planning committee - 13 august 2014 report index · 8/13/2014 · marwood 57762 whitefield villas...

Planning Committee - 13 August 2014

Report Index PART 1

Parish App. No. Location Dec. Page

BARNSTAPLE 56685 LAND OFF NORTHFIELD LANE, BARNSTAPLE A106 2

PART 2

Parish App. No. Location Dec. Page

BARNSTAPLE 57316 YEO VALLEY COMMUNITY WOODLAND APPC 28 DERBY ROAD, BARNSTAPLE

FREMINGTON 57418 FREMINGTON MANOR FREMINGTON TPOA 31

FREMINGTON 57519 FORMER FREMINGTON ARMY CAMP A106 36 FREMINGTON

ASHFORD 57606 ASHFORD INN FRUIT FARM BRAUNTON ROAD APPC 48

MARWOOD 57762 WHITEFIELD VILLAS MUDDIFORD APPC 55

FREMINGTON 57767 BRYNSWORTHY ENVIRONMENT CENTRE APPC 58 ROUNDSWELL

Total 7

Please note that applications shall normally be considered in the numerical order as shown above. However, the order does change from time to time with the agreement of the Chairman and the consent of the Committee.

of 61

In the following order: Part 1) Deferred Applications Part 2) New Applications With respect to the undermentioned planning applications responses from bodies consulted thereon and representations received from the public thereon constitute background papers within the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985. ABBREVIATIONS USED THROUGHOUT THE TEXT: AGLV - Area of Great Landscape Value

AONB - Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

ASAC - Area of Special Advertisement Control

BAC - Barnstaple & Fremington Area Committee

CA - Conservation Area

CED - County Environment Director

CPA - Coastal Preservation Area

DCC - Devon County Council

DSP(FR) - Devon Structure Plan (First Review)

EA - Environment Agency

ENP - Exmoor National Park

GPDO - General Permitted Development Order

HC - Heritage Coast

IAC - Ilfracombe Area Committee

LPA - Local Planning Authority

LB - Listed Building

NDLP North Devon Local Plan

NRAC - Northern Rural Area Committee

PC - Parish Council

PROW - Public Right of Way

PM - Planning Manager

SMAC - South Molton Area Committee

SSSI - Site of Special Scientific Interest

TPO - Tree Preservation Order

Schedule of Planning Applications for Consideration

Planning Committee on the 13/08/2014 Page 2

PART 1 DEFERRED APPLICATIONS

1

App. No.: 56685 Reg. : 26/11/2013 Applicant: MR JEREMY SUTCLIFFE

L. Bldg. : Expired: 25/02/2014 Agent : RPS Parish : BARNSTAPLE Case Officer : Mrs S-J. Mackenzie-Shapland Proposal: OUTLINE APPLICATION FOR THE ERECTION OF UP TO 115 DWELLINGS, PROVISION OF ASSOCIATED PARKING, ROAD & DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE, PUBLIC OPEN SPACE, LANDSCAPING & PEDESTRIAN LINKS (ALL MATTERS RESERVED EXCEPT FOR ACCESS) (AMENDED DETAILS) Location: LAND OFF NORTHFIELD LANE BARNSTAPLE

REPORT UPDATE Members will recall a decision on this item was deferred at the Planning Committee meeting on Wednesday 14th May 2014 pending exploration of the following: 1) Impact of offsite highway works to road network in Bellaire, Northfield Lane and

Pilton Bridge including pedestrian safety; between the site and the hospital junction and how those matters will be addressed;

2) Ensuring that the extent of the built development line reflects the provisions of the emerging Local Plan and the density being reconsidered;

3) The achievement of an adequate separation distance between Lynbro Road and the new development with regard to ‘green space’; and

4) A request that the traffic impact assessment be revisited by Devon County Council including the cumulative impact of development including the Ilfracombe Southern extension and the ‘blue light’ services

Since the meeting on the 14th May 2014, Officers can update Members as follows: HIGHWAYS The advice of the Highways Authority was sought on points 1 and 4 and they have responded as follows:

‘Minute 1 -(a) Impact of off-site highway works to road network in Bellaire, Northfield Lane and Pilton Bridge including pedestrian safety between the site and the hospital junction and how those matters would be addressed; Whilst it has previously been considered that the impact of traffic at the Pilton Bridge Junction will not be severe, there will be more traffic passing through this junction as a result of the proposed development. It is not considered necessary or possible to carry out any works at this junction that would aid vehicular traffic. However, it has been identified that the pedestrian crossing of the A39 is currently uncontrolled and money is being sought to provide a push button pedestrian crossing to help pedestrians cross the road at this point. The cost of such a scheme has been estimated at £75,000 and this cost is expected to be paid by various developments in the area.


Although the traffic movements associated with the proposed development are not considered large, there will be some additional traffic that will wish to use the route through Pilton via Bellaire/Northfield Park. This route is narrow with limited forward visibility and a lack of footway. As a result of the proposed development, and others in the area, there will be increased vehicle-vehicle and vehicle- pedestrian conflict and it is these conflicts that a scheme in this location would need to reduce. No exact schemes have been drawn up, but there are a number of options that could be considered such as formal and informal one-way systems; no entry except for access to certain roads; pedestrian facilities; traffic lights and more. In conjunction with the Local Members a consultation exercise with local residents would be needed to come up with a scheme that would reduce conflict and still provide access. An amount of £75,000 has been suggested for this work as this is the same as that for the Pilton Bridge Junction mentioned above. The proposed works to improve pedestrian facilities on Northfield Lane and Westaway Plain down to The Rock are a significant improvement on the existing pedestrian facilities. Whilst there will be a gap in the footway network between Shearford Lane and Westaway Heights there is currently no provision at all on the majority of the roads in this area, and development within the emerging local plan between this application site and the A39 will be required to provide the remaining section of footway up to the A39 and a crossing on Westaway Plain. Minute 4 - (d) A request that the traffic impact assessment be revisited by Devon County Council including the cumulative impact of development including the Ilfracombe southern extension and the ‘blue light’ services. Assessment of the traffic impact included growth in traffic from a national model that includes anticipated growth in houses and jobs across North Devon. The developer has also assessed the impact based on the busiest times of day including Summer Saturday traffic. Including both anticipated growth and seasonal assessment means that the typical absolute worst case scenario has been considered. The proposed roundabout scheme is being considered with all of the development in the emerging local plan and seasonal traffic. Westaway Plain is not heavily trafficked and emergency services are not considered to be severely hindered by the impact of the traffic from the proposed development subject to improvements at the Hospital Junction.’

The Highways Authority considers that the highway works proposed together with highway contributions towards improving the junctions in the vicinity of the site will provide for an acceptable development and can meet the tests set out in the National Planning Policy Framework. As members will recall, planning permission was granted at the July Planning Committee for the provision of 43 homes at Westaway (the site to the immediate east of this development) and a footpath link between Shearford Lane and the A39 junction forms part of this proposal. The Highways Authority are recommending the following ‘either/or condition for this application: ‘No part of the development otherwise permitted shall be commenced until: Plans for improvements to the Westaway Plain / A39 / Hospital Junction are


submitted to and approved in writing by the Highway Authority and these improvements are delivered in full. REASON: To ensure that the adverse effects of the development on the highway network are adequately mitigated prior to traffic being attracted to or from the site. ALTERNATIVELY: A financial contribution of £340,236.69 towards highway improvements at the Hospital Junction shall be secured within a section 106 agreement as part of an overall package of highway infrastructure improvements of a total of £391,272.19’ A timetable has now been prepared for the provision of a roundabout at the Westaway Plain/A39/Hospital junction and this states that the roundabout will be in situ by July 2015. As such, and in response to recent discussions with the Highway Authority, it is proposed that the off site contribution of £340,236.69 pence is sought and that a condition is imposed, which seeks to reflect this timetable. SITING/DESIGN/DENSITY This part of the report addressed Minutes 2 and 3 of the resolution at the 14th May Planning Committee: Ensuring that the extent of the built development line reflects the provisions of the emerging Local Plan and the density being reconsidered and the achievement of an adequate separation distance between Lynbro Road and the new development with regard to ‘green space respectively. The applicant has provided an amended indicative masterplan, which reduces the number of dwellings previously identified by 8. This plan moves the residential development away from the north western boundary of the site with Lynbro Road and provides a form of development along the northern boundary that better relates to the countryside beyond. This is an outline application, where the layout should be used for illustrative purposes only. It does however illustrate how the number of dwellings proposed might fit on the site. The applicant has amended the description of the application from the provision of up to 115 dwellings to the provision of up to 110 dwellings. A framework plan has also been provided, highlighting the developable area, which could be conditioned to ensure the parts of the site available for development are conditioned (to include keeping the north western corner of the site free from development); albeit that final layout is reserved. Further to the densities set out to members in the original report, the applicant has now provided an analysis of densities, comparing the proposal site and the adjacent development recently approved at Westaway. When comparing densities on a like for like basis i.e when including public open space within the proposals but not the public highway, this site would have a density of 24.8 dwellings per hectare, where the adjacent, approved site at Westaway would have a density of 24.4 per hectare. The applicant also points out that the emerging plan allocates this and the adjacent site at Westaway for approximately 158 dwellings. Whilst this proposal does seek to increase the site area highlighted in the emerging development plan, this site of up to 110 dwellings, together with the adjacent site, would deliver less than 158 dwellings. To accommodate this number of dwellings in the site area in the emerging plan would result in a less acceptable development of a much higher density than is presently proposed.

imac

Rectangle

imac

Highlight

imac

Highlight


When considering the illustrative masterplan, which now includes the site together with the approved site at Westaway, the amended scheme is considered to provide an improved transition between Lynbro Road and the site at Westaway. The removal of development in the north west corner of the site helps smooth this transition. The development in the north western corner has been moved away from Lynbro Road. A landscaping scheme along the western boundary of the site can be conditioned and the exact distance between the proposed residential properties and this boundary would be handled at reserved matters stage. It remains your officer’s view that it would be preferable for private gardens to address this boundary treatment than open space, which would be available to the wider public. It is considered that the amendments proposed represent an improved form of development. CONCLUSION Taking into account the above noted changes and the evaluation set out in the original report, it is concluded that whilst this proposed development would result in limited impacts on the setting of the landscape and heritage assets, impact on the rural character of the area and result in the loss of agricultural land, the benefits arising in terms of contributing towards the District’s 5 year housing land supply; the provision of affordable housing and significant highway improvement works, it is concluded that the balance falls to a recommendation of approval of the application; subject to the applicant entering into a Section 106 Agreement to secure the heads of terms and appropriate planning conditions being imposed. RECOMMENDATION The original recommendation to members was one of Approval subject to appropriate planning conditions being imposed and a Section 106 legal agreement being completed. It is considered that these proposals improve the scheme originally reported and as such, the recommendation to members remains as set out in the original report below (subject to an amendment to the affordable housing terms, which was verbally reported to members previously). The Heads of Terms for the Section 106 Agreement, should read as follows:

• Affordable Housing – A minimum provision of 30%

• Public Open Space on site, including management arrangements, and off site financial contribution

• Management of the surface water solution

• Education contribution

• Financial contribution of £25,517.75 towards pedestrian improvements at the Pilton Causeway junction.

• Delivery of all proposed offsite highway works (footway and realigned Northfield Lane) through hybrid section 38/278 agreement.

• Contribution of £25,517.75 towards highway improvements to the western end of Northfield Lane, the works to be agreed with Highway Authority and Local Members following public consultation.

imac

Highlight

imac

Highlight

imac

Highlight

imac

Highlight

imac

Highlight


• £6,000 for the cost of traffic regulation orders for restricting parking within the development and adjacent roads and for the diversion of Northfield Lane.

• £170,118.34 towards enhanced bus service provision for five years. This can be paid in yearly instalments starting after the occupation of a yet to be agreed proportion of the houses on the site.

• £340,236.69 towards off site highway works to improve capacity at the Hospital Junction or delivery of improvements to the Hospital Junction that does not prejudice the ability to deliver the other allocated sites in the emerging local plan with a traffic impact on the A39 corridor. One or the other of these items will be required in order to mitigate the cumulative impact of the development.

PROPOSAL This is an outline planning application for up to 115 dwellings on land off Northfield Lane, Barnstaple. All matters except access are reserved for future consideration. The on-site access works proposed include the diversion of Northfield Lane through the site, closing the existing access from Northfield Lane onto Westaway Plain to vehicular traffic using staggered guard rails, a 2 metre footway (narrowed to 1.6 metres) across the site frontage and a footway along Maer Top to the south west of the site within the public highway meeting the existing footway at Wordsworth Avenue. This footway would be 1.2 metres for much of its length. Traffic calming measures are proposed within the public highway immediately to the south west of the existing junction with Northfield Lane in the form of ‘dragons teeth and traverse lines.’ To the west of the diverted road, Northfield Lane would be narrowed to provide a 1 metre footway and extended footway alongside 43 and 45 Northfield Lane.

RECOMMENDATION Delegate to the Planning Manager to APPROVE in consultation with Ward Member(s) subject to appropriate planning conditions being imposed and a Section 106 legal agreement being completed. SITE AND SURROUNDINGS The site is currently an open, rectangular, agricultural field with a site area of 4.53 hectares used for sheep grazing. It has a Devon bank along each of its boundaries; to the east is Shearford Lane, a public footpath and County Wildlife Site; to the south is Northfield Lane and to the west Lynbro Road. The site extends northwards beyond the residential development of Lynbro Road towards Bradiford water. There is an intervening agricultural field to the north and north west of the site, which separates this site from Bradiford Water and the Bradiford Valley SSSI. Site levels descend from south to north, most steeply at its northern edge. Site levels range between 48mAOD to 24mAOD. This site is within the Pilton ward and is approximately 600 metres from Pilton Street.

imac

Highlight

imac

Highlight

imac

Typewritten Text

Unacceptable!


