Planning and Sustainability Statement - East … Application...Planning and Sustainability Statement...

Barton Consortium Ltd and Bellway Homes Ltd

Phase 2, Land East of Efflinch Lane, Barton under Needwood

Planning and Sustainability Statement

(including Draft Heads of Terms for the Planning Obligation)

November 2014

Prepared by

Howard Sharp & Partners LLP

79 Great Peter Street Westminster

London SW1P 2EZ

P/2014/01490Received 14/11/2014

HOWARD SHARP & PARTNERS LLP

PHASE 2, LAND EAST OF EFFLINCH LANE, BARTON / PLANNING AND SUSTAINABILITY STATEMENT

CONTENTS

1 Introduction P3

2 Site Analysis P6

3 National Planning Policy and Practice Guidance P12

4 Housing Land Supply P15

5 Adopted Local Plan P19

6 Emerging Local Plan P22

7 Sustainability Appraisal P27

8 Section 106 Obligation P32

9 Conclusions P34



1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 This joint application by Barton Consortium Ltd and Bellway Homes Ltd seeks outline planning permission at land east of Efflinch Lane and north of Mill Crescent, Barton under Needwood. The proposal is to develop 1.4ha of agricultural land for up to 25 dwellings. The application site (‘The Site’) encompasses the access road from the adopted highway of Efflinch Lane through an existing Bellway Homes development site, amounting to a total planning application Site area of 1.8ha.

1.2 All matters other than access are reserved for future consideration.

FIGURE 1: ILLUSTRATIVE SITE LAYOUT



1.3 The Site is located directly to the south and west of a scheme for 130 houses on 13.1ha of land to the east of Efflinch Lane and north of Mill Lane, approved under Reserved Matters Ref: P/2014/00200 and now under construction. This Phase 1 Scheme is known as ‘Barton Manor’.

1.4 The development the subject of this application will be accessed through this Phase 1 Scheme as a second phase of development, utilising the same access and spine road. The strategic open space for the Phase 1 Scheme will enclose and screen the Site from the east and address flood risk of both phases through the approved landscaping scheme.

1.5 The main drawings are as follows:

Table 1. List of main submitted drawings

NAME REFERENCE SCALE NOTES

LOCATION PLAN 0128 P2 02 Rev A 1:2500 @A3 Shows the Site in its surrounding context. Prepared by Niche Architects.

SITE PLAN (PROPOSED ACCESS)

MID3810-002 1:500 @A3 Shows the proposed main access with visibility splays on the Topographical Survey base. Prepared by JMP Consultants.

TOOGRAPHICAL SURVEY

15014OGL Rev 1 1:500 @A0 Prepared by the Greenhatch Group.

TREE CONSTRAINTS PLAN

1477-14-01 Rev A 1:500 @A1 Prepared by Barry Chinn Associates.

INDICATIVE SITE LAYOUT

0128 P2 01 Rev A 1:1000 @A3 Prepared by Niche Architects.



1.6 The reports accompanying the planning application are as follows: Table 2. List of submitted reports

DOCUMENT CONSULTANT NOTES

Planning and Sustainability Statement (with Draft Heads of Terms for Planning Obligation)

Howard Sharp & Partners Required by Local List.

Affordable Housing Statement

Howard Sharp & Partners Required by Local List.

Open Space Assessment Howard Sharp & Partners Required by Local List.

Design and Access Statement

Howard Sharp & Partners and Niche Architects

National requirement.

Transport Assessment JMP Consultants Required by Local List.

Aboricultural Report Midland Tree Surgeons Required by Local List.

Ecological Appraisal FPCR Environment and Design

Required by Local List. Incorporates enhanced Phase 1 Habitat Survey and protected species surveys.

Flood Risk Assessment JBA Consulting National requirement. Contains Drainage Strategy for surface and foul.

Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

Ashmead Price Addresses para. 17 of the NPPF.



