committee report - stratford-on-avon district

COMMITTEE REPORT

Application Ref. 16/03904/FUL

Site Address Jaguar Land Rover, Gaydon Test Centre Banbury Road, Gaydon And, British Motor Museum, Banbury Road, Gaydon

Description of Development

Construction of southern car park to include car parking, access, drainage attenuation, removal and alteration of earth bunds, landscaping, erection of covered walkway, lighting, fencing and all associated work (revision to the size and location of the southern car park permitted as part of planning application 16/00296/FUL) (Site 4)

Applicant Jaguar Land Rover/British Motor Museum

Reason for Referral to Committee

Scale of DevelopmentParish Council Objection

Case Officer Neil Hempstead

Presenting Officer Neil Hempstead

Ward Member Councillor Kettle

Parish Council Gaydon

Description of Site Constraints

Flood Zone 1. Residential and commercial properties in surrounding area Local highways infrastructure. Car Park is located within the area covered by Core Strategy

Policy AS.11 where, inter alia, research, design, testing and development of motor vehicles and ancillary activities are considered appropriate uses in principle.

Summary of Recommendation GRANT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS

BACKGROUND

4 major planning applications accompanied by an Environmental Statement were resolved to be granted by East Area Committee in June 2016 as follows:

16/00288/FUL: Demolition of existing buildings and removal of hardstanding areas and roadways and the erection of new B1 buildings for the research, design, testing, and development of motor vehicles, offices, training and education purposes and other ancillary uses, parking, internal road alterations, associated infrastructure (including mechanical plant), associated landscaping, ecology area and reuse of arisings and remodelling of existing ground levels within the Proving Ground to create an all-terrain vehicle test facility and on land adjoining Gaydon village to manage surface water in combination with a proposed ecological enhancement area (with associated earthworks) (Site 1).

16/00294/FUL (which also covers part of the British Motor Museum) - Creation of new visitor entrance reception building (serving Jaguar Land Rover) and parking area and visitor parking area (serving both Jaguar Land Rover and British Motor Museum) with new sustainable lake and drainage feature and internal access roads and ancillary infrastructure and landscaping (Site 2).

16/00295/FUL - Demolition of existing buildings and removal of hardstanding areas and the erection of a B1 building for the research, design, testing, and development of motor vehicles, offices and other ancillary uses, associated landscaping, parking facilities and infrastructure (including mechanical plant)(Site 3)

16/00296/FUL - Provision of new northern (extension to an existing car park) and southern car park areas and reconfiguration of existing car park areas for staff to support Gaydon Triangle, Proposed Class B1 building and Gaydon Core building complex and potentially shared use of the southern car park with British Motor Museum together with improvement and extension of existing and on site access roads, new gatehouse, erection of a new vehicular bridge, surface water management, ecological enhancement area, strategic landscaping and ancillary associated works (Site 4).

This application ostensibly seeks to amend the layout and location of the southern parking area granted planning permission under application 16/00296/FUL as detailed below.

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL This application seeks to amend the layout of the southern car park granted planning permission under application 16/00296/FUL. Whilst the southern car park is substantially similar in scale and access to that previously, there are a number of differences which include:

-Location, positioning and parking space layout and orientation of the spaces along the southern boundary being altered with the car park becoming L-shape in appearance;-Minor alterations to the orientation of the access road to the southern car park from the B4100 (Banbury Road). The application retains the approved access point from a new roundabout approved under reference 16/00296/FUL;-Movement of the car park further from the southern boundary of the site;-Removal of a bund between the British Motor Museum car park and the proposed car park.

-Additional detail on works within the associated development on the southern car park including detail of fencing, covered walkway and lighting required as part of the development;- The southern car park will also be made available at various large events throughout the year to provide additional overflow car parking for the British Motor Museum which is a significant tourism destination within Stratford–on-Avon District.

DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS

Development Plan

Core Strategy

Relevant Policies in the Development Plan for this application are

CS.1 Sustainable Development CS.2 Climate Change and Sustainable Construction CS.4 Water Environment and Flood Risk CS.5 Landscape CS.6 Natural Environment CS.7 Green Infrastructure CS.8 Historic Environment CS.9 Design and Distinctiveness CS.11 Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty CS.22 Economic Development CS.24 Tourist and Leisure Development CS.26 Transport and Communications AS.11 Large Rural Brownfield Sites

Other Material Considerations

Central Government guidance

NPPF National Planning Policy Framework 2012 Planning Policy Guidance 2014 Circular 06/05: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation

Other documents

Stratford on Avon District Design Guide – Whilst no longer having the status of a Supplementary Planning Document, it still contains substantial and relevant guidance on design.

Warwickshire Landscape Guidelines (1993) Cotswold AONB Management Plan 2013-2018 (2013) Lighthorne Heath Parish Plan 2005 Lighthorne Parish Plan 2012 Gaydon Parish Plan 2013 Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (GLVIA3) National Character Areas 17.07.2012 Corporate Strategy 2015-2019 Stratford –on-Avon Business and Enterprise Strategy 2012-2015 Stratford District Partnership 2026 Vision – Sustainable Community

Strategy

Planning and Community Safety – Design and Crime Reduction 2006: Planning Advice Note

Stratford-on-Avon Destination Tourism Strategy 2011-2015 - January 2012

District Tourism Economic Impact Assessment 2009 (The Research Solution) - January 2011

Other Legislation

Human Rights Act 1998 Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 (any site in a

rural location) The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 The EC Birds Directive (Directive 79/409/EEC), as translated into UK Law by

