to other non B-Class
uses such as retail, leisure and healthcare. The significant issues for commercial use are the
lack of road frontage, limited space and access issues.
Overall, the applicant has demonstrated that there is no demand for the site as a continued
employment site.
Alternative Sites There are other sites in proximity of the site such as Brimscombe Port,
Bath Road Trading Estate, Inchbrook Trading Estate as well as those further afield such as
Stroudwater Business Park, Oldends Lane Industrial Estate and Severn Distribution Park at
Sharpness. The majority of alternatives sites are located more centrally within the District
with road frontages and/or good transport links.
Conclusions The purpose and objective of the emerging policy to promote mixed use
schemes is to protect for the demand and need for employment space in Stroud urban area
and the wider District area and to provide for sustainable communities. The application has
demonstrated the very limited commercial opportunities for the site which have demonstrated
that there is not a viable mixed use scheme.
Overall, the considerations will need to evaluate the harm and benefits associated with these
key issues which can then be addressed in the planning balance at the end of this report. In
coming to a recommendation, the decision maker will need to have regard the balance of the
need for the development and the benefits associated and whether these outweigh the harm
that may be attributed to the development.
HIGHWAY IMPACT
Paragraph 32 of the NPPF places the test of ensuring that a development does not have a
severe impact on highway safety. This is an important point as it infers that a level of impact
is acceptable providing that the resultant impact is not severe. It must also be noted that the
impact on the highway is directly related to the proposed development and not pre-existing
concerns or issues.
Page 199 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
In considering the impact of the development on the highway network, Gloucestershire
County Council as Local Highway Authority (LHA) has been consulted. The LHA has
assessed the application and, following receipt of additional information, have not objected,
subject to conditions.
The LHA comments are lengthy and are available in full on the Council’s website. The
comments consider the proposed development and assess the highways impact against the
fallback position i.e. the impact that could be present if all the buildings on the site were
occupied for their authorised use. This assessment concludes: “On the basis that the extant
use of the site would generate almost double the amount of traffic of the residential proposal,
the Highway Authority is unable to object on congestion grounds or the safety of users along
Knapp Lane, as the impact can not be considered to be 'severe'. Consideration was given to
a Traffic Regulation Order, but this is not considered necessary to make the proposed
development acceptable. Other elements such as works to the highway; access for service
vehicles (via the tunnel at Knapp Lane); access to public transport; layout of development;
construction traffic; and public rights of way have all been considered. The overall conclusion
of the LHA is “The National Planning Policy Framework states at paragraph 32 that
"Development should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the residual
cumulative impacts of development are severe". The Highway Authority considers that this
development will not have a severe impact on the local highway network. The NPPF states
that "safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people", and that
“opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken up depending on the nature
and location of the site, to reduce the need for major transport infrastructure.” It is considered
that the development proposals will meet these criteria. It is recommended that no highway
objection be raised to this application” subject to the conditions being attached to any
permission granted.
Significant objections have been made with reference to the potential impact of the proposed
development on Knapp Lane as well as the limited access under the bridge and onto
Toadsmoor Road. These have been given weight in the determination of this application but
the decision maker has to have regard to contributing material factors. The road is a public
highway which the public have the ability to pass and re-pass, in combination, the site is
currently a commercial site which could also (in theory) use Knapp Lane and the restricted
height bridge. This fall back position is very significant consideration . On balance, whilst
these concerns are acknowledged, there are no demonstrable grounds for refusing this
application on highway safety concerns.
DESIGN :
The application seeks outline planning consent but with the matter of layout under
consideration at this stage (except for plot 50).
Layout and Design Approach:
The layout of the site is determined by the constraints of the site resulting from the
topography changes and the re opening of the river corridor. This has had the effect of
creating a linear development site which is split into three main areas. The layout approach
considers the relationship of the built
form200
to of
the206
surrounding natural characteristics such as
Page
the river, the canal and the level changes. The design seeks a modern approach, providing
strong building lines and edges to the canal frontage. This provides a firm boundary to the
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
canal with fenestration at higher levels which replicates the physical relationship of industrial
buildings to the canal, as well as ensuring security to these units.
In the middle section of the site the proposal reflects the relationship to the river with the
indicative elevations within the Addendum to the Design and Access Statements outlining a
modern approach combining industrial building lines and materials into domestic scale. This
approach is echoed with variation in the upper (third) lines of dwellings.