REASON FOR REPORT TO MEMBERS Councillors Greenslade and Manuel have requested that this site be taken to Planning Committee. It is a site that it is outside of the development boundary of the Adopted North Devon Local Plan and has raised significant concerns locally, particularly with regard to density, traffic and flooding. POLICY CONTEXT Development Plan Devon County Waste Local Plan June 2006 (DCWLP) WPC4 Waste Audit WPC5 Provision of Waste Management Facilities for Major New Developments North Devon Local Plan 2006 STY1 Sub Regional Centre DVS1A Sustainable Development DVS1 Design DVS2 Landscaping DVS3 Amenity DVS4 Public Health and Safety DVS6 Flooding and Water Quality DVS7 Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems ENV7 Agricultural Land ENV8 Biodiversity ENV11 Protected Species ENV12 Locally Important Wildlife or Geological Sites ENV13 Nationally Important Archaeological Remains ENV16 Conservation Areas ENV17 Listed Buildings TRA1A Promoting Sustainable Transport Choices TRA6 General Highway Considerations TRA8 Residential Parking HSG2 Development Boundaries HSG5 Residential Density HSG6 Mixed Accommodation HSG7 Affordable Housing in Residential Schemes ECN15 Renewable Energy REC2 Sport and Recreation Facilities in Villages REC5 Public Open Space CONSULTEE RESPONSES Barnstaple Town Council Recommends Refusal on the grounds of: i. The inadequacy of the local road networks to accommodate the increased traffic

likely to be generated by the proposal, ii. Concerns that the development will lead to a greater risk of flooding to the Bradiford

Valley.

imac

Typewritten Text

Why not ENV1? Was listed for W'way Plain, 11.6.14


Pilton West Parish Council Consider that this proposed development brings with it the same risks as previously outlined in our response to both the Trayne Farm and the Westaway Plain developments. They are highlighted as Flooding Risk and Traffic Impact. It is concluded that the Council wish to register their objection to this application on the material grounds of its adverse impact on the countryside adjacent to an area designated as an SSSI, the residential flood risk posed to those living downstream and the adverse impact of traffic on the local area. They are also of the view that consideration of this development should be deferred until the Local Plan is approved. A full copy of their responses are appended to this report. Environment Agency We consider that this proposal will be acceptable if a condition is included on the subsequent planning permission to ensure the construction and maintenance of a sustainable drainage system to control surface water. Conditions and Notes are provided. Following concerns, the EA provided a statement advising that the development will not increase flood risk elsewhere ((including Bradiford water) because the amount of run off will be the same as the current site. A further response has been received to the amended Flood Risk Assessment received in March 2014: ‘The revised FRA is acceptable. It shows that soakaways are feasible and can fit within the site, with room for further drainage features if found to be necessary at detail design stage. The drainage design uses all the latest technical guidance, which includes calculations for storm greater in size than experienced in the last few years’ A full copy of these responses and additional information is appended to this report. Highways Authority The two consultation responses from the Highways Authority are appended to this agenda report. Environmental Health Conditions related to contaminated land, construction noise, construction management and construction times are suggested. Housing 35% Affordable Housing is requested. Tenure split of 75% social rented and 25% Intermediate housing. Project and Procurement Officer (Parks, Leisure and Culture): Satisfied with the level of onsite informal Public Open Space and equipped natural play and would request off site contributions for sports pitches, built recreation and MUGA. These are identified as approximately £225,904.80. It is confirmed that NDC do not wish to adopt the onsite POS.


Sustainability Officer: The existing supporting information provides very little specific detail with regard to sustainable design and construction targets or baseline energy assumptions. Numerous non-specific statements are made relating to energy efficiency and Building Regulations 2010 however this is insufficient for a development of this scale. The outline application should make specific reference to the design targets required for all elements of the development,

• All residential elements will meet Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH) Level 3 as a minimum

• A 15% reduction in carbon emissions beyond Building Regulations 2010 from the development as a whole either through on site design efficiency or through onsite low carbon technologies.

Further information should be conditioned for reserved matters. Sport England No comments to make. Conservation Officer Thank you for inviting a comment. Having visited the site again this afternoon, I would agree with the views expressed in paragraph 5.4 of the Heritage Desk Based Assessment submitted with that application. This is that the proposed development would be visible from the immediate vicinity of the listed building, and that there would likely be some adverse effect on the wider setting of the listed building. Architectural Liaison Officer: As this is an outline application I will comment on principles only:

• Any dwelling adjacent public open space must have external defensible planting adjacent their wooden close boarded fence in order to prevent casual access to recover balls, and prevention of using fences as goals,

• Consideration of a 106 Agreement for one or possibly two youth shelters in appropriate locations,

• Ideally vehicles parked within the curtilage of the home, failing that off street within view,

• Clear definition between private space and public open space,

• Adequate defensible space within ownership.

The biggest concern of the police, as identified in the District Commanders email dated 1st September 2013 with this proposal and similarly located proposals is traffic management as the Police response hub is in Westaway Heights and this development together with similar proposals around this location will exacerbate emergency vehicles response times, all three services will be adversely affected. Only a small amount of calls to the police justify blue light runs, but many require prompt attention. The hospital access especially into the visitor’s car parks appears to be the main cause for grid lock at certain times of day; if this issue can be addressed concerns would diminish. A copy of the District Commander’s email is appended to this report.


SWW No objection. On request, they subsequently advised that the impact of this development upon South West Water infrastructure – the public water supply and foul sewer network and are satisfied that it can be accommodated. Devon County Council – Strategic Planning Children’s Services A proposal if 115 dwellings would be expected to produce an additional 29 primary pupils and 17 additional secondary pupils. There is sufficient capacity within 1.5 miles of this development at primary level but not at secondary level and a contribution of £314,640. Subsequent correspondence clarifying the primary schools with capacity in the locality are appended to this report. Natural England Statutory nature conservation sites – no objection Protected Species – standing advice applies Local Sites – If the proposal is on or adjacent to a local site ... the authority should ensure it has sufficient information to fully understand the impact of the proposal on the local site before it determines the application. Biodiversity enhancements – The Authority should consider securing measures to enhance the biodiversity of the site from the applicant, if it is minded to grant permission for this application. Landscape enhancements – Should be considered. A full copy of this consultation response is appended to this report. PROW Officer There is a public footpath (Barnstaple FP13 – Shearford Lane) immediately adjacent the eastern boundary of this site ... If the application were to be approved, a linking path into the lane should be created at the north-eastern corner of the site with an informal footpath inside the eastern boundary of the development to Westaway Plain / Maer Top accommodated. This would provide an improvement to the public rights of way network, as use of the route would also certainly increase with the proximity of the proposed development.

Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service

Make observations relating to provision of fire hydrants and Access for vehicles.

REPRESENTATIONS At the time of preparing this report 46 letters of objection and 2 letters of representation have been received relating to the application. Copies of all the letters have been made available prior to the Planning Committee meeting in accordance with agreed procedures. See attached list for representation names and addresses. They raise the following issues:

• Infrastructure of Pilton is at saturation point

• High incidence of traffic using Chadiford Lane and Northfield Lane to access the hospital

• Water run off from development will have flooding implications for Bradiford

• The proposed house types are out of keeping with the bungalows and detached properties set in large gardens in the vicinity,


• Water pressure is low in properties in Northfield lane,

• Local schools are already oversubscribed,

• Not enough parking for two spaces per dwelling,

• No provision for the maintenance of historic hedgerows and planned open/community area,

• Road access is narrow and at gridlock at peak times at both ends of Northfield Lane. Congestion also at the hospital and along Pilton Causeway.

• Access to properties at the north end of Northfield Lane will be restricted or compromised,

• Roads locally are not wide enough to accommodate the planned footpaths,

• The farmland provides valuable habitat for wildlife as are the hedgerows,

• Pilton Street and The Rock are congested and Abbey Road is chaos at 08:20,

• Solar panels?

• Do we not deserve green spaces that do not require a car,

• Additional pedestrian link from housing estate to Shearford Lane,

• Road pinch point between Northfield Lane and diversion should be removed as will increase congestion,

• Road width of diversion should be increased,

• Road width of Westaway Plain from Shearford lane to junction with Northfield Lane cycle route should be widened,

• Link road to Lynbro Road to integrate housing with existing development,

• Should be considered together with other applications in and around Pilton,

• Part of development is outside proposed development boundary,

• Emergency vehicle response already restricted,

• Pilton is the wrong side of town to be overdeveloped and cannot cope,

• Some of the highway works are outside of the site area,

• Road width at narrowing inaccurate,

• Scheme prevents casual parking outside numbers 43 and 45 Northfield Lane,

• Density does not reflect the locality,

• Lack of shops/services to support development and no medical surgery at Pilton,

• Where is the employment for the increased housing?

• Development will add to the queuing traffic along Westaway Plain which already impedes the police unit based at Westaway Close being the sole base for emergency response units,

• Development will add to congestion impacting on ambulances travelling to the hospital and fire engines departing at Pilton bridge,

• The greenfield site north of Westaway Plain is the only readily accessible area of countryside for residents of Pilton; this will be reduced if Shearford Lane is surrounded by residential development.

• Loss of defensible boundary.

• No provision for visitors/delivery vehicles within the diversion,

• Difficult to get our car on and off drive at 45 Northfield Lane given steepness of drive.

• Impact on privacy of 45 Northfield Lane,

• Impact on house value,

• Will erode our green and pleasant land,

• EA rejected storage tanks for Bradiford flood relief scheme as considered that the tanks would spill flood water,

• Hospital at capacity,

• We will impede flow of traffic when accessing our house at 43 Northfield Lane,


• Will detract from the Conservation Area – traffic will be increased across the whole area,

• Increased noise pollution to existing residents and unacceptable reduction in quality of life,

• Is Agricultural land Classification GOOD – we must protect our best land,

• Visual impact,

• Area hazardous for pedestrians – no pavement in the Bellaire area,

• The secluded valley will be lost,

• County Wildlife Site that is Shearford Lane must be protected,

• Design proposed does not respond to setting, but put together with little sensitivity, rigour or attention to detail,

• Sustainable design and construction cursorily addressed,

• No information regarding visual impact from surrounding areas particularly from fields around Bradiford Water to the North,

• Sewerage infrastructure inadequate,

• Impact on Anchor Mills listed building,

• Concern regarding youth shelters,

• Impact of footpath on high bank along Maer Top – maintenance responsibility?

• Proposed bin storage for 3 properties is a concern,

• Shearford Lane is dangerous,

• Impact on insurance of existing properties,

• Impact on SSSI and Great Horseshoe bat,

• Impact on privacy/light to 26 Lynbro Road,

• Impact on hedge to Lynbro Road for services? PLANNING HISTORY There is no planning history of relevance on this site. North Devon District Hospital Site Planning permission was recently granted for the redevelopment of part of the hospital for residential use. The permission is for the provision of 101 new dwellings and a staff campus of 112 apartments and 18 dwellings (ref. 43953). This permission was granted on 31 December 2012. The proposal involved the demolition of existing buildings and the redevelopment of the existing Hospital car park. The permission permits building heights up to 4 storeys (14m), including buildings of up to 3 storeys (12m) along the northern Roborough Road boundary. Trayne Farm Members have resolved to provisionally approve an application for up to 80 dwellings on land to the north of the hospital and west of Trayne Farm subject to requirements that include appropriate conditions and the resolution of a Section 106 Agreement that requires, inter alia, the dedication of land and financial contributions towards the provision of a roundabout at the hospital junction and highway requirements at Northfield Lane, Bellaire and Pilton Bridge. A planning application to the immediate east of the site on Westaway Plain for 43 dwellings is under consideration at this time. These sites are shown on the attached site plan.


SUMMARY OF ISSUES

• 5 year Housing Land Supply

• Character and appearance of the area and Agricultural Land

• Flooding

• Wildlife and designated sites

• Amenity

• Heritage

• Highways

• Education and Health Infrastructure and Employment

• Design (including Sustainability) and Density

• Section 106 matters: Affordable Housing/Open Space/Education

• New Homes Bonus PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS 5 year Housing Land Supply (HLS) The site lies outside the identified settlement boundary of the Adopted North Devon Local Plan. As such, its development for housing would conflict with extant Development Plan policies aimed at protecting the character and quality of the countryside by preventing development outside settlement boundaries. This site was identified as ‘developable’ in the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment, (SHLAA), albeit a larger site area than that the subject of this application, which concluded: ‘The land has been identified within the draft core strategy as a site that is suitable for housing. The site is immediately available and achievable subject to certain constraints being overcome.’ Part of this site, together with sites in the immediate locality are allocated in the pre-consultation draft of the emerging North Devon and Torridge Local Plan under Policy BAR05. A full copy of this policy and associated plan are appended to this report. The allocation for this site runs alongside the rear boundary of properties along Lynbro Road. However, the early stage of preparation of this plan limits the weight that it carries in the determination of this application. Notwithstanding, the site being outside the existing development boundary must be considered in light of the five-year Housing Land Supply. In this respect, the National Planning Policy Framework (Framework) sets out that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The Framework itself is such a material consideration. Paragraph 47 requires that local planning authorities should identify a supply of specific deliverable sites, sufficient to provide five years worth of housing against their housing requirements, with an additional appropriate buffer included, dependant on past delivery. At the time of writing this report and whilst an Interim 5 year HLS Statement is presently being prepared, which is likely to show a change in the present position, the formal position at the time of writing this agenda report is that the Local Planning Authority are not able to clearly demonstrate a five-year HLS. As members will recall this was a conclusion of the Goodleigh Road appeal.