2. SITE ANALYSIS

Ordnance Survey (c) Crown Copyright 2013. All rights reserved. Licence Number 100022432

FIGURE 2: APPLICATION SITE

2.1 The field to be developed is 1.4 hectares in area and irregular in shape. There are hedgerows on three sides, containing a few scattered trees. It has previously been in arable use but is currently fallow, with longer grasses in the field margins. A wet ditch runs along the southern boundary and a small, occasionally wet pond abuts the north east corner. Overhead power lines mounted on timber poles cross the Site from east to west.

2.2 The Site is located to the south east of the village of Barton under Needwood. It lies immediately to the south of the developable area of the 130 houses under construction at Barton Manor (“the Phase 1 Scheme”) and immediately to the west of fields which will form part of more than 8 hectares of landscaped strategic green infrastructure for the Phase 1 Scheme.



2.3 To the south is the Mill Lane housing estate built in the early post-war period. To the west is a grass field adjoining Efflinch Lane.

2.4 Further east lie the Trent and Mersey Canal and the A38. To the north east

is the Barton Marina, with various leisure and commercial activities on offer.

FIGURE 3: APPLICATION SITE IN VILLAGE CONTEXT (N.T.S.)

Planning history

2.5 There are no previous planning applications recorded for the Site. Public Rights of Way

2.6 There are no Public Rights of Way in or around the Site.



Accessibility

2.7 The location of the proposed development means the Site benefits from good sustainable travel links. A variety of sustainable travel options are available for residents and visitors to the development.

2.8 Barton under Needwood contains a range of facilities and services, all within 15 minutes walking distance. Shops (including a Co-op food store), library, post office, pharmacy, doctors surgery and dentist are in and around the centre. The John Taylor High School and Thomas Russell Infant School are nearby. The Thomas Russell Junior School is very close to the Site and there is also a local parade of local services (including a late-opening Londis) at Oak Road. The marina provides further facilities including restaurants, public house, cafes, shops (including delicatessen), cinema and outdoor leisure.

2.9 There is a bus stop located directly outside the proposed access point, with

services into Burton upon Trent and Lichfield (No. 7, 7A and 7E). 2.10 The Transport Assessment provides further details.

Topography

2.11 A topographic survey (to Ordnance Survey GPS datum) has been undertaken

by the Greenhatch Group. The land is fairly level and slopes gently to the north east, at around 50.5m AOD. Trees

2.12 The trees and hedgerows in and around the Site are detailed in the Arboricultural Report prepared by Midland Tree Surgeons and the accompanying Tree Constraints Plan by Barry Chinn Associates. There are hedgerows along some boundaries containing scattered trees. The report sets out how to protect and buffer these during the development of the Site.



Ecology

2.13 The submitted Ecological Appraisal by FPCR Environment and Design provides details of an extended Phase 1 Habitat survey. The baseline ecology of the Site and its surrounds has been reviewed and the value of habitats and species assessed in order to inform the development process.

2.14 The Site is within 3km of the River Mease but does not fall within its

catchment so will not have any impact. There are two non-statutory sites of Local importance approximately 800m away which is considered sufficient difference to ensure the impact will be negligible.

2.15 The majority of the habitat within the Site contains only common,

widespread species and as such is considered to be of low nature conservation value. The ecological interest lies primarily in the features to be retained in the layout: the wet ditch, ephemeral pond and hedgerows along some field boundaries containing broad-leaved trees.

2.16 The Ecological Appraisal provides advice about how to manage and

mitigate any impacts upon the features of ecological importance in and around the Site, and to enhance the biodiversity of the Site. Agricultural land quality

2.17 According to the Provisional Agricultural Land Classification (Digitised on DEFRA’s Magic Map from the Digitised from the published 1:250,000 map which was in turn compiled from the 1 inch to the mile maps) all the agricultural land in this area is likely to be Grade 3. Landscape

2.18 The Site does not fall within any protective landscape designations. In terms of assessing the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside (para. 17 of the NPPF), the most broadly defined landscape character area is Mease/Sence Lowlands. This is characterised by a gently rolling open agricultural landscape with very few semi-natural habitats. The landscape



type is Village Estate Farmlands which is a landscape shaped by mixed farming, with moderately good crops only achievable with appropriate management and drainage.