The Habitat and Species Regulations 2010 The EC Habitats Directive (Directive 92/43/EEC) as translated into UK Law

by The Habitat and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) Protection of Badgers Act 1992 Hedgerow Regulations 1997 Community and Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010 Localism Act 2011 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations

2015 The Town and County Planning (Consultation) (England) Direction 2009 Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Areas Act 1979 Environmental Protection Act 1990. Equality Act 2010

SUMMARY OF RELEVANT HISTORY

Application Reference

Application Proposal Decision

16/00296/FUL Provision of new northern (extension to an existing car park) and southern car park areas and reconfiguration of existing car park areas for staff to support Gaydon Triangle, Proposed Class B1 building and Gaydon Core building complex and potentially shared use of the southern car park with British Motor Museum together with improvement and extension of existing and on site access roads, new gatehouse, erection of a new vehicular bridge, surface water management, ecological enhancement area, strategic landscaping and ancillary associated works (Site 4).

Granted 20.07.2016

In assessing the current proposal I have taken into account the planning application at the British Motor Museum which is for an additional collection building adjacent to the existing museum collection building granted under planning permission 14/03537/FUL – Application 17/01114/FUL - Construction of a Museum Collection Centre Two (MCC2) Building (amended scheme to that previously granted planning permission under reference 14/03537/FUL dated 19

March 2015) adjacent to the existing Collection Centre (MCC1) Building – Granted 13.07.2017.

REPRESENTATIONS

Applicant’s Supporting Documents

List of documents:

Application form Covering letter Planning and Design and Access Statement Plans Environmental Impact Assessment (submitted in respect of the original

planning application 16/00296/FUL) Environmental Impact Assessment Addendum External Lighting information Additional information was submitted during the course of the application in

the form of additional lighting information. Clarification was also submitted in respect of the proposed drainage details and possible impact on one of the nearest residential properties.

During the course of the application additional information has been submitted as follows:

A revised layout to the car parking across the Southern Boundary Car Park so that the spaces are reconfigured to allow for future development of a southern extension to the design studio forming part of the Gaydon Design and Engineering Centre (GDEC) building to ensure that sufficient space is allowed for this extension and the relocation of the existing service road. The road relocation is presently under consideration as part of separate application reference 17/01008/FUL.

In undertaking a revised parking layout across the site, the central footpaths have been removed and sufficient car manoeuvring and turning space maintained to retain a layout that is both practical and suitable at the north-eastern extent.

Further details of the proposed covered walkway have been submitted. A revised Written Scheme of Investigation has also been provided. The design of the lighting has been reviewed to minimise its visual impact

whilst providing safe lighting levels.

Supporting Statement

The application is made to enable the efficient operation of the Jaguar Land Rover site in Gaydon in the provision of an alternative Southern Car Park scheme to the south west of the site, following approval of a similar parking area within an existing Planning Permission (reference: 16/00296/FUL).

The application seeks approval for minor alterations to the location of parking and the alignment of the access route previously permitted and forms a revision from that originally submitted, intended to be considered at the March 2017 Planning Committee, taking into account other development proposals at the site.

The application includes drainage attenuation measures, removal and alterations to earth bunds to the east and south of the site and the erection of a covered walkway connecting the car parking area to the Gaydon Design Engineering

Centre building reception. It also includes lighting, fencing and all other associated works to allow construction and the use of the land as a car park for Jaguar Land Rover employees and add additional capacity as an overflow car park for the British Motor Museum.

The provision of parking for employees is pursuant to the existing Jaguar Land Rover operation at Gaydon. The proposal accords with the principle and objectives of the site specific (Policy AS.11) and also the general policies within the Core Strategy for parking as part of the continued development of research, design, testing and development (or associated ancillary uses) of motor vehicles at Gaydon.

The matter of lighting, of particular local concern to Gaydon Parish Council, has been considered with discussions over their concerns ongoing since the original submission. The level of lighting is proportionate to the proposals and significant steps have been taken to adapt these to minimise the impact. The lighting scheme is of modern design and specification removing ‘sky glow’ and is in full accordance with the Gaydon Lighting Strategy approved as part main application in summer 2016. The lighting scheme offers a number of improvements to the previously approved scheme with Conditions proposed.

The development proposed would sit comfortably within the wider Gaydon Jaguar Land Rover and British Motor Museum complexes and have no significant impacts or emissions which would negatively affect the amenity of the adjoining buildings, nearby land uses or local communities.

Taking into account the planning balance, this proposal represents a sustainable development which promotes economic growth as well as having other associated benefits including ecological mitigation, sustainable drainage and no significant impact on the environs or local community. Accordingly, local and national planning policy favours the development proposals.

Ward Member

Councillor Kettle

No comments received.

Adjoining Ward Members

Councillor Mills

No comments received

Councillor Harris


Councillor Williams


Councillor Parry


Parish Council

Gaydon

Objects for the following reasons:

LIGHTING. We request motion sensor lighting for environmental and light pollution reasons. This seems to be more commonly used and so can not understand why a company like JLR are not promoting it. The light pollution emanating from this site is severe and we would like to see it reducing not increasing. We would like to see JLR adapt and blend into the countryside and not create light pollution issues for local residents plus have a detrimental effect on our wildlife. Huge amounts of lighting affects the character of rural Gaydon Village and, we understand in this instance, would be contrary to the NPPF (09.02.2017).