imac

Rectangle

imac

Rectangle


Paragraph 49 of the Framework therefore applies. It states that if a local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of housing, relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date. Any policies that seek to encourage the provision of housing in some circumstances, restrict it in others, or otherwise direct the amount or location of residential development, can reasonably be considered “relevant” to the supply of housing. On that basis, to the extent that it seeks to control the provision of housing, it is considered that Policy HSG2 of the North Devon Local Plan should be read as out of date. To meet the demand, housing will have to extend beyond currently identified settlement boundaries and planning applications considered in the balance. The “decision-taking” section of paragraph 14 of the framework, therefore applies. It defines the operation of the presumption in favour of sustainable development as meaning that where (as here) relevant policies are out of date, permission should be granted unless (a) any adverse impacts of so doing would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the framework taken as a whole; or (b) specific policies in the framework indicate that development should be restricted. The decision-taker is therefore required to identify, and then to balance, the benefits and adverse impacts of the proposal. It is to these requirements that this report now turns. Character and Appearance of the Area Local residents have raised concerns with the visual impact of this development and its impact upon the green space and secluded valley. A landscape and visual impact assessment has been commissioned by the applicant and submitted to support the application. The report recognises that land to the north of the site is of a higher landscape and visual sensitivity than land to the south of the site. Specifically, the report advises ‘the plan does not, in the terms of this LVA, require the limitation on any development in this area but it does suggest a greater degree of consideration of the countryside influences and references. The edge should be soft, trees and areas without any buildings should be provided and view lines created, framed and focused should be captured as visual assets.’ The illustrative masterplan identifying development on this site seeks to respond to this by proposing an area of open space to the northern edge of the site, with the development set back at least 50 metres from the rear of the site. Whilst illustrative, a lower density of development is identified to the northern edge of the developed area and the development along the northern and eastern edges are shown as informal, looking out onto the countryside, with front gardens and low key, shared private driveways. The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment submitted identifies the viewpoints affected by this proposal. Localised viewpoints are limited by the dense hedgebanks and planting on the site boundaries. Public vantage points from distance are also obscured by vegetation. The Assessment concludes that: ‘It is regularly hidden by intervening landform. When it is possible to make it out, it is not particularly distinctive in the wide panoramas towards Barnstaple and the Taw estuary. It is not a highly distinctive element in the landscape. Where the site is discernible at this

imac

Rectangle


distance, its setting does not show much of the LCT 3H: Secluded Valleys character area in which the site sits. Where it is visible it has the expansive foreground and panoramic mid-ground of the 5C: Devon Downland LCT, both of which are set against the existing built environment of the settlement edge of Pilton.’ At present this site is a green field, outside of the development boundary of Barnstaple. The proposal to erect up to 115 dwellings on this land will have a detrimental affect on this character, which is contrary to Policy ENV1 of the Local Plan, which seeks to ensure that development in the countryside is only permitted where it enhances the beauty and diversity of its landscape. This policy accords with the core principles of the Framework in relation to development in the countryside. This impact will need to be balanced against the benefits that this scheme can deliver when determining this planning application. Agricultural Land The site is grade 3a agricultural land. This is classed as good, with only grades 1 (excellent) and 2 (very good) categorised above it. Policy ENV7 of the Local Plan advises that ‘the loss of the best and most versatile agricultural land (grades 1,2 and 3a) will only be permitted where the economic or social benefits of the development outweigh the loss of land … If the best and most versatile agricultural land needs to be developed and there is a choice between sites in different grades, a proposal will only be permitted if the lowest grade available is used unless other sustainable and/or environmental considerations outweigh the agricultural land quality considerations’. This approach is reflected in paragraph 112 of the NPPF. The category of agricultural land was acknowledged by the SHLAA Panel when they found the majority of this land to be developable and suitable for housing. The loss of this good agricultural land will need to be balanced against the benefits of this proposal. Flooding This site is located in flood zone 1; however, significant concerns have been raised locally with the impact that increased surface water would have on Bradiford Water and the flooding implications of this. A Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) has been submitted by the applicant. There are several water courses in the vicinity of the site and immediately to the north is Bradiford Water; this stream runs to the south west before joining the River Taw, approximately 2Km from the site. There is a deep ditch to the east of the site, alongside Shearford Lane. Infiltration tests have indicated that infiltration is suitable as a means of storm water outfall. The calculations show that two trench soakaways will be required to provide storage water discharge during a 1 in 30 year storm with a duration of six hours. An overspill trench soakaway is proposed which increases the capability of the infiltration devices to discharge the 1 in 100 year plus climate change storm again with the duration of six hours. The FRA advises that the current site discharges into the ditch to the east from overland flows, so enjoys the right to discharge into this watercourse. The effect of development will be to reduce or eliminate run off into this ditch providing betterment for down stream residential areas. The FRA advises that groundwater monitoring will be undertaken at the request of DCC in order to ascertain whether the ground water levels will affect the infiltration devices … in

imac

Rectangle


the event of the soakaways not performing as expected, there is available land at the north east of the site for an overspill attenuation zone. The FRA also advises of an exceedance strategy where should an extreme event occur (greater than 1% plus climate change) surface water would follow the highway in the site towards the northern boundary, where it would eventually enter the ditch adjacent to Shearford Lane. Flow paths will be created between houses to ensure no flooding occurs. The Environment Agency has considered the report and advises: ‘The revised FRA is acceptable. It shows that soakaways are feasible and can fit within the site, with room for further drainage features if found to be necessary at detail design stage. The drainage design uses all the latest technical guidance, which includes calculations for storm greater in size than experienced in the last few years. The Environment Agency would require a condition: ‘No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until details of a scheme for the provision of surface water management has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:

• Details of the drainage during the construction phase,

• Details of the final drainage scheme,

• Provision for exceedance pathways and overland route flows,

• A timetable for construction;

• A construction quality control procedure;

• A plan for the future maintenance and management of the system and overland flow routes.

Prior to the occupation of the site it shall be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the LPA that relevant parts of the scheme have been completed in accordance with the details and timetable agreed. The scheme shall thereafter be managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise approved in writing by the LPA.’ In addition, the Highways Authority consider additional monitoring work is required to consider the appropriateness of infiltration as a means of surface water disposal. They advise: Groundwater levels must to be monitored over a twelve month period. Borehole(s) were requested to be dug in February/March which would provide a reasonable idea of the seasonal high groundwater level, but can’t be certain, so there must be twelve months monitoring. Fortnightly measurements until the end of May and then at monthly intervals thereafter would be acceptable. The number of monitoring boreholes required will depend on the location, size and number of soakaways / infiltration devices to be used. The monitoring boreholes need to be taken down to a depth of at least 2m below the proposed base level of the infiltration device. In order for the soakaway(s) to be constructed to an adoptable standard, groundwater must no rise to within 1m of the underside of the soakaway (as per Ciria Guidelines). The upper 1.0 to 1.5m of the monitoring borehole needs to be sealed to prevent the migration of surface water into the borehole, thereby affecting the results. Below this depth the standpipe should be slotted to the base of the borehole. The applicant will need to provide details and drawings of how it is proposed to monitor the groundwater levels so that we can make sure that our requirements will be met.


It is considered that the information contained within the FRA identifies that a scheme for the disposal of surface water will be achievable here in accordance with Policy DVS6 of the Local Plan; however, conditions will need to be applied to ensure the detailed scheme will appropriately deal with surface water from the site. Sewerage SWW have confirmed that they have no objections to this development and that they have assessed the impact of this development upon their infrastructure in terms of public water supply and foul sewer network and are satisfied that it can be accommodated. Impact on designated sites and Wildlife The site is identified as a biodiversity network and the Shearford Lane and Bradiford Scarp County Wildlife site lies to the immediate east of the site. The Bradiford Valley SSSI is located to the north of the site but is separated by an intervening field. Natural England has considered the relationship of this site with the SSSI and do not object to the application on this basis. They advise that the SSSI does not represent a constraint in determining this application. Natural England advises that standing advice applies for protected species. An Ecological Impact Assessment accompanies this planning application and this complies with the requirements of Natural England’s Standing Advice. An appropriate mitigation strategy is contained within that report to ensure protected species are appropriately protected together with enhancement proposals, all of which can be conditioned. Providing the development is carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the Ecological assessment it is considered that this proposal will accord with Policy ENV11 of the adopted North Devon Local Plan and the Framework. The illustrative masterplan identifies a buffer zone of between 7.5 metres and 14.5 metres between the residential development and the County Wildlife Site. This is to minimise the impact on the County Wildlife site and avoid any direct damage to the woodland’s vegetation including tree routes, address shading effects and minimise any disturbance on wildlife using the woodland. This buffer zone can also be conditioned to ensure the development will comply with Policy ENV12 of the Local Plan. The site’s hedgerows are all considered important under the Hedgerow Regulations 1997. Other than those required to facilitate vehicular access all hedgerows will be retained. This will result in the loss of 30-35 metres of hedgerow in the south west corner of the site and 50m-60m in the south-east corner. At least 100 metres of new species hedgerow will be planted as part of the landscaping proposals to off set these losses. This mitigation will be conditioned. Providing the mitigation and enhancement measures contained within the Ecological Impact Assessment are conditioned, this development is considered to accord with the policies in the Adopted North Devon Local Plan. Design and Density The density of the development proposed has caused concern locally. The proposed density of this development is approximately 40 dwellings per hectare. The density of the Lynbro Road development is 19 dwellings per hectare, whilst Youings Drive is 40 dwellings per hectare and Westaway Heights is 57 dwellings per hectare.


The applicant has sought to respond to these concerns by incorporating further soft landscaping within the site and breaking up some of the development blocks previously identified to better reflect the type of development form in the locality, particularly at the entrance to the proposed development off Northfield Lane. These amendments to the illustrative masterplan represent a significant improvement to the scheme and indicate that 115 dwellings on this site could be satisfactorily assimilated into the locality. A density of 40 dwellings per hectare represents an efficient use of land and compares with other development in the locality. All matters apart from access are reserved; however, it is considered that this number of dwellings can be satisfactorily accommodated on the site and respect the character of the locality. The design and access statement advises that the site will be predominantly two storey with 2.5 storeys introduced where it is considered the situation would benefit from an increase in scale. It is considered that two storey should be the maximum height here, particularly given that Lynbro Road is a mixture of single storey and 1i/2 storey development. This requirement can be conditioned. On this basis, it is considered that the density of this proposal is acceptable in this location and accords with Policies DVS1 and HSG5 of the Adopted North Devon Local Plan. Concern has been raised with regards the sustainability principles incorporated here; however, compliance with conditions DVS1A and ECN15 of the Local Plan can be conditioned. Heritage A Heritage Desk Based Assessment has been submitted to support this application. Concern has been raised with regard the impact of this development on the Pilton Conservation Area. This development is some distance from the Pilton Conservation Area. The Heritage report advises that there is no intervisibility between this site and the Conservation Area and as such, is not considered sensitive to potential adverse impacts from this development. This is accepted and as such, this scheme is considered to accord with Policy ENV16 of the Adopted North Devon Local Plan. There is a listed building known as Westaway to the north of this site. It is a substantial distance from the site, separated by Shearford Lane. The Heritage report concludes that the proposed development will potentially be visible in views from Westaway; these are likely to be at least partially screened by trees along Shearford Lane. However, there is likely to be some intervisibility, especially in winter. This change to the wider agricultural setting of the house would potentially result in a negligible adverse impact upon its significance as a heritage asset. The Conservation Officer concurs with this advice and states: This is that the proposed development would be visible from the immediate vicinity of the listed building, and that there would likely be some adverse effect on the wider setting of the listed building.


The Heritage report finds no current evidence to suggest below ground remains of pre-historic or Romano-British interest within the proposed development site. The Heritage report also advises that a stone barn in the south-western part of the proposed development site, first recorded on the First Edition Ordnance Survey map of 1889, might be considered to be a heritage asset of local historic interest. With regard to adopted North Devon Local Plan policies and the Framework it is considered that any impact on the setting of the listed building or the barn, which might be considered of local interest, represents less than substantial harm. The impacts therefore remain to be weighed in the balance. Amenity Concern has been raised with regard the impact of this development on the properties adjacent the site at 26 Lynbro Road and 45 Northfield Lane and particularly with regards privacy and light. In response to this, the applicant has moved the garage block forward adjacent 26 Lynbro Road. The illustrative masterplan identifies the rear gardens of the new properties backing onto the side boundaries of these properties. It is considered that an appropriate distance between the properties can be provided to ensure the impact on these properties privacy and light is acceptable and this can be resolved at reserved matters stage. The scheme is considered to accord with Policy DVS3 of the Local Plan. Education and Health Infrastructure and Employment Representation has been received concerned that existing facilities in the locality are at capacity. The Local Education Authority has not requested a financial contribution towards primary provision as they consider there to be sufficient capacity within 1.5 miles of this site and they have identified the schools, which enjoy this capacity. A secondary contribution is sought and this is considered under the Section 106 Agreement heading. In terms of health services the recently released Planning Practice Guidance states that Local planning authorities should ensure that health and wellbeing, and health infrastructure are considered in local and neighbourhood plans and in planning decision-making. The National Planning Policy Framework encourages local planning authorities to engage with relevant organisations when carrying out their planning function. In the case of health and wellbeing, there are key contacts. Engagement with these organisations will help ensure that local strategies to improve health and wellbeing and the provision of the required health infrastructure are supported and taken into account in local and neighbourhood plan making and when determining planning applications. The range of issues that could be considered through the plan-making and decision-making processes, in respect of health and healthcare infrastructure, include how:

• development proposals can support strong, vibrant and healthy communities and help create healthy living environments which should, where possible, include making physical activity easy to do and create places and spaces to meet to support community engagement and social capital;

• the local plan promotes health, social and cultural wellbeing and supports the reduction of health inequalities;


• the local plan considers the local health and wellbeing strategy and other relevant health improvement strategies in the area;

• the healthcare infrastructure implications of any relevant proposed local development have been considered;

• opportunities for healthy lifestyles have been considered (e.g. planning for an environment that supports people of all ages in making healthy choices, helps to promote active travel and physical activity, and promotes access to healthier food, high quality open spaces and opportunities for play, sport and recreation);

• potential pollution and other environmental hazards, which might lead to an adverse impact on human health, are accounted for in the consideration of new development proposals; and

• access to the whole community by all sections of the community, whether able-bodied or disabled, has been promoted

In terms of these issues statutory consultees have not raised concern albeit public open space requirements need to be met by the proposal and sustainable transport alternatives considered. Representations have been expressed that there are insufficient employment opportunities for prospective occupants of the dwellings proposed. As Members are aware the adopted North Devon Local Plan identifies land for employment purposes and other department of the Council help to facilitate such investment. It is therefore not a matter for consideration as part of this application Highways As highlighted above representation has been submitted with regard to highway matters. As well as the present application site, there are three other potential additional residential development sites in close proximity. These sites are the Trayne Farm site to the north of the hospital to which reference is made earlier in this agenda report. The other two sites, without planning permission, form two distinct parcels of land both of which are allocated for development within the emerging Local Plan. One of the development sites is located to the east of the current application site, and is the subject of a current planning application, and the other is to the south of North Devon District Hospital. These three sites would accommodate up to 235 dwellings. There is also an extant planning permission for housing on the Hospital site, which would result in approximately an additional 130 units of accommodation. It has been identified by the Highway Authority that the junction of the A39 / Westaway Plain / Hospital access (known as the hospital junction) is currently at capacity. DCC and some representations have identified that the traffic issues here include:

• long queues form in the morning peak northbound on the A39 at the hospital junction due to conflict between a large number of vehicles wishing to turn right into the hospital and the conflicting movement of incoming traffic to Barnstaple.