The site is within the Industrial Heritage Conservation Area (IHCA) and the design emphasis
seeks an appropriate balance of industrial scale development within a domestic scale.
Subject to appropriate conditions and careful control of details and materials, the design
approach is innovative and should be supported within the IHCA.
The innovative layout of the site has required a different approach to the provision of amenity
space which will be provided through a range of wider communal areas and smaller decked
areas or roof terraces to individual properties. This as a concept is acceptable subject to
appropriate control mechanisms on long terms management responsibilities and this can be
controlled by condition.
LANDSCAPE IMPACT:
The proposed development would be visible to the wider Cotswold Area of Outstanding
Beauty (AONB) but this impact would be one of minimal impact on the characteristics of the
wider AONB. The site is at the bottom on the valley. It is visible to the public vantage but the
visibility of the site does not render a scheme unacceptable.
The landscaping details would be considered as part of the detailed reserved matters but the
indicative information has demonstrated that the scheme can provide an acceptable level of
internal landscaping, thus minimising the impact on the wider landscape setting.
The prominence to the IHCA has a greater impact to the character of the area and this has
been considered above.
Overall, the scheme would not have a significantly detrimental impact on the character and
appearance of the AONB.
FLOODING & WATER MANAGEMENT
The site is a former mill complex with large sections of the river being culverted under the
hard surfacing of the site and also underneath some of the buildings.
The site falls within designated Flood Plain Zones 2 and 3 and the guidance within Chapter
10 of the NPFF and accompanying Technical Guidance in the NPPG are a critical
consideration. Within the designated flood plain, especially those in Zone 3, guidance in the
NPPF seeks to steer development to areas with the lowest risk of flooding.
The scheme seeks to make a series of hydrological enhancements. The application proposes
to re-open the river through the site
which
culverted through the site. This has
Page
201isofcurrently
206
multiple benefits to the site, firstly in terms of reducing the risk of flooding down from a Flood
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
Zone 3 to a Flood Zone 2. This has been confirmed by the Environment Agency. Other
benefits include ecological and landscape improvements.
The effective downgrading of the flood risk of the site to Flood Zone 2 removes the need for
the Sequential and Exception Tests to be applied to the site. The decision maker needs to
have regard to the impact of the development and the risk of flooding. These aspects have all
been taken into account in the allocation of the site as part of the Local Plan process.
The Environment Agency (EA) has been involved in discussions relating to the proposed
development on the site and has formally commented to the proposed development. Their
comments are detailed and are available in full on the web site.
The extensive discussions with the EA demonstrate that they are satisfied that the scheme is
acceptable from a flood risk, biodiversity and a controlled water perspective subject to
appropriate control mechanisms. The River Frome, which runs across the site, is currently
culverted and the culverted section of the river cannot convey flows. The proposed
development opens up the river. Modelling has demonstrated that this will improve flows
significantly such that the flood classification is reduced from zone 3b to zone 2. Conditions
are proposed relating to the opening up of the river; the access details; footbridge
requirements; and ongoing management. Land contamination conditions are proposed to
ensure that controlled waters are not contaminated. The conditions require details of
remediation and work along with the control of the impact of contaminated land on human
health with the Environmental Health department.
The Water Resources Engineer has advised that the application is acceptable in principle
subject to approval of a specific drainage scheme, which can be secured through planning
conditions.
Overall, subject to a series of planning conditions, the scheme has demonstrated that is
acceptable in water management terms and that the scheme provides for a number of
benefits the environment.
ECOLOGICAL IMPACT
This is a brownfield site which has the potential for ecological value. The site has been
subject to a number of ecological surveys identifying the impact of the development on such
habitat. The site has potential for ecological habitat for a variety of species given the
presence of water and mature landscaping. The ecological surveys highlighted the potential
for bats on the site but there was no evidence of badgers, otters, water voles, white claw
crayfish and great crested newts.
The ecological surveys have indicated that only the eastern part of Building B1 has some
potential for bats. The demolition of this building would be the subject of a licence from
Natural England which subject to details and timing of demolition is likely to be acceptable.
The site offers foraging potential within the mature trees, wooded areas and the adjacent
canal. The scheme will require the approval of the landscape for which the indicative plans
show substantial tree/hedgerow Page
retention.
202 ofThe
206 majority of the site is proposed for
development within the areas of existing built form. The reinstatement of the river corridor
offers a significant ecological enhancement.