Additional comments following the submission of further information

Initial comments still stand (verbal response dated 18 July 2017)

Adjoining Parish Councils

Lighthorne


Lighthorne Heath


Kineton


Compton Verney


Chesterton & Kingston


Chadshunt


Burton Dassett


Bishops Itchington

No representation (03.02.2017)

Additional comment following the receipt of further information

No representation (11.07.2017)

Adjoining District Council

Cherwell District Council

Whilst the area of car parking is relatively large, this would be closely associated with the existing buildings at Jaguar Land Rover. The development is not situated close enough to Cherwell to cause any particular impact on Cherwell District. No objections (25.01.2017)

Third Party Responses

1 letter received expressing concern that permission should be delayed until the source and assessment of water entering the dry stone wall on The Old House, Church Road, Gaydon. In the event of any run off being found then modification should be made to the comprehensive mitigation strategy suggested in the application as this would reduce the risk of any adverse effect on The Old House including pollution of the pond and the village in general.

1 letter of objection on the following grounds: Cannot support this application as Health and safety requirements will dictate a certain lighting requirement. The glow currently emitted from this site is currently equivalent to a constant dawn. The parish objected to the lighting on the central/west car park. This is clearlythe source of the 'night glow' which currently afflicts the site. Any further parkingrequirements should be underground or under cover. Consideration should be given to amendments to existing lighting to alleviate the existing 'night glow' which is exacerbated by the location of the site on the top of a hill. Light pollution associated with this site (and the BMM), both on site and on the approaches to the site has far exceeded acceptable levels for a rural location.

Consultations

Highways England

No objection (17.01.2017)





WCC Highways



Maintains its position of no objection as detailed in previous response dated 25.01.2017 (01.03.2017).

Warwickshire Police Road Safety

No objection to the traffic management planning aspect of the proposal (21.02.2017)


No objection, Warwickshire Police has comments to make regarding the further amendments or additional information provided. Warwickshire Police has no objection to this application.

SDC Environmental Health Officer



No objections to the proposed lighting scheme for the extended car park. The submitted plans include isolines which show light spills from the site boundary at levels that are not an Environmental Health concern (03.07.2017)

WCC Ecology

No comment to make (24.01.2017)

Natural England

No comments to make (09.01.2016)


No objection. The proposed amendments to the original application are unlikely to have significantly different impacts on the natural environment from the original proposal (05.07.2017)



Lead Local Flood Authority

No objection subject to the imposition of conditions requiring adherence to the mitigation measures detailed in the submitted Flood Risk Assessment and submission of a surface water drainage scheme (04.01.2017)


No new comments to make (11.07.2017)

Severn Trent


Forestry Commission

Refer to standing advice of the Forestry Commission dated 22.11.2016 (16.01.2017)

National Planning Casework unit

Acknowledge receipt of the District Council’s e-mail regarding the Environmental Statement. No further comments to make (16.01.2016)

Historic England

Do not to wish to offer any comment. The application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance, and on the basis of your specialist conservation advice (09.01.2017)


Do not to wish to offer any comment. The application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance, and on the basis of your specialist conservation advice (27.02.2017)

SDC Conservation Officer

Have read through the Planning and Design and Access statement and look at the plans. Nothing relating to the setting of heritage assets to substantively alter my previous comments on the four applications of which 16/00296/FUL was one, and to which this revision relates (26.01.2017)


Have looked at latest information, regarding lighting, and although this will clearly have some impact in general terms, I do not consider this impact to have any meaningful substantive affect on my previous assessment regarding heritage assets (27.02.2017)


Have looked at the documents submitted with the above application, and also looked back at my consultation response for 16/00288/FUL, 16/00294/FUL, 16/00295/FUL & 16/00296/FUL.

There is nothing in this latest application which introduces any new concerns, and so my previous comments in relation to 16/00296/FUL remain unaltered. There are no major heritage concerns raised by this new application (11.07.2017)

Western Power

Have no network on the site in question. However, there are some in the surrounding area and if any works are undertaken here then all relevant precautions are to be taken (09.01.2017)


No change to response in previous e-mail dated 09.01.2017 (28.02.2017)


No objection to make. Western Power has been approached over cable diversions, where access from Banbury Road is required onto site. The designs and work for any required diversions is in hand (10.07.2017)

MOD response

No safeguarding objections to the proposal (06.01.2017)


No safeguarding objection to the proposal (02.03.2017)


No safeguarding objections to the proposal (26.06.2017)

National Air Traffic Services (NATS)




Warwickshire Police

No observations to make (05.01.2107)



WCC Rights of Way

No recorded public rights of way crossing or immediately abutting the application site. No objection (13.01.2017)


No objection to the amended proposals and no further observations to add to previous response (03.03.2107)

ASSESSMENT OF THE KEY ISSUES

Principle of Development

Policy AS.11 of the Core Strategy relates to development of Large Rural Brownfield Sites of which Gaydon site (which encompasses Jaguar Land Rover) is specifically referred to in the policy.

In respect of the Gaydon site a number of uses are considered to be appropriate in principle including, inter alia, research, design, testing and development of motor vehicles and ancillary activities. The proposed car park will serve the significant developments granted under planning applications 16/00288/FUL, 16/00294/FUL and 16/00295/FUL on the Jaguar Land Rover/British Motor Museum sites and essentially seeks to modify the location and layout of a car park already granted planning permission in this location under application 16/00296/FUL which are detailed above in the planning history section.