• severe queuing occurs within the hospital site in the evening peak as hospital staff, patients and visitors leave the hospital. This queue stretches beyond view and often extends into the site beyond the A entrance. It is anecdotally reported to take around 15 minutes to leave the hospital site in usual conditions at this time of day.


• queuing forms from the hospital car park out onto the A39 in times when the car park is full. This is dangerous and causes delay to vehicles on the A39 and to ambulances entering the hospital site. This has been identified by, amongst others, the Devon and Cornwall Constabulary Road Casualty Reduction Officer (North).

• In addition to this, the Pilton Police Station on Youings Drive, accessed from Westaway Plain, is the central hub for emergency police response units for Northern Devon. This station is the centre for response officers, roads and policing officers, armed response units, dog units and other support functions such as scene of crime investigators. The majority of vehicles deployed from this station travel through the hospital junction to attend an emergency.

Local residents are also very concerned about the highway infrastructure in Pilton, including Northfield Lane, Bellaire, The Rock, Westaway Plain, Abbey Road, Pilton Street and Pilton Bridge and the highway network’s ability to cope with any additional traffic, both vehicular and pedestrian. The Transport Assessment advises that the proposed development of up to 115 dwellings will generate 72 vehicle trips and 66 vehicle trips in the morning peak hour and evening peak hour respectively. In terms of the Hospital Junction, the Highway Authority is currently redesigning a roundabout scheme for the A39 hospital junction so as to accommodate traffic growth in this area as well as the high volume of emergency service vehicles. This scheme has already been the subject of one round of public consultation which has highlighted a number of issues with regard to the scheme, including:

(1) Vehicles accessing the Hospital, in particular the issue with cars

queuing back from the car park barriers, (2) Pedestrian facilities at the proposed new junction, (3) The overall need for the scheme. As a consequence the current design is being reviewed and the issues will be discussed with local stakeholders, possibly requiring a period of further consultation prior to consideration by Devon County Council Cabinet.

In this context, the Highways Authority are recommending the following condition: ‘No part of the development otherwise permitted shall be commenced until: Plans for improvements to the Westaway Plain / A39 / Hospital Junction are submitted to and approved in writing by the Highway Authority and these improvements are delivered in full. REASON: To ensure that the adverse effects of the development on the highway network are adequately mitigated prior to traffic being attracted to or from the site. ALTERNATIVELY: A financial contribution of £340,236.69 towards highway improvements at the Hospital Junction shall be secured within a section 106 agreement as part of an overall package of highway infrastructure improvements of a total of £391,272.19’ The above noted condition suggested by DCC would require no development to commence until highway improvements are delivered in full. If the DCC Highway


improvement scheme were to be pursued the applicant has expressed concern over the imposition of such a planning condition as there is an uncertainty over the deliverability and timescales for any DCC scheme. They advise that such a planning condition could result in impacts on the financial viability of the application. If a resolution to grant planning permission based on the DCC scheme were proposed this is a matter your Officers, Ward Member, DCC Highways and the Developer would need to discuss further, to ascertain if the trigger point is the most appropriate. This proposal includes highway improvements in the immediate vicinity of the site; namely:

• Create a footway on Westaway Plain / Maer Top from the site entrance down to Wordsworth Avenue (varying in width from 1.2metres to 2.1metres), narrowing the carriageway to a minimum of 4.6 metres for two way traffic, with some localised narrowing to 3.3 metres,

• Realign Northfield Lane, providing visibility improvements at the junction of Northfield Lane with Westaway Plain,

• Provide additional traffic calming in the form of dragons teeth and traverse lines to the immediate south-west of the new Northfield Lane / Westaway Plain junction,

• Provide narrowing of the highway at the north western access to the site off Northfield Lane.

The Highway Authority considers that all of these works provide the minimum level of safety for pedestrians and vehicles while maintaining access for vehicles and increasing provision for pedestrians. The Highways Authority advise that the amended drawing FMW1032T-SK12-revision D identifying the above works is considered acceptable subject to detailed design for the construction and adoption process. The Highways Authority recognise, however, that whilst this scheme will provide safety improvements at the Northfield Lane junction, no improvements are proposed to the highway network further into Pilton. It is therefore essential that the development provides a contribution towards future highway works at or around Bellaire/Northfield Park to improve traffic flow. Such a scheme has yet to be designed and will require consultation with local residents and stakeholders. The Highway Authority are seeking a contribution of £25,517.75 towards this work. The Highway Authority also considers that the additional traffic using the Pilton Causeway junction will be in conflict with pedestrians, particularly school children, crossing the A39 and as such, contributions to improvements to pedestrian facilities here are sought. The Highway Authority considers that subject to the highway improvements proposed and a set of contributions towards off site highway works at Pilton Bridge, the Hospital junction and Northfield Lane / Bellaire they do not raise objections subject to the following Section 106 package and appropriate conditions:

• Travel Plan including travel pack and £300 of vouchers per dwelling to be used on bus tickets and/or cycle equipment.




• Contribution of £25,517.75 towards highway improvements to the western end of Northfield Lane, works to be agreed with Highway Authority and Local Members following public consultation.


• £170,118.34 towards enhanced bus service provision for the number 6 bus for five years. This can be paid in yearly instalments starting after the occupation of a yet to be agreed proportion of the houses on the site.


Particular concern was raised with pedestrian safety and this development and the Highways Authority have provided the following advice:

The developer is proposing to create footway between the site and the Rock as well as along a realigned Northfield Lane into the current wide section of Northfield Lane which already has footways on both sides. There will also be a link to the adjacent proposed development which itself has proposed a footway link across its site on towards the Hospital.

Furthermore, I have recommended that all developments in this area should pay towards highway works around Bellaire, where there is currently no footway provision, the form of these works are yet to be determined, but will consider pedestrian safety.

In terms of risk to pedestrians due to lack of footway or the minimum width of footway proposed, the document Highway Risk and Liability Claims explains, amongst other matters, that in considering the use of the highway, the objective of the Highway Authority is to obtain the maximum benefits for the community, and it notes that this task is wholly different to that of minimising risk. It goes on to say that local authorities should not become locked into a risk management mentality, pointing out that the role of a local authority is to seek advantage for the community and that this will necessarily involve some risks, with a balanced view needing to be taken. I am of the view that footway provides ‘formal’ areas where pedestrians can travel and pass one another and motor vehicles, however, there are other ‘informal’ passing places and areas of pedestrian refuge where there is no footway. On balance I believe the proposed works will provide a great benefit to the community in terms of highway safety due to a vastly improved access at the end of Northfield Lane and a complete segregated footway link between the A39 and the Rock and Northfield Lane. It is recognised that this development will generate additional traffic, however, the proposed on and off site highway works are considered to provide significant benefit and the scheme would be acceptable subject to the necessary Section 106 contributions and conditions. Other Matters The consultation response of Architectural Liaison has been detailed above and the recommended S106 Agreement should include provision for an appropriate contribution towards the proposed youth shelters or other appropriate measures to meet the identified recommendations.


The amended flood risk assessment identifies that connection to services will be required in Lynbro Road. This has been confirmed by the applicant, who states:

'With regards to the connection, the rising main from the site will be a small diameter pipe and will likely run fairly shallow (≈1m depth) to the existing chamber close to number 26. Whilst the main will obviously need to cross the hedge along the boundary, which includes a few trees, the impact can be kept to a minimum by planting certain varieties of shallow rooted vegetation close to the rising main.

During construction/connection a small section of the hedge will need to be removed (maybe 2m wide), however, given some time following this it is possible to restore this gap, reinstating the closed boundary from Lynbro Road to the new site.’

This can be conditioned to ensure minimal impact on the residents of Lynbro Road and the hedgebank. Concerns have been raised regarding impact on house value and insurance. These are not material planning considerations, which can be taken into account. Concern has been raised regarding the location of bin storage to serve the three properties on Northfield Lane (where the route is diverted). This detail can be controlled by condition. Noise pollution from construction traffic has been raised as an issue. Environmental Health has requested a condition seeking a Construction management Plan and controlling Construction time, which will enable noise pollution to be controlled. Water pressure of existing properties in Northfield lane has been raised as an issue. This concern could be added as a note to inform the applicant of such concerns. The impact of parking and access to numbers 43 and 45 Northfield Lane has been raised as a concern. The applicant has responded as follows: ‘Visibility from No 45 Northfield Lane is currently restricted by the existing highway and hedgerow arrangement. The proposed priority narrowing and footway arrangement would slow down traffic adjacent and would improve visibility from the private drive, especially to the west. The proposals would not prevent a large car from entering or exiting the existing drive.’ Section 106 Agreement The applicant has advised that they are content to offer 35% affordable housing but that this is subject to agreeing the other contributions and consideration of viability thereafter. In addition to affordable housing the following Heads of Terms are requested:

• Education – A contribution towards secondary education provision is sought. The required contribution is £314,640. North Devon Council’s policy would seek to discount this contribution for affordable housing. Assuming the provision of 35% affordable housing, this would reduce to £204,516.

• Public Open Space – Off site open space contributions for sports pitches, built recreation and a MUGA are sought. These are identified as approximately £225,904.80.

• Architectural Liaison. As noted above.


• Highways – The following matters are sought:

• Travel Plan including travel pack and £300 of vouchers per dwelling to be used on bus tickets and/or cycle equipment.







The applicant does not consider they are in a position to finalise the heads of terms because of the unknown highway costs associated with this development. As members are aware, the Highway Authority is recommending either the provision of off site works at the hospital junction or a contribution of £340,236.69 towards off site highway works at this same junction. The applicant considers that the cost of providing the off site works is significantly less than the off site contribution sought. Until clarity is sought on this request, the heads of terms cannot be finalised. The applicant is also querying the requirement for an education contribution when one was not requested either for the planning applications at Trayne Farm or Westaway Plain. New Homes Bonus Sections 143 of the Localism Act amends Section 70 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 so that when determining planning applications, Local Planning Authorities should also have regard to any local finance considerations, so far as material to the application. Local finance considerations means a grant or other financial assistance that has been, or will or could be provided to the relevant authority by a Minister of the Crown, or Sums that a relevant authority has received, or will or could receive, in payment or a Community Infrastructure Levy. In respect of this proposal consideration should be given to the fact that a New Homes Bonus would be generated by this application. CONCLUSION In terms of this application, considerable weight can be attached to the circumstance that the scheme would deliver both open-market housing and affordable housing in the context of the above noted housing land supply requirement. It would also bring forward a site the majority of which is allocated in the Emerging Local Plan.


Weight can be attached to the fact that the proposed development would assist the local economy through the generation of construction work, and a payment to the Council under the New Homes Bonus Scheme and to the provision of Public Open Space within the development and the associated biodiversity enhancement. Development of this site will change the character of the land and result in the loss of good agricultural land. The requirement under S66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 to have “special regard” to the desirability of preserving the setting of a listed building is remembered. However, the impacts on the heritage assets in the locality can be mitigated through landscaping and are mitigated through distance and relationship between the asset and the site resulting in the retention of their significance. It is considered that subject to the applicant entering into a legal agreement to secure the above noted POS, transport matters, community security, affordable housing and water management measures the overall impact of the proposed development would be mitigated to the extent of making the proposed development acceptable in terms of the planning balance. Drawing this together it is concluded that the development would result in limited impacts on the setting of the landscape and the heritage assets, the rural character of the area and the loss of good agricultural land. Given the limited impacts that would result it is concluded that the balance falls to a recommendation of approval of the application; subject to the applicant entering into a S106 and appropriate planning conditions being imposed. HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998 The provisions of the Human Rights Act and principles contained in the Convention on Human Rights have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report. The articles/protocols identified below were considered of particular relevance:

• Article 8 – Right to Respect for Private and Family Life

• THE FIRST PROTOCOL – Article 1: Protection of Property DETAILS OF RECOMMENDATION Delegate to the Planning Manager to APPROVE in consultation with the Ward Member subject to appropriate planning conditions being imposed delegated to the Planning Manager and a Section 106 legal agreement being completed. The legal agreement would need to secure:-

• Up to 35% Affordable Housing

• Public Open Space on site, including management arrangements, and off site financial contribution

• Management of the surface water solution

• Education contribution








INSERT(S) TO FOLLOW OVERLEAF 1. OS Location Plan also showing other planning applications in the locality 2. List of Representations 3. Consultee Response of Pilton West Parish Council x2 4. Consultee Response of Environment Agency x4 5. Consultee Response of Highways Authority x2 6. Consultee Response of Police Architectural Liaison Officer 7. Consultee Response of Childrens Services 8. Consultee Response of Natural England 9. Questions from Cllr Greenslade 10. Policy BAR05 & associated plan from the emerging North Devon and Torridge Local

Plan


PART 2 NEW APPLICATIONS

2

App. No.: 57316 Reg. : 04/07/2014 Applicant: MR ANDREW MOULTON

L. Bldg. : Expired: 29/08/2014 Agent : NPS (SW) LTD Parish : BARNSTAPLE Case Officer : Mr. M. Brown Proposal: CONSTRUCTION OF HARD SURFACED PATH AND VIEWING PLATFORM Location: YEO VALLEY COMMUNITY WOODLAND DERBY ROAD BARNSTAPLE

PROPOSAL Construction of hard surfaced path and viewing platform at Yeo Valley Woodland, Barnstaple The footpath, which already exists in an un-surfaced form, is proposed to be surfaced with recycled road planings. The viewing area is proposed to be surfaced with road planings and enclosed by a post a rail fence not exceeding 1.2m high. RECOMMENDATION APPROVE SITE AND SURROUNDINGS Yeo Valley Community Woodland encompasses 12 hectares of undulating land on the very edge of Barnstaple. Providing spectacular views over Barnstaple, the Taw/Torridge Estuary and Braunton Burrows, the site offers an open space surrounded by unspoilt countryside on three sides. Access to the site is from Derby Road or the Silverwood Heights estate. REASON FOR REPORT TO MEMBERS North Devon Council are the applicant’s and land owners. POLICY CONTEXT Development Plan North Devon Local Plan 2006 ENV1 Development on the countryside. REC3 Sport and recreation on the countryside. Paragraph 10.10A


CONSULTEE RESPONSES Barnstaple Town Council – Recommends approval subject to:-

i. After completion of the works to the viewing platform the access track being reduced to only 1 metre wide.

ii. A fixed gate be installed at the access point to prevent unauthorised vehicular and motor-cycle access.