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The details of the landscaping of the river corridor and its long term management is the
subject of planning conditions as are the contents of the submitted ecological reports.
Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) - Under Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive,
Competent Authorities have a duty to ensure that all the activities they regulate have no
adverse effect on the integrity of any of the Natura 2000 sites (Together SPAs and SACs
make up the network of Natura 2000 sites). The effect of the Regulations is to require Local
Planning Authorities to ensure that no likely significant adverse effect arises from any
proposed development scheme or Local Plan. The effect of this legislation together with the
Natural England and Rural Communities Act 2006 is to impose on local authorities a legal
duty of care to protect biodiversity. If local authorities think harm or “likely significant effect”
could occur they are legally obliged to not approve the proposed plan or project unless
appropriate avoidance and mitigation measures can be put in place. The various Habitat
Regulation Assessment iterations concluded that proposed residential growth in the Local
Plan within the catchment could have a likely significant effect, in the absence of appropriate
mitigation.
Over the last year SDC has collaboratively worked with Natural England (NE), the National
Trust (NT), the Rodborough Commoners and Stroud Valleys Project (SVP) to devise an
agreed interim impact avoidance strategy for housing within an identified 3km catchment.
The Interim Strategy for Avoidance of Likely Significant Adverse Effects on Rodborough
Common Special Area of Conservation (SAC) was adopted at Environment Committee on
19th March 2015 (Agenda Item 10).
The application includes a contribution towards the mitigation of the recreational impact on
the Rodborough Common SAC and accordingly the LPA can be satisfied that the scheme will
not result in a significant or adverse impact on the SAC.
AMENITY
The proposed layout ensures that the distances from existing properties to those proposed
are in excess of the minimum requirements of the adopted guidance in the Residential
Design Guide. The proposed dwellings by virtue of the layout proposed would not have any
significant impact on the amenity of the other proposed dwellings.
Overall, the scheme would not give rise to any significant loss of privacy, overbearing effect
or loss of light, and Policy GE1 of the Local Plan would be satisfied as would guidance with
the Framework.
The construction of this site could give rise to some concerns on residential amenity
concerns but these could be satisfactorily be addressed by conditions relating to construction
times and delivery times.
There are adjoining commercial premises which may have an effect but this is not considered
to be significant detrimental. The emerging allocation of this site for housing should also be
noted.
Page 203 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
HERITAGE IMPACT
Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act requires that,
‘special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving the character or appearance of
Conservation Areas.’
Wimberley Mills is classified as a ‘Non-landmark Mill’ in the Council’s Industrial Heritage
Conservation Area statement. These are mills that have lost most of their historic buildings
and much of their previous site form. The existing original buildings on such sites have often
gone through several phases of adaptation that have seen their former prominence much
reduced and their millponds, like many, have been filled in and concreted over. This extra
open space has been used to create car parking or room for larger modern industrial units.
The 20th century buildings on the site are very typical of the IHCA, and can be deemed to be
a significant contributor to its inherent gritty, not pretty, character.
The one surviving 19th century, two-storey building on the Wimberley Mills site is almost
unrecognisable due to replacement windows and doors, however the shallow brick headed
segmental windows tell of its origins. Attached, is a brick element with a corrugated roof. This
is perhaps the most interesting structure on the site, having the words ‘Critchley Bros Pins’
written in large letters so as to be visible from the main road and the railway. The loss of this
one roof is the most regrettable part of the application.
The loss of any distinctive part of a heritage asset has to be carefully considered. Since the
advent of the NPPF, the public benefits of the scheme have to form part of that consideration.
Bearing in mind the relatively poor condition of the buildings, their unfortunate loss can be
deemed to be outweighed by the benefits of the provision of housing.
ARCHAEOLOGY The site is acknowledged to have a series of historic mill buildings dating
back from the mid 19th Century, and that the site represents a complex of some significant to
the understanding of the industrial development of the locality. The County Archaeologist has
considered the application and makes reference to the historic importance of the site and
makes a requirement for a condition for a programme of archaeological work. This accords
with the guidance within the NPPF para. 128, Chapter 12.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING:
Policy CP9 of the adopted Local Plan 2015 seeks sites of this size to provide affordable
housing of 30% of the net units proposed where viable. The applicant has provided
information to demonstrate that there are abnormal costs associated with the redevelopment
of this site. The District Valuer has reviewed the financial justification and agrees that the
scheme would not be viable if affordable housing is required. Consequently officers are
recommending that no affordable housing is required, however a S106 agreement will be
required and this will have an overage clause such that if the scheme yields a profit in excess
of 20% gross development value then 50% of the excess should be secured to provide
affordable housing.