In addition to this Core strategy Policy AS.11 also states that all development proposals on site should take into account the need to: (a) consider the views which have been expressed through ongoing engagement with local communities; (b) address the impact on existing properties at Lighthorne Heath and on the surrounding rural area; (c) provide comprehensive structural landscaping around the perimeter of the site and within the site as appropriate (d) retain and enhance archaeological features on the site and (e) assess the impact of traffic arising from the proposed development on the local road network and the need for any off-site highway improvements or other appropriate mitigation measures.

I am satisfied that this application has taken into account all of these issues and these points are addressed individually later within this report. In respect of point (a), Jaguar Land Rover have engaged with the local community via the Parish Councils at the quarterly Gaydon Liaison meetings where forthcoming planning applications, including the current planning application, are discussed.

In addition to this, Policy CS.22 of the Core Strategy relates to economic development and seeks, inter alia, to support the expansion of businesses in their existing locations subject to the scale and type of activities involved, the location and nature of the site, its accessibility including by public transport, and impact on the character of the local area.

Policy CS.24 of the Core Strategy seeks to increase the role of tourism by supporting the growth and improvement of existing attractions and by encouraging new attractions and dispersing them throughout the District, in order to support the local economy and to provide the opportunity for local communities to enjoy the benefits that are derived. The southern car park will also be made available at various large events throughout the year to provide additional overflow car parking for the British Motor Museum which is a significant tourism destination within Stratford–on-Avon District.

Paragraph 17 of the NPPF lists 12 core land-use planning principles that should underpin both plan-making and decision-taking which includes, amongst others, ‘proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver the homes, business and industrial units, infrastructure and thriving local places that the country needs’. Paragraph 19 also states, inter alia, that significant weight should be placed on the need to support economic growth through the planning system.

In addition to this paragraph 28 of the NPPF seeks to support a prosperous rural economy by supporting economic growth in rural areas and seeks, inter alia, to support the sustainable growth and expansion of all types of business and enterprise in rural areas.

Aligned to supporting economic growth generally, the NPPF also acknowledges the importance of supporting the rural economy and the contribution that tourism makes stating a paragraph 28 that plans should (inter alia) ‘support sustainablerural tourism and leisure developments that support businesses in rural areas,communities and visitors, and which respect the character of the countryside.

The proposal will also support the aims of the District Council’s Corporate Strategy, Stratford on Avon Business and Enterprise Strategy and Stratford-on-Avon Destination Tourism Strategy 2011-2015.

Having had regard to Core Strategy policies AS.11, CS.22 and CS.24 and the guidance contained in the NPPF, and given the fact that there is an extant planning permission for a similar sized car park in closer proximity to the southern boundary of the site under application 16/00296/FUL, I consider that the proposal is acceptable in principle, subject to an assessment of the site specific issues.

Highways Matters

Core Strategy Policy CS.26 states that development will only be permitted if the necessary mitigation is provided against any unacceptable transport impacts which arise directly from that development. It goes onto state that parking provision will reflect local circumstances and have regard to the need to promote sustainable transport outcomes.

The proposal does not result in any additional vehicular trips to the site over and above that granted planning permission 16/00296/FUL as the number of car parking spaces is proposed to remain the same at 1700.

The impact of the wider highway network was carefully assessed in respect of applications 16/00288/FUL, 16/00294/FUL, 16/00295/FUL and 16/00296/FUL and was found to be acceptable and I consider that the same conclusion applies in respect of the current application.

I consider that the relatively minor changes to the alignment of the internal road layout serving the proposed car park is acceptable.

In terms of pedestrian and cycle linkages within the proposed development details of these have been submitted and are considered to be acceptable and can be controlled by the imposition of a condition requiring adherence to these details.

WCC Highways and Highways England have raised no objection to the proposed amendment to the southern car park.

Subject to the imposition of conditions requiring the implementation of the car park within 2 years from the date of planning permission being granted in order to ensure that sufficient car parking is provided on site and the submission of a Construction Method Statement, I do not consider that the proposed amendment to the extant car parking layout will have a detrimental impact on highway congestion (both in terms of local roads and the nearby M40) or highway safety

and I am therefore satisfied that the proposed development is in accordance with Policy CS.26 of the Core Strategy.

Impact on the Landscape and Character of the Area, Design, Layout, Scale and Appearance

Policy CS.9 states that all forms of development will improve the quality of the public realm and enhance the sense of place, reflecting the character and distinctiveness of the locality. Policy CS.5 states that the landscape character and quality of the District will be maintained by ensuring that development takes place in a manner that minimises and mitigates its impact and, where possible, incorporates measures to enhance the landscape.

In order to assess the impact of the proposed car park the applicant has revised the Environmental Statement submitted in respect of the 16/00296/FUL and the other three accompanying applications for the Jaguar Land Rover site.

The key changes are the proposed L-shaped layout of the car park and the removal of an existing bund that follows the same alignment. A new access route is also proposed, extending from the proposed parking area in a north-easterly direction linking to the British motor Museum entrance roundabout. A new covered walkway is also proposed linking the car park to the new reception building approved under 16/00295/FUL.

It should be noted that the additional part of the car park which helps form the L-shape (which extends along the boundary of the British Motor Museum essentially encompasses an area already primarily used for the storage/parking of vehicles on site which will reduce the overall impact of the development on the character and visual amenity of the area.

Impact on the character of the area

The original Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) that assessed the cumulative impact of the proposed development (in respect of applications 16/00288/FUL, 16/00294/FUL, 16/00295/FUL and 16/00296/FUL) has been revisited to assess the impact of the proposed development.