REPRESENTATIONS *At the time of preparing this report no letters of representation have been received relating to the application. PLANNING HISTORY None. SUMMARY OF ISSUES Enhancement of recreational provision. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS The website for the woodland states:- “The woodland offers areas for quiet enjoyment, walking, wildlife spotting or just watching the world go by. Work to date has focused on planting the 11,000 native trees and shrubs to create the woodland. This has been achieved mainly through the efforts of volunteers, which included over 800 local school children. The volunteers have also helped to create new hedgerows to replace those lost through farming, wet areas to encourage aquatic species and new sections of walling. Our future plans for the woodland include a community orchard and garden, a viewing platform to take advantage of the wonderful views, as well as further seating and picnic tables for those who want to spend more time.” The footpath provision will enable more people with disabilities to access the site and improve access for all the community generally. The comments of the Town Council were passed to the applicant for consideration. The applicant has advised that there is already a locked metal vehicle gate and kissing gate that prohibits motorcycles from getting through. They went on to state that they would like to keep the path width at 1.5m as this is the recommended width for people of all abilities. It is considered that the landscape and habitat impacts will be minimal due to the extent of the works proposed and the screening provided by existing planting. Again no impacts on flooding are considered to result from the proposal due to the scale of works proposed.


In terms of planning policy there is a general thrust for the enhancement of such facilities. CONCLUSION Due to the overall community benefits that will result from this proposal approval of the application, as submitted, is recommended subject to the imposition of standard planning conditions and informatives. HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998 The provisions of the Human Rights Act and principles contained in the Convention on Human Rights have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report. The articles/protocols identified below were considered of particular relevance:


• THE FIRST PROTOCOL – Article 1: Protection of Property DETAILS OF RECOMMENDATION Delegate to the Planning Manager to APPROVE subject to no new issues being raised prior to the expiry of the consultation period, which expires on the 14/08/2014: 1) The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the

expiration of three years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.

Reason: The time limit condition is imposed in order to comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the plans

submitted as part of the application, number ENG/560/01 Rev A and received on 04/07/2014, ('the approved plans').

Reason: To confirm the drawings to which the permission relates and to ensure the development accords with the approved plans.

NOTE TO APPLICANT (A) The applicant is reminded of the provisions of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and the E.C. Conservation [Natural Habitats] Regulations 1994. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework the Council has worked in a positive and pro-active way and has imposed planning conditions to enable the grant of planning permission. INSERT(S) TO FOLLOW OVERLEAF 1. OS Location Plan


3

App. No.: 57418 Reg. : 25/04/2014 Applicant: MS MICHELLE WARD L. Bldg. : II Expired: 20/06/2014 Agent : Parish : FREMINGTON Case Officer : Mr. A. Jones Proposal: APPLICATION FOR CONSENT FOR WORKS TO TREES COVERED BY A TREE PRESERVATION ORDER IN RESPECT OF REMOVAL OF ONE BEECH TREE (AMENDED DESCRIPTION) Location: FREMINGTON MANOR FREMINGTON BARNSTAPLE EX31 2NX

PROPOSAL Application for consent under Tree Preservation Order no. 210 in respect of removal of one Beech tree at Fremington Manor, Fremington RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL It is recommended that consent be granted subject to conditions to control the time within which the works are to be completed, the extent of the works, replacement planting and the standard of work to be achieved. SITE AND SURROUNDINGS The application relates to the removal of a mature Copper Beech tree that is situated in the grounds of Fremington Manor a grade II* listed building, which is in turn situated within the centre of the Fremington Conservation Area. REASON FOR REPORT TO MEMBERS The application has been called in by the local ward member who has expressed concerns over the loss of the tree and the associated adverse impact on the local environment and in respect of the lack of justification for the works proposed. The Officer recommendation is also contrary to the recommendation of the Parish Council. CONSULTEE RESPONSES Fremington Parish Council has recommended that the application be refused as the tree has a significant visual impact within Fremington. REPRESENTATIONS No other representations have been made in relation to the proposed works. PLANNING HISTORY No relevant planning history available.


SUMMARY OF ISSUES Consideration of the amenity value of the tree and the likely impact of the proposal on the amenity of the area; and In light of the above, to consider whether or not the proposal is justified having regard to the reasons put forward in support of it. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS AMENITY VALUE OF THE TREE AND THE LIKELY IMPACT OF THE PROPOSAL ON THE AMENITY OF THE AREA: The tree subject of this application is protected by virtue of an ‘Area’ TPO designation and is situated adjacent to the residents conservatory and to the south of northern accommodation block at Fremington Manor. Public views of the tree are considered to be limited to partial/glimpse views along a relatively short stretch of Church Hill to the south of the site where the tree can be identified (during the summer months) with a neighbouring Copper Beech due to their contrasting colour at the western edge of a larger group of trees. Despite the tree being a large attractive mature specimen in its own right the tree is considered to be of relatively low public amenity value as it is not considered to be prominent within public views and is not well suited to its current setting. The proposed tree removal is considered likely to result in a negligible/ very slight adverse impact on the amenity of the area and its enjoyment by the public in that the loss of the tree would be unlikely to be noticed by casual observers from public vantage points and its removal is considered unlikely to have any significant impact on the enjoyment of the wider area. CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSAL WITH REGARD TO THE REASONS/EVIDENCE PROVIDED: The reasons stated for wishing to carry out the work can be summarised as the nursing home management consider the tree; i) to be too close to the to the conservatory/nursing home; ii) to cast excessive shade on the conservatory and adjacent bedrooms iii) to prevent views from adjacent bedrooms iv) to create a maintenance burden in respect of dealing with debris from the tree v) to pose a risk to persons and property. Proximity to property: As alluded to above it is accepted that, as a result of development within the last 30 years, the tree is not well suited to its current setting and is considered to be only just suitable in respect of its proximity to the conservatory and adjacent rooms. However, there is no evidence to show that the proximity of the existing tree is causing any direct damage to the adjacent property and proximity alone is not considered to be sufficient justification for the removal of the tree. The proximity of the tree is however recognised as influencing the


degree of impact of the reasons put forward for wishing to remove the tree which are considered below. Shading: Whilst it is accepted that given the tree’s position in relation to the conservatory and residential block it is likely to have a degree of adverse impact of the availability of day light and sunlight to the conservatory and adjacent rooms. However the extent of shading of these areas is not considered to have such a severe impact as to prevent the reasonable enjoyment of these areas. Termination of views: It is also accepted that the tree will prevent extensive views from adjacent bedrooms at certain times of the year. However, it is not considered that extensive views from a bedroom window is a necessity as wider views are available from other parts of the property and on balance the lack of particular view is not considered to prevent the reasonable enjoyment of the rooms or to be reasonable justification for the removal of the tree. Maintenance: It is also accepted that the presence of this and other trees will result in maintenance burdens for the site operators. However, the level of maintenance is not considered to be unreasonable and the proposed tree removal is not considered likely to result in a significant reduction of maintenance works that would be required given the proximity of other trees. Risk to persons and property: The applicants have stated that the condition of the tree is not a reason for carrying out the proposed work on the application, but potential risk is raised in a supporting letter and it is noted that the site managers close the conservatory during storms. Having used the councils adopted Quantified Tree Risk Assessment (QTRA)* methodology, the tree is considered to pose a 1/30,000 risk of significant harm. Whilst this level of risk is not considered to unacceptable, it falls within the upper range of tolerable risk and is a situation whereby an assessment of the costs and benefits of risk control are applied and work would only usually be carried out where significant benefits could be achieved at reasonable cost. [QTRA* advisory risk thresholds – a risk of harm that is less than 1/ 1,000, 000 is broadly acceptable and is already as low as reasonably practicable – a risk of harm of 1/1000 is unacceptable and will not ordinarily be tolerated - Between these two values the risk is in the tolerable region and costs and benefits are assessed in order to inform management decisions.] CONCLUSION Whilst none of the reasons provided in support of the application justify the proposed work in their own right, given that the proposed works are considered likely to result in a negligible or very slight adverse impact on the amenity of the wider area, on balance it is considered that their would be significant benefits to the applicants in allowing the proposed works without a significant adverse cost to amenity of the wider area.


It is also considered that any, albeit slight, adverse impact on the character or appearance of the conservation area in the short term could be mitigated through new planting that would have the potential to make a greater contribution to the character and appearance of the area in the medium to long term. It is recommended that consent be granted subject to conditions to control the time within which the works are to be completed, the extent of the work, replacement planting and the standard of work to be achieved. HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998 The provisions of the Human Rights Act and principles contained in the Convention on Human Rights have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report. The articles/protocols identified below were considered of particular relevance:

• THE FIRST PROTOCOL – Article 1: Protection of Property

DETAILS OF RECOMMENDATION 1) The works hereby consented shall consist only of those detailed in the application

and supporting documents, as qualified by these conditions, and shall be completed in there Reason: To ensure effective control over the issuing of consents under the Tree Preservation Order. Reason: To ensure that the works are carried out in such a way that is not significantly detrimental to the tree's health or appearance, or detrimental to the amenity of the surrounding area.

2) One replacement Beech tree of a minimum size 12/14 nursery stock shall be planted

at an appropriate location within the grounds of Fremington Manor to be agreed in writing with the Council, within the first planting season following the permitted tree removal or such other size, species, location or period as may be agreed in writing by the Council. Reason: To ensure that tree cover and the amenity that it provides is maintained in the area for future benefit.

3) If, within a period of five years from the date of planting, the tree (or any other tree

planted in replacement) is removed, uprooted, or destroyed or dies or becomes, in the opinion of the Council, seriously damaged or defective, another tree of the same size and species shall be planted at the same place, or in accordance with any variation for which the local planning authority give their written consent. Reason: To ensure that tree cover and the amenity that it provides is maintained in the area for future benefit.


4) All works shall be carried out so as to conform to a minimum standard of;

a. British Standard 3998:2010, Tree Work - Recommendations; b. British Standard 3936:1992, Part 1: Nursery Stock - Specification for Trees and

Shrubs c. British Standard 4428:1989, Code of practice for general landscape operations; Reason: To ensure that the works are carried out in such a way that is not significantly detrimental to the tree's health or appearance, or detrimental to the amenity of the surrounding area. Reason: To ensure that tree cover and the amenity that it provides is maintained in the area for future benefit. Reason: To ensure that the work is carried out to a recognised arboricultural standard.

TREE WORK CONTRACTORS The Council recommends that a competent arboricultural contractor carry out this work. Please see the enclosed leaflet 'Tree Work - Choosing Your Arborist' for further advice. Whilst the Council does not recommend, or assess or endorse any individuals or companies, we strongly advise that you should ensure that any tree contractor you employ is appropriately qualified, aware of current good practice with regard to tree work and health and safety, and is fully insured. You should always verify credentials and qualifications and be particularly cautious of casual callers offering to carry out tree work. If you require further guidance, the Arboricultural Association [telephone 01242 522152 or Aboricultural Association website] is one of the recognised bodies in arboriculture which contains a directory of tree contractors and consultants and may be able to assist you with your choice of tree contractors. INSERT(S) TO FOLLOW OVERLEAF 1. OS Location Plan


4

App. No.: 57519 Reg. : 21/05/2014 Applicant: BARRATT DAVID WILSON HOMES L. Bldg. : Expired: 20/08/2014 Agent : RPS PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Parish : FREMINGTON Case Officer : Mrs S-J. Mackenzie-Shapland Proposal: VARIATION OF CONDITION 2 (APPROVED PLANS) ATTACHED TO PLANNING PERMISSION 53147 (APP/X1118/A/12/2188898) TO ALLOW FOR MINOR ALTERATION TO ACCESS ROAD (MILITARY ROAD) (ADDITIONAL INFORMATION) Location: FORMER FREMINGTON ARMY CAMP FREMINGTON BARNSTAPLE EX31 3BJ

PROPOSAL This is a Section 73 application for the variation of condition 2 (Approved Plans) attached to planning permission 53147 (APP/X1118/A/12/2188898) to allow for minor alterations to the access road known as military road. A small piece of land, the subject of the original application, is not in the ownership of the applicant and as a result, this application proposes a narrowing of the highway over a part of the access road approved by the original application. RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL SITE AND SURROUNDINGS The application site is the former Fremington Army Camp. Measuring approximately 16.65 hectares in size, it is located on land to the north of Yelland Road (B3233) between the village of Fremington and the Taw Estuary. The site contains a large number of predominantly single storey military buildings, which include accommodation blocks, kitchens, officers’ mess aircraft hanger, workshops and gymnasium. The majority of the buildings on the site are in a poor state of repair as a result of their construction during WWII and lack of maintenance. The site is accessed from the B3233 Church Hill Road at the junction to the west of the war memorial with Military Road. There is a pedestrian link via the Public Right of Way footpath from Church Hill to the Estuary and the Tarka Trail. The site is bordered by open fields and the River Taw Estuary to the north and west. The east and south-east boundaries consist of mature woodland adjacent to the footpath and cycleway. To the south of the site are the Manor, St Peter’s Church and the main village centre. The site is within the Fremington Conservation Area and forms the setting of a number of listed buildings including the Grade II* Church of St Peter, Grade II* Fremington Manor and its formerly associated Gazebo, as well as its former Grade II Garden Walls.