2.19 Within the regional context the Site falls within the Trent Valley Washlands (Joint Character Area 69). The Trent Valley landscape is characterised by large, flat, open fields, operational and restored gravel workings, distribution and industrial development which overall gives a fragmented appearance. The presence of transport corridors including railways, canal and the A38T are typical of this landscape. Large nucleated villages typical of the river valley such as Barton under Needwood have expanded in the post war period up to the present day.

2.20 As with the Phase 1 development, the developable area will not encroach

beyond the broad development limits to the village set by the Mill Lane development to the south.

2.21 The submitted Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment provides further

details. Heritage

2.22 The development would be visible from the Trent and Mersey Canal Conservation Area and be seen in relation to the (Grade II listed) Mill Lane bridge over the canal. However, as the Site merely infills between two existing housing areas it will not result in any adverse impacts to the settings of these heritage assets. They are separated from the development by the swathe of green infrastructure approved as part of the Phase 1 development, which will screen and soften views. The only other listed building in the wider area is the Fullbrook Grade II Listed houses on Captain’s Lane, set in its own landscaped grounds and with no visual connection to the Site. There are no other known heritage assets near the Site.



Flood risk and surface water drainage

2.23 The submitted Flood Risk Assessment by JBA Consulting demonstrates that the development will be safe and will not increase flood risk upstream or downstream as a result of the development.

2.24 Developing the Site will meet the National Planning Policy Framework requirement of directing development away from areas at highest probability of flooding. Paragraph 101 of the National Planning Policy Framework states:

“The aim of the Sequential Test is to steer new development to areas with the lowest probability of flooding. Development should not be allocated or permitted if there are reasonably available sites appropriate for the proposed development in areas with a lower probability of flooding.”

2.25 The Environment Agency (‘EA’) flood map show that the majority of the Site

is in Flood Zone 1 (low probability). The information on the EA flood map has been superseded by the implementation of the Phase 1 landscaping works, which will ensure that all of the Site falls within Flood Zone 1. It is the subject of a Flood Map Challenge, with the expectation that this will be reflected in the next update of the EA flood map.

2.26 The submitted Flood Risk Assessment sets out how appropriate management of surface water will ensure that there is no increase in surface water runoff from the Site. The proposed Sustainable Drainage System (SuDS) measures include attenuation in the public open space supplemented by detailed measures.



3. NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY AND GUIDANCE

3.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) issued on 27 March 2012 sets out the Government’s planning policies and its aims to secure sustainable development.

3.2 On 6 March 2014 the Government launched its national planning practice guidance (NPPG), following an external review of the previous guidance. The new guidance is closely linked to the NPPF and compared with the previous practice guidance is intended to be shorter, more accessible and more useful to everyone using the planning system. The presumption in favour of sustainable development

3.3 Paragraph 7 of the NPPF gives the three dimensions to sustainable development: economic, social and environmental and paragraph 8 states that these roles should not be taken in isolation because they are mutually dependent.

3.4 At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development for both plan-making and decision-taking (paragraph 14). Where the Local Plan is out of date, any adverse impact of proposed development needs to be weighed against the benefits.

3.5 Local planning authorities are expected to work proactively with applicants to secure developments that improve the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. Local planning authorities should now approach decision-taking in a positive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development (paragraph 186) with decision-takers at every level seeking to approve applications for sustainable development where possible (paragraph 187).

3.6 Having regard to paragraph 14 of the NPPF and footnote 9, there are no specific policies in the NPPF that indicate development should be restricted on the Site. For example, the Site is not protected under the Birds and Habitats Directives and/or designated as Sites of Special Scientific Interest;



it is not land designated as Green Belt, Local Green Space, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, or within a National Park. Nor does it directly affect a designated heritage asset or fall within a location at risk of flooding.

Housing delivery

3.7 In relation to housing development, the following policies are of particular

relevance to the proposal:

! Every effort should be made objectively to identify and then meet the housing needs of an area (paragraph 17);

! Local planning authorities should boost significantly the supply of

housing (paragraph 47); ! Housing applications should be considered in the context of the

presumption in favour of sustainable development (paragraph 49); and

! Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be

considered up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites (paragraph 49).