In respect of the impact on the character of the area the proposed car park would result in the localised loss of some additional landscape elements within the assessment area including the existing grassed bund located between the British motor Museum car park and the application site, a group of 35 leylandii (not those on the boundary but within the site) and some scrub vegetation. The previously submitted LVIA did not take this into account. However, the applicant has now amended the LVIA to take these works into account and concluded that their loss would not be sufficient to harm the existing landscape character either within the application site or the surrounding landscape. The proposed landscape scheme would continue to provide sufficient mitigation for the loss of the vegetation described. The same conclusion was previously reached in respect of the car park previously approved under application 16/00296/FUL. I agree with this conclusion subject to the imposition of a condition requiring details of the hard and soft landscaping to be submitted and approved by the District Council.

Impact on the visual amenity of the area

In respect of the visual impact of the proposed development the most likely public viewpoint to perceive elements of the car park is that viewed from a field gateway on the Southam Road. This was assessed as part of the LVIA submitted in respect of application 16/00296/FUL and has been revisited as result of the amendments to the previously approved car park.

The existing site is not visible from this view as it is well-screened by mature vegetation including a well-established Leylandii hedge which would be retained. There are a few minor gaps in the Leylandii hedge at lower levels. These gaps would be mitigated to a large degree by the installation of a 3m tall close boarded fence to the north of the hedge. In addition to this the existing leylandii hedge is located on a bund which the proposed car park would be set at a lower level than. The effect of this is that the bund will act as additional screening to the car park.

In light of this I do not consider that the proposal will have a detrimental impact on the visual amenity of the surrounding area. The same conclusion was reached in respect of the car park previously approved under application 16/00296/FUL.

In addition to this the amended LVIA has also assessed the viewpoint from the completed junction works at the British Motor Museum entrance (viewpoint 14 on the previously submitted LVIA) looking towards the application site. I agree with the conclusion that changes to the proposed car parking above that experienced from the previously approved car park would not be perceived from this location and as such I consider that this is acceptable.

The updated LVIA has also assessed the view from the British Motor Museum which would change as a result of the proposed additional car parking area which requires the removal of a bund that is visible to the rear of the collections Centre. The updated LVIA concludes that given that views of the existing car parking on the adjoining Jaguar Land Rover site (part of the area that will form the L-shape to the proposed car park as detailed earlier in the committee report) are already present it is not considered that an increase in the number of visible car parking spaces would significantly change the nature of the view. I agree with this conclusion.

In order to ensure that the car park does not have a detrimental impact on the character and visual amenity of the area I consider that it is appropriate to impose a condition requiring the levels information submitted relating to the proposed car park to be adhered to.

In respect of landscaping given the location of the car park within the site there is little soft landscaping required to the actual car park itself. However, I consider that it is appropriate to impose a condition requiring details of the soft landscaping that will be to the associated drainage basin and the covered walkway together with the hard surfacing materials of the car park itself together with a condition requiring the replacement of any failing soft landscaping within a 5 year period.. In respect of tree protection I consider that there is a requirement for this in respect of the access road only given the separation distance of the proposed car park site from the nearest trees.

In order to ensure that the proposed 3m high close boarded timber fence (part of the covered walkway) and 1.8m high security mesh fence are of an appropriate design, I consider that it is appropriate to impose a condition requiring adherence to the submitted details. In addition I consider that it is appropriate to impose a condition requiring details of the additional elements of the proposed covered

walkway (with the exception of the 3m high close boarded fence which forms part of it and is controlled by separate condition as detailed above) to be submitted for approval.

Impact of lighting to the car park

I acknowledge that concern has been raised in the past about the possible visual impact of additional lighting close to the southern boundary of the Jaguar Land Rover Site and I have carefully assessed the impact of the proposed lighting in respect of the impact on the character and visual amenity of the area.

I consider that the proposed lighting associated with the new car parking (proposed to be 3.5m high) would be well contained even if the adjacent leylandii hedge were to be removed (taking an absolute worse case scenario) as a result of the design of the lighting scheme (including the luminance levels - see amenity section of the committee report), the proposed 3m tall boundary fence to the north of the leylandii hedge and the existing screen bund retained beneath the leylandii hedge which is to be retained. The applicant has also confirmed that they will give consideration to the fitting of shades to reduce the levels of luminance visible from Gaydon village.

Views of the lights (proposed to be 6m high) along the proposed access road would be visible through the deciduous tree screen along the southern boundary of the British Motor Museum area. However, the applicant has confirmed that the lights would be angled northwards and fitted with shades to reduce the levels of luminance visible from Gaydon village.

In order to ensure that the lighting is acceptable, I consider that it is appropriate to impose conditions requiring the submitted lighting specification to be adhered to (the plans can be detailed under the condition specifying the list of approved plans). The applicant has confirmed that hooding will be added to the 6m high access road lights and that the application of hooding to the 3.5m car parking lights will be subject to further assessment to ascertain whether they are required or not. In light of this I consider that it is appropriate to impose a condition requiring a lighting hooding strategy to be submitted detailing the extent of hooding to be applied to the 6m high access road lights and also the 3.5m car parking lights if shown to be necessary. In respect of the operation of the lighting in terms of hours and levels of luminance, I consider that is is appropriate to impose a condition requiring the submission of an Lighting Management Scheme. This has been the approach adopted in respect of the other car parks on the site.