REASON FOR REPORT TO MEMBERS Councillor Frank Biederman (one of the ward members) has requested that this application be debated at Planning Committee for the following reasons: ‘My reasons are that I don’t believe the access is safe as it is, to further reduce the width of military road for any further length of it, will put the public at risk, particularly pedestrians. It will also make it more difficult and possibly impossible for emergency vehicles to access the site, in a timely manner. I also have concerns about the accuracy of the drawings, I believe public debate is essential.’ POLICY CONTEXT The effect of an application under section 73, if approved, is to issue a fresh consent and so this application should be judged against current national and local policies and all other material considerations. The relevant policies are listed below and a copy of the Inspector’s decision is also attached as Appendix II. It is considered that since the original permission was approved on appeal, there have been no material changes to the policies or other considerations, subject to the changes resulting from this application. The emerging Local plan is at such an early stage in the process that very limited weight can be given to it at the present time. The principle of development has therefore been established by the appeal decision and so this report focuses on the material changes to the development previously approved and on the main issues arising from those proposed changes DEVELOPMENT PLAN Devon County Waste Local Plan June 2006 (DCWLP) WPC4 Waste Audit WPC5 Provision of Waste Management Facilities for Major New Developments North Devon Local Plan 2006 (NDLP) STY3 Local Centres DVS1A Sustainable Development DVS1 Design DVS2 Landscaping DVS3 Amenity DVS4 Public Health and Safety DVS6 Flooding and Water Quality DVS7 Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems ENV7 Agricultural Land ENV8 Biodiversity ENV9 International Nature Conservation Sites ENV10 Sites of Special Scientific Interest. ENV11 Protected Species ENV13 Nationally Important Archaeological Remains ENV14 Locally Important Archaeological Sites ENV16 Development in Conservation Areas. ENV17 Listed Buildings. TRA1A Promoting Sustainable Transport Choices. TRA6 General Highway Considerations.


TRA7 Non Residential Parking TRA8 Residential Parking HSG2 Development Boundaries HSG5 Residential Density HSG6 Mixed Accommodation HSG7 Affordable Housing in Residential Schemes. ECN2 Safeguarding Employment Land. ECN15 Renewable Energy COM4 Community Facilities REC2 Sport and Recreation Facilities in Villages REC5 Public Open Space REC8 Public Art FRE2 Fremington Army Camp. This is an allocated site within the development boundary of Fremington where Policy FRE2 applies. The relevant extract is copied in full below:

Policy FRE2 Fremington Army Camp Development will be permitted on land at Fremington Army Camp for a range of uses comprising about 200 dwellings including at least 50 affordable homes, office and light industry (B1 uses), recreational open space and associated community facilities, as shown on inset Map 3, where:-

• Pedestrian and cycleway links are provided connecting to the Tarka Trail, Fremington Quay and the B3233;

• A bus waiting and turning area is provided;

• Environmental enhancement along the Fremington Pill frontage of the site;

• Access improvements from Church Hill;

• A development brief is prepared; and

• In addition to the above elements, contributions will be sought towards increasing the capacity of Fremington School or providing a new school at Instow or West Yelland.

The reasoned justification of Policy FRE2 requires a development brief. However, it was considered that the submission of a detailed planning application precludes the need to produce a development brief. CONSULTEE RESPONSES Fremington Parish Council – Resolved to refuse this application as this is a compromise that would impact on the safety of the general public.

Highways Authority – At its Development Management Committee Meeting on 15th July 2014, it was resolved the Local Planning Authority be informed that: (i) the County Council, as Local Highway Authority is of the view that there is no technical highway safety reason why planning permission should not be granted; and (ii) North Devon Council be advised of this decision.

A full copy of the officer report to that Development Management Committee is attached as Appendix I to this report.

Conservation Officer- Thank you for consulting me on this amendment application. As I see it, there is already a consent to build the access road very close to the churchyard wall. This we would have to treat as 'existing'. The proposal now is to move the access


road slightly to the west, further away from the wall. If implemented this would be an improvement on the existing situation, so I would not make any objections. There are mentions of underpinning the wall but as far as I am aware there are no definite plans for this. The wall will be curtilage listed, so if the underpinning, should it become necessary, is likely to affect the character of the listed building, then Listed Building Consent will be required.

English Heritage - The scheme as proposed in the documentation provided on the council’s website is for alterations to the main access road, Military Lane, to the development site at the Army Camp by narrowing the road, pulling it away from the curtilage grade II* listed retaining wall around the graveyard of the Church of St Peter’s. From the information provided, we do not consider that the revised scope of work presented within the application will cause any additional adverse impact to the historic environment. We would caveat this by saying that there may be wider planning issues that the local planning authority needs to consider and that this should be done under national and local policy. Recommendation We would urge you to address the above issues, and recommend that the application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance, and on the basis of your specialist conservation advice. It is not necessary for us to be consulted again. However, if you would like further advice, please contact us to explain your request.

REPRESENTATIONS At the time of preparing this report 14 letters of objection and 1 letter of comment has been received relating to the application. (Copies of all the letters have been made available prior to the Planning Committee meeting in accordance with agreed procedures). See attached list for representation names and addresses. They raise the following issues:

• The Transport Assessment fails to show how safe access to the site will be obtained contrary to the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF),

• Concerns that this proposal fails to meet the requirements of the guide entitled ‘Inclusive Mobility’,

• The proposals for the footway for the access road from its junction with Church Hill to the corner by High Lea do not comply with the recommendations of Inclusive Mobility and Manual for Streets,

• The cross sections plan does not include the width of the kerb on the non-footway side. The measurements should show the carriageway width and a further 100mm or so to include the kerb.

• Movement 2 in the Military road swept path analysis is incorrect in that it shows one entrance to the church car park, whereas the existing access to the car park is to be maintained along the whole of the frontage of the car park to Military Road. The difficulties caused by and to the users of the car park is not referred to in the Transport Assessment,

• The swept path analysis shows how little room there will be for a small refuse vehicle to pass a medium sized car. This will be exacerbated, given elements of single carriageway, outbound traffic queuing to exit Military road, inbound traffic giving way to the outbound traffic, traffic entering and leaving the church car park and the dentist


car park and the need to repair services in the road will lead to chronic traffic congestion and gridlock,

• The sight line shown on the Highways Layout plan is not drawn from the driver’s side and in any event, the sight line will be obscured by priority signs and lamp post within the build out,

• The Transport Assessment advises that if a vehicle breaks down at the build out, an emergency vehicle could pass via a 5 metre corridor – this is contested given the obstacles within the build out,

• Plans to relocate the existing gully has not been agreed with the Church,

• The scheme does not allow for the protection of ancient walls i.e. the churchyard wall and buttresses,

• The Church have not agreed to a no entry sign or traffic signals controlling the church access opposite Higher Road,

• Concern that the amendments still involve church land,

• Notice should have been served on the church,

• Concern that review of pedestrian safety set out in the Transport assessment is flawed,

• There does not appear to be a disability access audit in respect of the footway,

• The proposals are contrary to TRA6 in that provision cannot be made for safe access and egress from the highway for all forms of travel serving the site, the design and function of the proposed military road will harm the safety of highway users and the character and setting of the locality will be harmed by the highway works necessary to accommodate the level of traffic generated by the development,

• English Heritage should be consulted on this application given that the proposals will require the underpinning of a wall to St Peters Church churchyard.

• Any proposal to narrow this road is significant and we have practical knowledge of the difficulties faced by all drivers and pedestrians who use this narrow road.

• A signal controlled access to the Church carpark has not been agreed with the Church and as such, it is our view that the original scheme cannot be delivered.

• Concern that all previous objectors were not notified of this application.

• Case law confirms that when applying the Planning and Listed Buildings Act, the desirability of preserving the setting of listed buildings should not simply be given careful consideration by the decision maker but should be given considerable importance and weight. It is considered that the Inspector failed to uphold the guidance provided in the Act when making his judgement.

• A reduction in width of the Military Road by nearly one metre makes the revision untenable.

• The Heritage Impact Assessment submitted with this application is flawed.

• The submitted plans are inaccurate.

• Road not wide enough – A HGV cannot turn right into the road as it is.

• Conflict with use of the Church for funerals.

• Footpath not wide enough to accommodate push chairs.

• Two months of the year when passing the church entrance and the sun will preclude vision of the traffic lights.

• Traffic lights no place in a Conservation Area and not necessary.

• Site boundaries inaccurate – include footpath/stream/church car park etc.

• Work likely to lead to eventual collapse of the church walls. Should be 1 metre separation distance between the road and this wall.

• Pinch point of 3.7 metres and a short stretch where road will be one way only near a sharp bend with compromised visibility increasing the risk of collisions.


• The swept path analysis drawing should include two pantechnicans not one and a car and larger vehicles i.e. 26 tonne refuse vehicles.

• A Heritage Assessment has been provided, which considers that underpinning of the church wall is required, narrow road and signage within build out will mean real possibility of damage to the wall and graves behind.

• Amendment increases harm of development and begins to tip the balance versus the benefits of the proposals – further careful overall review of the proposal required.

PLANNING HISTORY

Reference Proposal Decision Date 53147 Residential development of 277 dwellings with

associated public space, affordable housing, recreational facilities, landscaping & access following the demolition of existing buildings, & the refurbishment of 2 former military buildings for community uses (amended plans & supporting documents) (further amended information relating to changes to key buildings, character area 2 & signalised junction (additional plans regarding amended access plans & road safety audit) Fremington Army Camp Fremington

Refused

Appeal Allowed

December 2012

July 2013

The remaining planning history relates to the former use of the site as an Army Camp. It has been previously agreed that this use has been abandoned and as such, this history is not considered of relevance to this application. SUMMARY OF ISSUES As mentioned previously, there have been no material changes to the national and local policies since the previous appeal decision and so this report concentrates on the considerations resulting from the proposed amendment. These are:-

• Impact of the amendment on highway safety

• Impact of the amendment on heritage assets

PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS Impact of the amendment on highway safety It has been confirmed, that this Section 73 application should only consider the implications of this amendment and not reconsider the original scheme as a whole. Many of the objections however refer to the scheme as a whole and these will not be considered further in this report (other than how they are affected by this proposed amendment), as the appointed Planning Inspector considered them when determining application number 53147 and found them to be acceptable. This proposal does however seek to amend the access arrangements into the site and the implications for this need to be carefully considered.


Following the Inspector’s decision, land that formed part of the application site was transferred to the Church. This land had originally formed part of the access along the Military Road. This is now shown as excluded from the access arrangements. The amendments relate to a stretch of highway measuring approximately 22 metres in length. The loss of land results in a reduced carriageway width up to the proposed build out, on either side. The carriageway width at the build out is however slightly greater than the approved width (rising from 3.62 metres to 3.7 metres at the pinch point) but the build out is reduced in width by 0.87 metres. The footpath as approved is not reduced in width, other than at the build out itself. There are to be two signs located within the build out and a street light. Objections received centre on the view that the above noted amendments tip the planning balance and that a further reduction in the width of the Military road should make this application untenable. They consider that a pinch point of 3.7 metres with a stretch of road for one-way traffic over a sharp bend with compromised visibility increases the risk of collisions. The appointed Inspector in determining the appeal against the refusal of the earlier application considered the highway implications of this development in some detail in his decision and the Decision Letter is attached as Appendix II to this report. When considering the original scheme, the Inspector concluded: ‘I have considered all the detailed highways evidence put forward by the appellant, the Council and ACSAG, and have noted the clear areas of disagreement between the various witnesses. However, my own review and assessment of the proposal, outlined above, leads me to conclude that, on balance, the proposed improvements to Military road would provide safe and suitable access arrangements for all users. In addition, the traffic signals proposed for the Military Road/Church Hill/Higher Road junction would provide safer crossing facilities of these roads for all users. In view of these points I find no conflict with Local Plan policies FRE2 and TRA6, nor with the guidance set out in the Framework on such matters.’ The report to Development Management Committee DCC as Local Highway Authority considered the impact that the amendments would have on these matters: 3.23 With respect to the current application, the proposed road width at the build-out with the alteration is increased from 3.62 metres to 3.7 metres which is regarded as a slightly better width for single file traffic passing the build-out in either direction. Road widths on the immediate approaches to the build-out are reduced to taper down to 3.7 metres. The tapering widths are sufficiently wide enough for single file traffic to negotiate past the build-out and no adverse safety implications are foreseen. 3.24 The footway width remains unaltered apart from a minor increase from 1.2 metres to 1.3 metres at the give way to the build-out, thus the safety benefits associated with the provision of the footway remain unchanged. 3.25 An anomaly noted by the Local Highway Authority is the identified carriageway width of 5.5 metres immediately to the front of the give-way markings at the build-out. This scales at 5.0 metres and it is understood the Local Planning Authority will be seeking an amended plan in this respect. 3.26 The build out width is reduced by 0.87 metres but is provided to a width of between approximately 2.0-2.4 metres. “Manual for Streets” and “Inclusive Mobility” indicates a width of 1.5 metres for a walker and wheelchair user to pass one another and a width of 2 metres for two wheelchairs to pass one another. The standards at the proposed build-out


are maintained and still provide a width wider than the proposed adjoining footway. The build-out can provide an informal uncontrolled pedestrian crossing/access into the church car park, if necessary, and forward visibility to and from remains acceptable. 3.27 The narrowed section of carriageway (below 5 metres) only extends for a distance of approximately 22 metres and this is proposed to control single file traffic by a combination of, the build-out and give way to traffic on the military road, to vehicles heading in the southerly direction towards the B3233. Forward visibility of 45 metres from the give way to approaching traffic is achieved (which is greater than the minimum requirement of 25 metres). 3.28 Therefore, the amended scheme maintains a similar level of safety provided to all road users with the original layout. 4. Recommendation 4.1 It is recommended North Devon Council be advised that Devon County Council, as Local Highway Authority, has no objection to the proposed development subject to the imposition of an appropriate planning condition as set out in Appendix IV to this Report. The Highways Authority has considered the implications of the amendment on highway safety and considers the amended scheme to be acceptable in highway terms. Objections have been raised with the completeness of the Highway Authority’s response, as an amended plan has been received rectifying the annotation referred to in paragraph 3.25 of the Highway Officer’s report. It does not change the content of the Plan but does seek to correct the anomaly. To address this, any condition would need to relate to this latest plan. The remaining plans submitted seek to provide information to support the amendment. The accuracy of the drawings have been contested; however, many of these were considered and accepted by the Inspector, when determining the original application and any condition attached to any new permission would require the development to be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. Concern has been raised with the provision of signage and a street light within the build out. The Highways Authority have not raised concerns with this and it is noted that whilst Inclusive Mobility states that 1.5 metres could be regarded as the minimum acceptable width for footways under most circumstances, it further states that the absolute minimum width, where this is an obstacle, should be 1.0m clear space, and that the maximum length of restricted width should be 6 metres. On this basis, there is sufficient space within the build out to accommodate this signage. The Church considers that the development still involves church land. Notice has been served on the Church (6th June 2014). If this is the case, then the permission of the church will be required to implement the development. In light of the Highways response and consideration of the amendment, the following points are noted:

• The pinch point at the carriageway id 0.08 metres wider than the width of the pinch point agreed by the Inspector at this site.