Creating sustainable communities

3.8 Paragraph 17 of the NPPF identifies one of the core principles of planning is to encourage multiple benefits from the use of land in urban and rural areas, recognising that some open land can perform many functions (such as for wildlife, recreation, flood risk mitigation, carbon storage, or food production).

3.9 Paragraph 69 states that the planning system can play an important role in

facilitating social interaction and creating healthy, inclusive communities. Planning decisions should aim to achieve places which promote safe and



accessible developments, containing clear and legible pedestrian routes, and high quality public space, which encourage the active and continual use of public areas.



4. HOUSING LAND SUPPLY

4.1 As summarised in the previous section, paragraph 49 of the NPPF indicates that housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development and that, where the Council cannot demonstrate a five-year supply, relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up to date. Paragraph 14 of the NPPF indicates that where relevant policies are out-of-date, the presumption in favour of sustainable development means that permission should be granted unless the adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh them benefits, when assessed against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole.

4.2 In addition, Council’s must identify and update annually a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide five years’ worth of housing against their housing requirements with an additional buffer of at least 5% (moved forward from later in the plan period) to ensure choice and competition in the market for land. To be considered deliverable, sites should be available now, offer a suitable location for development now, and be achievable with a realistic prospect that housing will be delivered on the site within five years and in particular that development of the site is viable. Housing need

4.3 The most recent objective assessment of housing need (OAN) in East Staffordshire is 613 dwellings per year. This is contained in the SHMA which forms the evidence base for the emerging Local Plan. The figure is based on the 2011 Census date released in early 2013. There is no requirement in Government policy or guidance for this figure to be tested before a Planning Inspector at examination. Housing land supply

4.4 Insufficient housing has been delivered in East Staffordshire over the past

few years. It has averaged less than 500 dwellings per year when more than 600 per year was needed.



4.5 The most recent objective assessment of housing land supply in East

Staffordshire is contained in the Note on 5 Year Land Supply Methodology - 31st August 2014, issued by the Planning Policy Team on 12 September 2014. The housing supply of 3961 dwellings is made up of the following components:

Table 3. Sources of Housing Supply

Sites with planning permission (with 10% lapse rate) 1,323

Large sites recently approved with s.106 signed off 1,004

Deliverable Sites

• Sites with a resolution to approve and awaiting s.106 sign off

• Sites currently in the Pre-Submission with an application submitted for determination

• Sites currently in the Pre-Submission without live applications

1,184

Windfalls (5 x 90) 450

TOTAL SUPPLY 3,961

4.6 In calculating the five year supply, under-delivery is spread over the five

year period (Sedgefield method) and a buffer of 20% is used. This results in a five year housing requirement of 5095



Table 4. Five year housing land supply

Requirement April 2006 – August 2014 5,381

Dwellings completed April 2006 – August 2014 3,964

Shortfall April 2006 – August 2014 1,417

Need over next five years (613 x 5) 3,065

Need with 20% buffer (3,065 x 1.2) 3,678

Need + shortfall (3,678 + 1,417)

= FIVE YEAR HOUSING REQUIREMENT

5,095

ANNUAL REQUIREMENT (5,095/5) 1,019

FIVE YEAR HOUSING LAND SUPPLY (3,961/1,019) 3.89 years

4.7 The emerging Local Plan strategy is dependent upon very large sites such as Beamhill, Lawns Farm and South of Branston, none of which have started on site. In the case of Lawns Farm a section 106 has yet to be signed despite a resolution to grant being made a year ago. Some sites are not yet in the hands of a builder. Role of the Site in meeting housing land supply

4.8 The Site has been assessed in the 2014 Strategic Housing Land Assessment (SHLAA). Together with the field to the west it falls within Site 59a (Efflinch Lane, Barton under Needwood) with an overall area of 3.56ha and a yield of 107 dwellings. The SHLAA table (Appendix A) confirms that the Site is Suitable, Available, Achievable and Deliverable within 5 years.