It should also be noted that on the land to the south of Jaguar Land Rover/British Motor Museum site and to the north of Gaydon Village that an ecological area is in the process of being implemented (which involves modelling work to the existing land levels with associated landscaping which will provide further screening to the nearest residential properties to the proposed lighting.

In assessing the lighting I have taken into account the cumulative impact of the proposed lighting with the existing lighting on the site. I acknowledge that some objection has been raised in respect of a general ‘lighting hue’ surrounding the site at night. However, I consider that given the specification of the lighting proposed that it will not have a detrimental impact on the character or visual amenity of the area.

Cotswold Area of Outstanding natural Beauty

The application site is located approximately 5.1km from the boundary of the AONB. In respect of the previous applications (16/00288/FUL, 16/00294/FUL, 16/00295/FUL and 16/00296/FUL) both individually and cumulatively it was concluded that the proposed development would not have a detrimental impact on the setting of the Cotswold AONB. I consider that this conclusion is applicable in relation to the current proposed car park.

Conclusion in respect of landscape matters

In light of the above assessment I consider that the proposed development is acceptable in terms of its design and that it will not have a significantly detrimental impact on the character or visual amenity of the area on the setting of the Cotswold Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Overall I consider that the proposal is in accordance with policies CS.5 CS.9, CS.11 and AS.11 and CS.11 of the Core Strategy. Impacts on Neighbours

Policy CS.9 states that occupants of new and neighbouring buildings will be protected from unacceptable levels of noise, contamination and pollution, loss of daylight and privacy, and adverse surroundings.

Given the location of the proposed and the significant separation distance to the nearest residential properties, I do not consider that the car park will have a detrimental impact on the amenity of any of the nearest residential properties in respect of noise disturbance. In fact the car park is intended to be set further back from the southern boundary than that previously proposed.

I consider that the main consideration is in respect of the potential impact of the lighting on the nearest residents at Gaydon village that are located to the south of the application site and I have given this careful consideration.

In respect of the lighting to the southern car park this is proposed to be a maximum of 3.5m high and the level luminance is proposed to be controlled so that it would have less of an impact in the early hours and later at night. These details are to be controlled (including the hours of operation) by the imposition of a condition requiring the submission of a Lighting Management Scheme as detailed earlier in the committee report.

I consider that the design of these lights together with the additional works proposed and the existing and proposed landscaping (as detailed earlier in the committee report) will ensure that the proposed car parking lighting will not have a detrimental impact on the amenity of the nearest residential properties.

I acknowledge that the proposed lighting for the access road is taller at 6m high and will be more visible especially during the winter months. However, the lights are proposed to be positioned to the south of the access road and angled northwards away from Gaydon village. In addition the lights are proposed to be fitted with baffles/shades to prevent any luminance being visible from Gaydon village details of which will be controlled by the imposition of a condition requiring details of these to be submitted to the District Council.

The impact of the proposed lighting will be reduced by the formation of the ecology area detailed above.

The District Council’s Environmental Heath officer has raised no objection in respect of the proposed lighting scheme.

I am therefore satisfied that the proposed development is in accordance with Policy CS.9 of the Core Strategy

Impact on Heritage Assets –Listed buildings and Archaeology

Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states that in considering whether to grant planning permission for development that affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. In addition Section 72(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states that special attention should be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a conservation area.

The Barnwell case considered by the Court of Appeal determined that when considering the impact on heritage assets with other material considerations in the overall planning balance, interpreting S66(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 the decision maker should accord ‘special weight’ or ‘considerable importance and weight’ to the desirability of preserving the setting of listed buildings, and to preserving the character and appearance of Conservation Areas.

Paragraphs 128 to 139 of the NPPF seek to protect heritage assets, including sites of archaeological importance. However, paragraphs 133 and 134 state that harm to heritage assets may be acceptable if outweighed by public benefits. Policy CS.8 of the emerging Core Strategy allows for harm to a heritage asset to be weighed against the public benefit.

The applicant undertook a comprehensive assessment of cultural heritage and archaeology as part of the submitted Environmental Assessment in respect of the previously approved 4 applications on the site which has been updated for the current application.

Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas

The District Council’s Conservation officer has carefully considered the application. No designated heritage assets are directly affected by the proposal.

In respect of non-designated heritage assets the Cold War airfield taxiways and perimeter road would be retained in the proposed scheme due to their solid nature, but they would be covered with a new surface. However, it is the designated heritage assets which obviously take precedence and the principal ones are comprehensively set out the in the applicant’s submitted heritage statement. There are no designated heritage assets on the site itself.

Those heritage assets outside the application site, but within the study area, include the conservation areas of Lighthorne (and its many listed buildings), and the listed buildings in the settlements of Gaydon and Chadshunt. These settlements also have some scheduled monuments which are also considered. There is also the site of a Roman villa south of Gaydon and within the study area which is a scheduled monument, also considered as part of the submitted assessment.

In addition to these and even though substantially further removed from the site, the District Council’s Conservation Officer has also considered views to and from two other important heritage assets, namely Chesterton Windmill and the Burton Dassett Beacon Tower, because of their topographical prominence in the wider landscape.

In respect of designated heritage assets (conservation areas and listed buildings), I agree with the conclusion of the District Council’s Heritage Consultant in that I have not identified any harm of such a level that causes concern in relation to protecting and preserving heritage character. The main reasons for this is that the heritage assets fall into one or more of three main categories:-

(a) the heritage assets are too far away for there to be anything other than minimal impact (e.g. views to and from Burton Dassett Beacon, Chesterton Windmill), (b) they are topographically 'protected' (e.g. Lighthorne Conservation Area and its listed buildings), or (c) they are screened in one way or another (e.g. Chadshunt assets).