• The carriageway width is narrower beyond the pinch point over a length of approximately 22 metres. DCC as Local Highway Authority has advised that the tapering widths are sufficiently wide enough for single file traffic to negotiate past the build-out and no adverse safety implications are foreseen. They have also confirmed that adequate visibility is available over this section of road.


• The footway width itself is not narrower than that agreed by the Inspector. At the build out, the width is reduced by 0.87 metres but is provided to a width of between approximately 2.0-2.4 metres and this is considered an acceptable width to allow users to pass one another.

The impact of the highway amendments on highway safety are considered acceptable and comply with Policy TRA6 of the Local Plan and the requirements of the NPPF. Impact on Heritage Assets Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states that when considering whether to grant planning permission for development which 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. Section 72 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 states that local planning authorities have a duty in the exercise of planning functions to pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area. Objectors have also provided the local planning authority with case law, which reinforces these duties upon us. The Inspector applied these duties when determining the original application. On heritage matters he stated the following: ‘My overall conclusion on the heritage issue is therefore that although the proposal has had full regard to the statutory duties under Sections 66 and 72 of the PLBCA Act, there would still be a small adverse impact on the setting of the Church, the War Memorial and Nos 1-5 Church Hill, with the proposal just failing to preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area as a whole. This means, to use the appellant’s phraseology, that there would be a technical breach of Local Plan Policies ENV16 and ENV17. But as I have concluded earlier in this decision, these policies, if applied rigidly would not be consistent with the Framework. In situations like this Paragraph 134 of the Framework requires the harm to be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including securing the optimum viable use of the assets.’ Concern has been raised with regard the impact that this amendment would have on the curtilage listed church wall and the need to underpin it. If anything, the present proposal seeks to move the carriageway marginally away from this structure and not closer to it. It is for this reason that the Conservation Officer advises:

‘As I see it, there is already a consent to build the access road very close to the churchyard wall. This we would have to treat as 'existing'. The proposal now is to move the access road slightly to the west, further away from the wall. If implemented this would be an improvement on the existing situation, so I would not make any objections. There are mentions of underpinning the wall but as far as I am aware there are no definite plans for this. The wall will be curtilage listed, so if the underpinning, should it become


necessary, is likely to affect the character of the listed building, then Listed Building Consent will be required.’

This is reiterated by English Heritage who advise: ‘The scheme as proposed in the documentation provided on the council’s website is for alterations to the main access road, Military Lane, to the development site at the Army Camp by narrowing the road, pulling it away from the curtilage grade II* listed retaining wall around the graveyard of the Church of St Peter’s. From the information provided, we do not consider that the revised scope of work presented within the application will cause any additional adverse impact to the historic environment...’ The amendments, which seek to move the proposal marginally away from the Church wall are not considered to have any additional, adverse impact on the listed buildings or their setting. Furthermore, the amendments are not considered to have an additional impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The necessity for signage existed on the original scheme considered by the Inspector, in the same way that it does now. The overall scheme will still have an impact on the historic environment in the same way as described by the Inspector above. This amendment is not considered to impact upon his findings. The harm that has been found has to be weighed against the public benefits of the proposal. CONCLUSION When considering the appeal proposal, the Inspector concluded the following: ‘In light of all the matters set out above, it is my assessment that the public benefits of the proposed development would clearly outweigh the small amount of harm which would arise to heritage assets, and that the proposal as a whole would accord with the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development. There are no adverse impacts of sufficient weight as to significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the proposal, nor are there any specific policies in the Framework which indicate that development should be restricted. The planning balance is therefore in favour of granting planning permission.’ It is your officer’s view that the amendments proposed do not affect this assessment. The amendments to the highway are still considered to provide safe and suitable access arrangements for all users, and accordingly would comply with the relevant requirements of Local Plan policies FRE2 and TRA6, and with the relevant aspects of the Framework. There is not considered to be an additional affect on heritage assets to that found by the Inspector. As such, the planning balance remains unaffected by this proposal and the recommendation to members on this application is one of Approval. HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998 The provisions of the Human Rights Act and principles contained in the Convention on Human Rights have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report. The articles/protocols identified below were considered of particular relevance:



• THE FIRST PROTOCOL – Article 1: Protection of Property DETAILS OF RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL subject to a deed of variation to the original Section 106 Agreement to ensure it can also relate to this application number and appropriate conditions. The conditions as set out by the Inspector for application 53147 are to be transferred in their entirety, subject to the amendment of condition 2, which shall ensure that the following plans are properly superseded/replaced: Approved Drawings affected by S73 Application as set out in Appeal Decision dated 2 July 2013, ref. APP/X1118/A/12/2188898 as appendix to condition 2

Drawings/documents submitted with S73 application: Replacement Drawings/Documents (R) Supplementary Drawings/Documents (S) Addendum (A) New (N)

31419-ATR-01 H Military Road Swept Path 31419-ATR-01 J Military Road Swept Path (R) received 21st May 2014

31419-PHL-10 H Military Road Prelim Highways Layout

31419-PHL-10 k Military Road Prelim Highways Layout (R) received 21st June 2014

Highway Plans pursuant to S38 Revised (NB. Individual drawings not listed in appendix)

Revised Highways Plans pursuant to S38 as follows: 31570-CTR-102-B (R) received 21st May 2014 31570-DR-104-B (R) received 21st May 2014 31570-GA-106-B (R) received 21st May 2014 31570-GA-107-B (R) received 21st May 2014 31570-KD-103-B (R) received 21st May 2014 31570-PD-103-B (R) received 21st May 2014 31570-RC-103-B (R) received 21st May 2014 31570-RP-102-B (R) received 21st May 2014 31570-S38-102-B (R) received 21st May 2014 31570-TS-103-B (R) received 21st May 2014 31570-UD-103-B (R) received 21st May 2014 31570-SC-103-B (R) received 19th June 2014 31570-SD-201-G (R) received 19th June


2014 31570-SD-101-F (S) received 21st June 2014 SB/FREM/CAMP/113A received 21st June 2014

Heritage Assessment Nov 2011 Fremington Camp Heritage Impact Addendum 02 (A) received 21st May 2014

Transport Assessment Volumes 1 and 2 Fremington TA May 2014 Volumes 1 and 2 (R) received 21st May 2014

Overlay drawing (N) (NDC001) received 21st June 2014

Location Plan 500_103 Location Plan received 21st May 2014

INSERT(S) TO FOLLOW OVERLEAF 1. OS Location Plan 2. List of Representations 3. Officer report to Development Management Committee 4. Inspectors Appeal decision for 53147


5

App. No.: 57606 Reg. : 09/06/2014 Applicant: MRS J B CHESTERS & MRS R KENKINS L. Bldg. : Expired: 04/08/2014 Agent : WOODWARD SMITH CHARTERED ARCHITECTS - MRS L ROWE Parish : ASHFORD Case Officer : Mr. M. Brown Proposal: HYBRID APPLICATION: FULL APPLICATION FOR DEMOLITION OF TWO EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS & ERECTION OF ONE NEW RESIDENTIAL DWELLING; OUTLINE APPLICATION FOR ERECTION OF ONE RESIDENTIAL DWELLING (AMENDED PLANS) Location: ASHFORD INN FRUIT FARM BRAUNTON ROAD BARNSTAPLE EX31 4AU

PROPOSAL Hybrid application. Full application for demolition of two existing residential dwellings & erection of one new residential dwelling; outline application for erection of one residential dwelling. The two new dwellings are proposed to be located in an adjacent paddock. RECOMMENDATION APPROVE subject to planning conditions. SITE AND SURROUNDINGS Ashford Inn Fruit Farm & Nursery is located on the east bound side of dual carriageway section of the A361between Barnstaple and Braunton. The village of Ashford is visible to the north and accessible by a public footpath to the east of the site. The SWW waste water works are to the south of the site. There is a residential dwelling to the east and the Midland Caravan Park to the west. The site is screened from views from the west. It is visible from the A361 directly to the south and from the east to a limited extent. Due to topology there are views of the site from the elevated position of Ashford above. The areas either side of the site retain hedgerow/banks abutting the road, unlike the application site. The Farm complex itself consists of two residential units fronting the A361, behind which is the farm shop. Further north again are existing polytunnels in a north south orientation and then as the ground rises further in a northerly direction there are poly tunnels running east west and then open fields. REASON FOR REPORT TO MEMBERS One of the applicants is a District Councillor.


POLICY CONTEXT Development Plan North Devon Local Plan 2006 DVS1A Sustainable Development DVS1 Design DVS2 Landscaping DVS3 Amenity DVS6 Flooding and Water Quality ENV1 Development in the Countryside ENV7 Agricultural Land ENV8 Biodiversity ENV11 Protected Species TRA6 General Highway Considerations TRA8 Residential Parking HSG2 Development Boundaries CONSULTEE RESPONSES Parish Council – Ashford Parish Council wish to recommend approval.

South West Water – No objection

Environment Agency – Increased finished floor level required to overcome flood risk.

Further consultation response awaited following receipt of amended plans.

Environmental Health – No objection.

Devon County Council Highways – No objections.

Landscape and Countryside Officer - The application has the potential to provide net gains in respect of landscape and biodiversity. Unfortunately however the applicant has not provided us with a detailed landscape proposal to demonstrate this.

At this stage I would suggest that we seek more detailed proposals in respect of the landscaping and I would suggest that the applicants should consider using a Devon bank and native mixed species hedgerow along the A361 site frontage and site boundaries of the proposed plots. Some native species standard tree planting could also be incorporated in to the new hedges (20.06.2014).

Further consultation response awaited following receipt of amended plans. REPRESENTATIONS At the time of preparing this report no letters of representation had been received.


PLANNING HISTORY

Reference No. Details Decision Date

NI 19300 Proposed alterations to agricultural access Granted 14.03.74 84/518/2/3 Proposed extension to dwelling to form

annexe for dependent relatives, alteration to access and closure of central reservation crossover

Granted 28.09.84

42452 Erection of 1 agricultural workers dwelling together with improvements to access

Refused 28.09.06

42638 Agricultural building works prior notification for erection of 1 polytunnel

Agricultural Prior

Approval Not

Required

23.05.12

42684 Erection of 1 polytunnel Withdrawn 30.07.12 56099 Application for a Certificate of Lawfulness of

existing use of a building as a single dwelling house

Granted 04.11.13

SUMMARY OF ISSUES

• Development in the open countryside

• Design

• Landscaping/Biodiversity

• Flooding

• Amenity

• Highways PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS Development in the open countryside The site is located in the open countryside for the purposes of the adopted development plan. As such the countryside should be safeguarded for its own sake. There are two residential units on the site that are not tied to the holding. If this proposal were granted planning permission and the existing properties demolished, this demolition could be controlled by way of a planning condition, there would not be a material change in sustainable impacts resulting from the proposal. Subject to the demolition of the existing dwellings being secured and undertaken there would not be an unacceptable policy conflict. Design The dwelling that is proposed as part of the detailed application is proposed to be a bungalow finished in smooth render with timber boarding applied in areas to break up the frontage of the dwelling. A slate roof with upvc fenestration is also proposed.


The proposed layout for the first dwelling has been designed with a wheelchair user in mind. Corridors are generous, the kitchen and living areas are open plan and an en-suite wet room has been shown to the main bedroom, to assist with care provision. The applicant has stated that it is envisaged that the second dwelling will reflect the design of the first. The dwellings that are proposed to be demolished have a ridge height of 14.69m, whilst the proposed bungalows will have a ridge height of approximately 13.9m. This is because of the need to increase the finished floor level to overcome potential flood risk. This height is considered to be acceptable subject to landscaping to the south being provided. This design approach is considered to accord with Policy DVS1 of the adopted North Devon Local Plan with no impacts on the amenity of any neighbours with regard to Policy DVS3. The design of the outline element would be considered at the reserved matters stage if planning permission is granted. Landscaping/Biodiversity The application has the potential to provide net gains in respect of landscape and biodiversity. The initial submission did not provided the Local Planning Authority with a detailed landscape proposal to demonstrate this.

The applicant has subsequently provided further details in terms of landscaping. The details now include a Devon bank and native mixed species hedgerow along the A361 site frontage.

The incorporation of these elements result in a net benefit in terms of biodiversity. This also improves the landscaping of the site as a whole and can be secured by way of planning conditions.