Page 204 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
OBLIGATIONS
1. Primary Education
£303,992
(based on no current capacity and therefore 0.25
pupils per qualifying dwelling – thus 26 dwellings x £11,692 per pupil place)
2. Libraries
£20,384
(based on £196 per dwelling)
3. Rodborough SAC
£20,800
(based on £200 per dwelling)
4. Affordable housing: no affordable housing required as part of the redevelopment however
an overage clause to be included. to the effects suggested in the preceding section above.
The scheme also provides for an on site LEAP as well as a series of localised improvements
to the highway network including street lighting, signage, and bus stop improvements. These
are controlled by planning conditions.
The proposed development would give rise to an off site recreational impact for youth/adult
provision subject to compliance with the CIL tests in identifying a harm to be mitigated, a
proportionate contribution towards a specific scheme. Given the scheme has demonstrated
that there are unusually complex associated costs of the development, it has been
demonstrated that the scheme cannot contributed towards youth/adult recreation.
The proposed development is in close proximity to the canal although the canal projects are
not currently working in the vicinity of the site. Given the viability matters, the scheme does
not make a contribution towards the canal.
Gloucestershire Police has sought a contribution towards policing, this is not considered to
be CIL compliant as being related to the development. This is not a speculative development
forming part of the emerging housing allocations.
PLANNING BALANCE
The consideration of this application requires decision makers to have regard to Paragraph
14 of the National Planning Policy Framework alongside other planning considerations. The
National Planning Policy Framework is a pro-growth and the basis of Paragraph 14 is the
promotion of sustainable development unless the
“adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits,
when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole, or where specific
policies in this Framework indicated development should be restricted. “
There are no specific policies in the Framework which indicate that this application must be
refused and therefore, the decision maker is required to assess the impacts of the
development and whether these significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits. The
above sections have discussed the material considerations and highlighted the benefits and
impacts of the proposed development. In turn it is then required to assess these factors as a
whole in reaching a balance.
Page 205 of 206
Development Control Committee Schedule
12/01/2016
The NPPF seeks to boost housing provision. However the Local Plan Inspector has agreed
the housing figures set out in the Local Plan as being compliant with the NPPF. The
application is an allocated site in the Local Plan, identified for 100 dwellings and business
uses. Consequently this site is important for the 5 year land supply requirements..
The scheme would comply with the housing element of Local Plan allocation and bring about
a level of benefits associated with additional housing, including jobs/economic growth allied
with the construction and occupation of the houses. It would also result in regeneration of an
underused brownfield site.
There are benefits associated with opening up the River Frome, both in terms of reducing
flood risk and improvements to the ecological interest of the river corridor.
Concerns have been expressed with regard to highway safety and flooding. Whilst these
concerns are acknowledged, the relevant consultees have not objected to the proposed
development for reasons set out in the above report. The benefits of the proposed
development are considered to outweigh any disadvantages.
RECOMMENDATION
Officers recommend that Members resolve to grant permission for the proposed development
for the grounds detailed above, subject to a S106 agreement to secure:
Primary Education
£303,992
(based on no current capacity and therefore 0.25
pupils per qualifying dwelling – thus 26 dwellings x £11,692 per pupil place)
Libraries
£20,384
(based on £196 per dwelling)
Rodborough SAC
£20,800
(based on £200 per dwelling)
Affordable housing: no affordable housing required as part of the redevelopment however an
overage clause to be included such that if the scheme yields a profit in excess of 20% gross
development value then 50% of the excess should be secured to provide affordable housing.
Article 35(2) statement
The application was subject to discussion with the agent as part of formal pre-application
discussions where these issues were identified and as part of the application, the agent was
informed of the grounds for refusal.
HUMAN RIGHTS
In compiling this recommendation we have given full consideration to all aspects of the
Human Rights Act 1998 in relation to the applicant and/or the occupiers of any neighbouring
or affected properties. In particular regard has been had to Article 8 of the ECHR (Right to
Respect for private and family life) and the requirement to ensure that any interference with
the right in this Article is both permissible and proportionate. On analysing the issues raised
by the application no particular matters, other than those referred to in this report, warranted
any different action to that recommended.
Page 206 of 206