The heritage assets in and around Gaydon (12 Grade II listed buildings) are the closest, but having undertaken a comprehensive on site assessment I agree with the conclusions of the District Council’s Conservation Officer in that I cannot identify any substantive harm.

I acknowledge that there may be some relatively subtle difference from the proposed development in respect of light spill, noise or other non-visual impacts, but I do not consider these would be so significant as to cause clear harm.

I am therefore satisfied that the proposed development is in accordance with Policy CS.8 of the Core Strategy.

Archaeology

The application site has the potential to contain earlier undocumented archaeological remains, possibly of higher potential though there is no direct evidence of this. Any such remains are likely to have been damaged by wartime activity and subsequent development.

The previously submitted Environmental Statement undertook a detailed archaeological investigation of the site that resulted in a written scheme of investigation being produced which was secured by condition. A written scheme of investigation for the amended southern car park has been submitted and I consider that it is appropriate to secure this by the imposition of a condition. .

Conclusion in respect of heritage matters

Overall, I conclude that the proposed development would not cause harm to any designated heritage assets which would trigger either paragraph 133 or 134 of the NPPF subject to the imposition of a condition requiring the submission of a written scheme of investigation in respect of additional archaeological work. In assessing these impacts I acknowledge the requirements of Section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

In light of this I consider that the proposed development is in accordance with Core Strategy policy CS.8 and paragraphs 128-137 of the NPPF. I therefore consider, in terms of heritage impact, the proposed development is acceptable.

Flood Risk and Drainage

Policy CS.4 of the Core Strategy states that all development proposals will take into account, dependent on their scale, use and location, the predicted impact of climate change on the District’s water environment and that all development proposals should be located in Flood Risk Zone 1 (Low Probability Flood Risk).

The location of the original and revised southern car park layout is within the assessment area covered by the original environmental statement baseline.

Surface Water Drainage

Over 1.7ha of the site is laid to hardstanding being occupied entirely by the existing car park which is informally drained to the existing drainage ditch unattenuated. The remainder of the site is grassed and presently discharges through a combination of overland flow to the existing drainage ditch, evaporation, transpiration and infiltration.

In order to assess the required drainage calculations, and despite the existence of the current areas of car parking, the entire development area has been presumed to be greenfield. This precautionary approach has provided a conservative worst case scenario for the site drainage and the post development surface water maximum flow rates, including a 20% increase in rainfall as an allowance for climate change, shall not exceed these greenfield values.

A surface water strategy has been put forward by the applicant that takes into account the requirement for some attenuation storage on site. The previous indicative strategy for the southern car park sought the implementation of an underground attenuation tank within the development layout to manage surface water run off such as not to cause flooding elsewhere.

A more formalised drainage system has now been submitted by the applicant whereby the surface water from the car park will flow to linear channel surface water drains which will then connect directly to a balancing pond or to the private storm drainage network via open manholes. The private storm drainage system will be designed to accommodate 1 in 2 year storm flows and will connect to the discharge point via a hydro-brake control which will restrict the flow of water from the storm drainage system to the existing surface water system.

The balancing pond has been designed to accommodate the worst case duration 1 in 100 year return period storm event, including a 20% allowance for climate change. The hydro brake control chamber will act as the inflow and outflow for the balancing pond, with this storm drainage system continuing through an oil/petrol interceptor to connect with the existing open channel drainage that currently drains the Gaydon site to the south of the proposed balancing pond.

The proposed surface water management plans set out for Gaydon Triangle (15/00288/FUL) and the Noise Vibration Harshness building (16/00295/FUL) will result in a significant reduction in surface water runoff to the eastern and north western catchments whilst maintaining the existing discharge rate to the south eastern catchment.

I acknowledge that a letter of objection has been received from a resident to the south of the application site concerned that the proposed development may exacerbate some existing flooding issues in the vicinity of the application site. This has been carefully considered by the applicant and I am satisfied that the overall development of the application site, including the current car parking

proposal, will result in an improvement in the drainage both on the application site and in the immediate area. The overall effect of undertaking development on the Gaydon site will result in a net positive effect on both downstream and on-site flood risk as well as providing positive effect on water quality through proposed mitigation.

Water Quality

Surface water drainage can lead to the deterioration in the water quality of rivers and streams. As detailed above The proposed development is proposed to include measures to reduce the overall impact of pollution by the addition of petrol/oil interceptors within the road and car park drainage systems as well as a SUDS Pond which will provide for settlement of any additional suspended solids prior to discharge to the drainage channel to the south. The surface water management strategy will have a positive effect on treatment of run-off and water quality.

In order to ensure that the surface water drainage system and water quality is acceptable I consider that it is appropriate to impose a condition requiring the submitted details to be adhered to together with the submitted management details.

Overall conclusion in respect of drainage matters

I am therefore satisfied that the proposed development would have an acceptable impact on the District’s water environment in accordance with Policy CS.4 of the Core Strategy.

Ecological Impacts

A core planning principle of the NPPF (para 17, bullet point 7) is that the planning system should contribute to conserving and enhancing the natural environment. The NPPF states, inter alia, that minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible, contribute to the Government’s commitment to halt the overall decline in biodiversity (para 109 bullet point 3). The NPPF also states that when determining planning applications, local planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity. Chapter 11 of the NPPF sets out a number planning principles including, amongst others, that planning policies should minimise any adverse effects on wildlife and opportunities for improving bio-diversity within developments should be maximised.