Amenity The existing properties are adjacent to the highway and therefore any occupants are aware of the proximity of the traffic and the amenity impacts this brings. The proposed dwellings are that much further away from the A361 with landscaping between. This is considered to be acceptable having regard to Policy DVS3 of the adopted North Devon Local Plan. Flooding The existing units of residential accommodation sit within flood zone 2-3 and are therefore at risk of flooding. The National Planning Policy Framework and its associated technical guidance advises that sequentially all new residential development should be located outside of floodrisk areas. Following detailed discussions with the Environment Agency the finished floor levels of the proposed bungalows have been increased and a means of escape shown on the proposed plans, taking in to account climate change. This has been shown on amended plans. This should overcome any concerns of the Environment Agency, their final comment will be reported to members at their meeting.


Removing the dwellings from a flood risk area is a positive. Highways Policies TRA6 and TRA8 of the adopted North Devon Local Plan are relevant in this regard. The proposal will not result in a significant alteration in traffic flows The Highway Authority have concluded that they have no objection to the proposal and not recommend any planning conditions. CONCLUSION The existing two untied properties on the site are noted and are material in the consideration of this proposal. There are a number of benefits that can be derived from the scheme:

• Reduced flood risk.

• Reduced Landscape impact.

• Biodiversity enhancement.

• Improved amenity impacts for dwelling occupiers. Having regard to these matters and the benefits that would result approval of the application is recommended subject to the imposition of planning conditions. HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998 The provisions of the Human Rights Act and principles contained in the Convention on Human Rights have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report. The articles/protocols identified below were considered of particular relevance:


• THE FIRST PROTOCOL – Article 1: Protection of Property DETAILS OF RECOMMENDATION Replacement Dwelling 1 (Full Application) 1) The development to which this permission relates in detailed for Dwelling 1 must be

begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted.



submitted as part of the application, numbers: A121 13 01 and received on 9 June 2014,


A121 13 02 and received on 9 June 2014, A121 13 30 C and received on 9 June 2014, A121 13 31 D and received on 9 June 2014, A121 13 20 I and received on 29 July 2014, A121 13 21 E and received on 29 July 2014, ('the approved plans'). Reason: To confirm the drawings to which the permission relates and to ensure the development accords with the approved plans and to minimise flood risk.

3) The replacement dwelling hereby approved shall be finished in the following

materials, gray slate roof with rendered and timber boarded walls.

Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the development.

4) Implementation and maintenance of approved landscape proposals

All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation or the substantial completion of any dwelling, whichever is the sooner; and any trees or plants which within a period of 5 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 unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variations. Reason: To assimilate the development into the landscape and to safeguard the appearance and character of the area and in the interests of biodiversity.

5) The means of enclosure shown on the approved plans abutting the A361 shall be

provided prior to the first occupation of any dwelling and retained thereafter.

Reason: In the interests of residential amenity and to assimilate the development in to the locality and in the interests of biodiversity.

6) The existing dwellings within the application site shall be completely demolished not

later than 3 months from the date of the first occupation of any dwelling hereby permitted and all materials resulting from the demolition shall be removed from the site within that time period unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: The dwellings hereby allowed are granted as an alternative to the existing dwellings on the site. Additional open market dwellings in the open countryside would be contrary to planning policy.


Replacement Dwelling 2 (Outline Application) 7) a) In the case of any reserved matter application for approval must be made not later

than the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which this permission is granted ; and

b) The development to which the permission relates must be begun not later than whichever is the later of the following dates:

i. the expiration of three years from the date on which this permission is granted;

or ii. the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or, in

the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.

8) Approval of the details of the appearance and scale of the site (hereinafter called the

‘reserved matters’) shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced.

Reason: To ensure adequate information is available for the proper consideration of the detailed proposals.

9) The Ground Floor finished floor level for dwelling 2 shall be 8.75 AOD and the overall

external height shall not exceed 5.2 metres above ground level. Reason: To minimise flood risk and in the interests of the character and appearance of the locality.

10) The reserved matters submission shall follow the design principles set out in the

Design and Access Statement.

Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the development.

INFORMATIVE A. The responsibility is with the applicant to ensure that the existing septic tank is

adequate to accommodate the additional living accommodation. The applicant may be required to submit additional information to Building Control in order to satisfy building regulations.

B. The applicant is reminded of the provisions of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981

and the E.C. Conservation [Natural Habitats] Regulations 1994. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework the Council has worked in a positive and pro-active way with the Applicant and has negotiated amendments to the application to enable the grant of planning permission. INSERT(S) TO FOLLOW OVERLEAF 1. OS Location Plan


6

App. No.: 57762 Reg. : 02/07/2014 Applicant: MRS LORNA JONES L. Bldg. : Expired: 27/08/2014 Agent : Parish : MARWOOD Case Officer : Mr. A. Devereaux Proposal: ERECTION OF DECKING Location: WHITEFIELD VILLAS MUDDIFORD BARNSTAPLE EX31 4HA

PROPOSAL This application seeks planning permission for the erection of decking to the front of no.2 2 Whitefield Villas, Muddiford. The decking would be almost the width of the existing property before wrapping around the side of the property. The decking would project 4.7m from the front of the property. The area of decking would be enclosed by balustrading in the form of wooden handrail with glass panels. The existing hedge along the boundary would be retained with trellis fencing to a height of 1.8m installed along the side of the decking area. RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL SITE AND SURROUNDINGS The property is a two storey semi detached dwelling, located within a primarily residential area which is within an Area of Great Landscape Value. The property is on the side of a hill, sited in the top corner of the plot having no rear garden. Therefore the decking would be raised, being approximately 2m above ground level at its furthest point away from the dwelling. REASON FOR REPORT TO MEMBERS The planning application has been submitted by an employee of North Devon Council. POLICY CONTEXT Development Plan North Devon Local Plan 2006 DVS1: Design DVS3: Amenity Considerations ENV6: Areas of Great Landscape Value CONSULTEE RESPONSES Marwood Parish Council: Approval


REPRESENTATIONS At the time of preparing this report no letters of objection and no letters of support have been received relating to the application. (Copies of all the letters have been made available prior to the Planning Committee meeting in accordance with agreed procedures). PLANNING HISTORY There are no recent relevant planning permissions on this site. SUMMARY OF ISSUES The main issues with this planning application relate to the need of the development, the design and appearance of the proposal, and the potential impact on the amenity of any neighbouring property and the Area of Great Landscape Value. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS The main issues in relation to this proposal are design and amenity, both in terms of impact on amenity on neighbouring properties and that of the landscape. The applicant has stated that the area of decking is required as there is no rear garden, with the existing property built on a hillside with the land falling from north to south so that the parking area to the south is located at a lower level. Design The property is located in a spacious plot in an area with a mix of house styles and it is considered that the addition of an area of decking in the position shown on the submitted plans would not be out of keeping with the scale and form of the existing property or have a significant detrimental impact on the character of the surrounding area. The design of the proposed development and the materials chosen are considered acceptable for this location and in accordance with Policy DVS1 of the North Devon Local Plan 2006. Amenity In terms of the impact on amenity received by neighbouring residential properties, the nearest neighbouring property is that of the adjoining semi detached property. There is currently an area of level ground in front of the two properties which is approximately 0.8m in length. The decking would effectively increase this flat ground level by an additional 3.9m. Whilst the neighbouring front garden would be at a lower level, the existing hedge along the boundary is to retained with trellis fencing erected along the length of the decking to help protect privacy. The proposal is therefore considered acceptable when assessed against Policy DVS3 of the North Devon Local Plan 2006. Whilst the site is located within the Area of Great Landscape Value, this area is primarily residential, with existing vegetation helping to partially screen the site from public vantage points further away. Therefore it is considered that the decking with steps would not have a significantly detrimental impact on the landscape. Therefore the development would be in accordance with Local Plan Policy ENV6. CONCLUSION Overall the scheme is considered to be an acceptable proposal to an existing dwelling that accords with current planning policy subject to the conditions as set out below.


HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998 The provisions of the Human Rights Act and principles contained in the Convention on Human Rights have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report. The articles/protocols identified below were considered of particular relevance:


• THE FIRST PROTOCOL – Article 1: Protection of Property DETAILS OF RECOMMENDATION APPROVE subject to the following conditions: 1) The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the




submitted as part of the application, numbers NDC001, NDC002, NDC003, NDC004, NDC005, NDC006, NDC007, NDC008, NDC009 and received on 2nd July 2014, ('the approved plans').

Reason: To confirm the drawing to which the consent relates and to ensure the development accords with the approved plans.

INSERT(S) TO FOLLOW OVERLEAF 1. OS Location Plan


7

App. No.: 57767 Reg. : 03/07/2014 Applicant: MRS DIANA HILL L. Bldg. : Expired: 28/08/2014 Agent : MR ROB JENKINS Parish : FREMINGTON Case Officer : Ms. J. Watkins Proposal: ERECTION OF A MODULAR BUILDING FOR ADDITIONAL OFFICE SPACE Location: BRYNSWORTHY ENVIRONMENT CENTRE ROUNDSWELL BARNSTAPLE EX31 3NP

PROPOSAL This application seeks planning permission for the provision of additional office accommodation with a footprint of 12.483m x 9.0848m. This would take the form of a flat roofed single storey modular building sited next to the covered way at the front of the BEC. RECOMMENDATION APPROVAL SITE AND SURROUNDINGS The site is located within the open countryside to the south of Roundswell and is accessed by a road which connects with the B3232 Torrington Road. The overall site is a substantial use comprising offices and depot used by the District Council. To the north-east of the site are a number of employment uses which are accessed though the Council site, and to the south-east are four residential properties. REASON FOR REPORT TO MEMBERS The application has been submitted by the District Council. POLICY CONTEXT Development Plan North Devon Local Plan 2006 DVS1 Design DVS2 Landscaping DVS3 Amenity considerations DVS6 Flooding and Water Quality ENV1 Development in the countryside TRA6 General Highway considerations TRA7 Non Residential Parking CONSULTEE RESPONSES At the time of preparing this report no consultation responses had been received.

The Parish Council will meet on the 11th August and will provide their views in time for the Committee meeting


REPRESENTATIONS At the time of preparing this report no letters of representation had been received in connection with this application. The public advertisement period expires on the 6th August and hence any comments will be reported to the meeting. PLANNING HISTORY

Reference Proposal Decision Date 45830 Change of use of meat processing factory to

provide depot for council vehicles with vehicle maintenance workshops, residual green waste store, overnight vehicle parking, recycling plant & offices

Approved 21.05.2009

53091 Removal of conditions 2 (skin processing) & 4 (trading company name) attached to planning permission 10378; together with change of use of bay 2 to use class B8 (storage)

Approved 14.02.2002

54643 Change of use of unit to public service vehicle operating depot, together with siting a portacabin to provide office accommodation

Approved 19.12.2012

56301 Application under regulation 3 of the T & CP General Regulations 1992 notification by North Devon Council for provision of additional office accommodation by replacing existing single storey modular building with 12m x 9.8m single storey modular building

Approved 15.10.13

SUMMARY OF ISSUES

• Principle of Development

• Design/Landscaping

• Amenity

• Flood Risk

• Highway PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS Principle of Development

The site whilst located in the open countryside is an established employment use, and the proposal is to provide additional floorspace to support that use within the established planning unit. It is therefore considered that there is no ‘in principle’ objection to the development proposal. The Proposal is therefore considered to comply with Policy ENV1 and NPPF core principal 3 supporting economic development and 8 making effective use of a brownfield site. Design/Landscaping The proposal is to site and use a modular building, which has no intrinsic design quality. The building would be located to the front of the site and would be subservient in scale to the main building and is not considered to be particularly prominent. Given the extremely limited opportunities for any person to view this building the design is considered


acceptable, and no further landscaping of the site would be required. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with Policies DVS1 and DVS2 and is not considered to conflict with NPPF and Core principal 4 securing high quality design. Amenity The use of itself will not introduce any impacts either direct or indirect on the amenities of the residential properties neighbouring the site. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with Policy DVS3. Flood Risk There would be a limited additional amount of surface water run off as a consequence of the development which can be directed to sustainable drainage systems within the site and as such there would be and no increased risk to third parties as a consequence of the development and no impact on the CDA. The building itself would not be at risk of flooding either now or over its lifetime. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with Policy DVS6 and DVS7. Highways The additional floor space of 114m2 could accommodate 12 staff. Other office space is shown notionally for the Leader with a ‘Members Meet and Greet Area’. It is considered that there would be no significant impact on the highway network so as to warrant refusal of the application in line with NDLP policy TRA6. The site operates within a Green Travel Plan and has a parking allocation strategy. An office space of this size would require 4 additional car parking spaces to comply with Policy TRA7. It is understood that additional car parking is being provided within the site. The office accommodation should not be occupied until this has been provided and the Green Travel Plan refreshed. CONCLUSION The proposal is considered acceptable on its merits subject to conditions. HUMAN RIGHTS ACT 1998 The provisions of the Human Rights Act and principles contained in the Convention on Human Rights have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report. The articles/protocols identified below were considered of particular relevance:


• THE FIRST PROTOCOL – Article 1: Protection of Property DETAILS OF RECOMMENDATION 1) The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the




submitted as part of the application, numbers A8665/MB2/W1 received on 3 July 2014 ('the approved plans').


Reason: To confirm the drawings to which the consent relates and to ensure the development accords with the approved plans.

3) Before the building is occupied and additional four car parking spaces shall be

provided within the limits of the site, the details of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that there is adequate car parking available to serve the development clear of the public highway.

4) Before the building is occupied the Green Travel Plan approved under Condition 11

attached to planning permission 45830 shall be refreshed to reflect the current usage of the BEC and the agreed provisions for access to car parking and access to communal transport. A copy of the Green Travel Plan shall thereafter be agreed in writing by the Planning Authority. The occupiers of this building shall thereafter comply with the provisions of the Green Travel Plan.

Reason: The environmental and traffic movements associated with the approved uses require detailed management and other controls in order to limit traffic attracted to the site and to minimise the impact on adjoining properties. Alternative uses would need to be considered in light of the resulting traffic and amenity impacts and may require other or alternative means of on and off site mitigation and amelioration.

In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework the Council has worked in a positive and pro-active way and has imposed planning conditions to enable the grant of planning permission. INSERT(S) TO FOLLOW OVERLEAF 1. OS Location Plan