Policy CS.6 states that development will be expected to contribute towards a resilient ecological network through the District that supports ecosystems and provides ecological security for wildlife, people, the economy and tourism. It goes onto state that proposal will be expected to minimise impacts on biodiversity and, where possible, secure a net gain in biodiversity. It is the duty of the Authority to have regard to conserving biodiversity, including in relation to living organisms or types of habitat, restoring or enhancing a population or habitat under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006.

In order to assess the ecological impact of the proposed development I have assessed this on an individual development basis and in the context of the other three proposed developments which make up the suite of applications on the Jaguar Land Rover site. I consider that this is an appropriate approach.

The setting back of the proposed car park from the southern boundary will result in the loss of less species rich grassland than previously proposed. The bund that is now proposed to be lost as a result of the proposal has ben identified as a species-poor, semi-improved grassland bund which runs between the Proving Ground and the British Motor Museum and the species found here are similar to those found abundantly within equivalent habitat conditions within the wider Gaydon site.

In light of this the proposed southern car park will avoid impacts on aquatic Great Crested Newts habitats; ensure the retention of the habitat for key invertebrate species; ensure the retention of the high-quality grassland habitats; retain ecological connectivity for a range of species including badgers, Great Crested Newts and reptiles; and minimise the loss of suitable terrestrial habitat for a range of species.

In order to ensure that the proposal does result in a significant reduction in the impacts previously identified by the Environmental Statement in respect of the southern car park I consider that it is appropriate to re-impose the previous conditions (in respect of 16/00296/FUL) which required adherence to the ecological mitigation measures specified in the submitted Environmental Assessment and the submission of a scheme to show that there is no net biodiversity loss as a result of the development.

I am therefore satisfied that the development accords with Policy CS.6 of the Core Strategy and the NERC Act 2006.

Other issues

I consider that it is appropriate to impose a condition requiring adherence to the submitted plans and also the reporting of any contamination should any be found on site during the implementation of the development.

I have also taken into account the standing advice of the Forestry Commission in reaching this decision and conclude that the proposal would not have a detrimental impact on any ancient woodland.

The proposed development will not interfere with any airspace or Ministry of Defence Safeguarding Areas.

Referral to the Secretary of State

Previous application 16/00296/FUL was referred to the Secretary of State on the basis of the cumulative impact when taken into account with applications 16/00288/FUL, 16/00294/FUL and 16/00295/FUL on the basis of it it being for a large office complex outside the urban area (out of centre). The application was assessed by the Secretary of State and it was not called-in. In light of this and given that the current planning application relates primarily to changes to the previously approved car park, I do not consider that the proposed development needs to be referred to the Secretary of State taking into account the criteria specified in the National Planning Practice Guidance and The Town and Country Planning (consultation) (England) Direction 2009. Conclusions

I consider that the current application should be determined in accordance with the adopted Development Plan. I can identify no material considerations that warrant an alternative approach.

Policy CS.1 states that the Council will take a positive approach to applications that reflect the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained in the NPPF.

On the basis of the above considerations, I conclude that the proposal is sustainable development, when considered individually and cumulatively with previously approved planning permissions 16/00288/ FUL, 16/00294/FUL and 16/00295/FUL and therefore consider that the presumption in favour applies in this case and that Planning Permission should be granted.

RECOMMENDATION

It is therefore recommended that application 16/03904/FUL is GRANTED, subject to the following planning conditions and notes, with any necessary amendments and final wording delegated to the Head of Planning and Housing:

Conditions Definition

1. Southern car park to be implemented within 2 years of planning permission being granted.

2. Application shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans including the lighting plans.

3. Submission of details of a lighting hooding strategy for the 6m high lighting for the access road and 3.5m high lighting for the southern car park.

4. Prior to the lighting scheme approved under conditions 2 and 3 coming into first use, a Lighting Management Scheme detailing how the lighting for the phase will operate shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

5. The finished floor levels for the car park hereby approved shall be in accordance with the approved plans.

6. The surface water drainage scheme hereby approved shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved plans and details. Adherence to the on-site surface drainage system adoption and maintenance details.

7. Report to the Local Planning Authority in the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the development hereby approved.

8. The 3 metre high close boarded timber and mesh security fence and the 1.8 metre high security mesh fence shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved plan.

9. Replacement of soft planting for a period of 5 years.10. The proposed pedestrian and cycle routes shall be carried out in

accordance with the approved plan.11. Adherence to the submitted Written Scheme of Investigation for a

Programme of Archaeological Work

Pre Commencement Conditions

12. Details of the proposed external materials to the covered pedestrian walkway(not including the external 3m high close boarded fence approved under condition 8) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

13. Scheme for the protection of all existing trees and hedges affected by the proposed access road serving the car park.

14. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out to wholly accord with the detailed mitigation measures for the safeguarding of protected species as set out in the Environmental Statement.

15. Hard and soft landscaping details. 16. Submission of a Construction Method Statement.

Post Commencement Conditions

17. Within 6 months of the commencement of development a scheme ('the scheme') to ensure that there is no net biodiversity loss as a result of the development shall be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

Notes:

1. General Pollution Prevention Measures2. Control of Pollution Act3. Works within the limits of the public highway 4. Paragraphs 186 and 187 of the NPPF.

Robert WeeksHEAD OF PLANNING AND HOUSING