4.9 With the Local Plan dependent upon delivery of large, complex urban extensions, and many sites in and around Burton upon Trent, it leaves the local authority vulnerable to a housing land shortfall in the event of housing market problems and a consequent slowdown in delivery. In the circumstances, this application has the benefit of bringing forward a suitable, unconstrained site that accords with the Settlement Hierarchy of the Plan and can help to bolster delivery in the early years following adoption whilst the infrastructure is put in place for the larger sites.

4.10 As the proposal would contribute to identified unmet housing need in a

sustainable location, this should weigh positively in the balance of the decision. In such circumstances, the presumption in favour of sustainable development applies.



5. ADOPTED LOCAL PLAN 5.1 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires

that proposals be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The adopted Development Plan currently comprises the saved policies of the 1998 Local Plan.

5.2 With regard to the saved policies of the adopted Local Plan, Paragraph 215

of the NPPF states that due weight should be given to relevant policies in existing plans according to their degree of consistency with the NPPF (the closer the policies in the plan to the policies in the NPPF, the greater the weight that may be given).

5.3 The Local Plan was adopted over eight years ago and the plan period ran to

2011. The ‘Local Strategy for Development and Containment’ policy (CSP2), the ‘Housing Provision’ policy (H1) and the ‘Housing Outside Development Boundaries’ policy (H7) have not been saved. The Plan was not intended to boost significantly the supply of housing as now required by the NPPF. As it does not address current housing needs its policies on housing provision are out-of date. In accordance with recent appeal decisions this means that the settlement boundaries on the Proposals Map that were defined in relation to the out-of-date housing provision policies can only be given limited weight.

5.4 Paragraph 49 of the NPPF also states that relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites. The housing land supply position presented in the previous section confirms that there is a serious shortfall in the five-year land supply. But as current housing needs are not being addressed through an up-to-date development plan the presumption in favour of sustainable development in the NPPF would apply in any case.



Relevant local policies

5.5 Some saved policies of the Local Plan are now considered to be of limited weight because their evidence base is superseded and/or it not does accord with the NPPF. However, others are considered to be broadly consistent with the NPPF. The following have been take account of in the preparation of this planning application: o Policy CSP5 Infrastructure and Community Provision o Policy CSP6 National Forest o Policy NE14 National Forest: Planting Schemes o Policy NE15 National Forest: Implementation of Planting Schemes o Policy NE27 Light Pollution o Policy BE1 Design o Policy H6 Housing Design and Dwelling Extensions and Housing

Densities o Policy H12 Affordable Housing o Policy T1 Transport: General Principles for New Development o Policy T2 Strategic Highway Network o Policy T6 Parking Areas: Design o Policy T7 Parking: Standards o Policy L2 Landscaping and Greenspace: Assessment o Policy IMR2 Contributions and Legal Agreements

5.6 Policy NE1 (Development outside of Development Boundaries) is considered to have limited weight because of the deletion of the housing provision policies to which it was related, including H7 (Housing outside of Development Boundaries). Its strict criteria must be considered in relation to the national presumption in favour of sustainable development which operates in the absence of up-to-date development plan policies.

Other relevant material considerations

5.7 In addition to the Development Plan, the following documents are

considered to be material to the determination of the application and have been:



o Design Guide SPD 2008 o Open Space SPD 2010 o Waste, Storage and Collection Guidance Document 2012 o Housing Choice SPD Revised 2014 o Parking Standards o Barton under Needwood Village Design Statement o National Forest Charter



6. EMERGING LOCAL PLAN

6.1 On 11 April 2014 the Council submitted for examination a proposed new Local Plan to the Secretary of State. This sets out the strategic housing sites required in order to meet the bulk of the housing requirement of 11,648 over the plan period of 2012-2031.

6.2 The timetable for adoption is set out in the Local Development Scheme issued in July 2013 with adoption expected by December 2014. However, with the hearing sessions starting on 28 October, adoption is unlikely to occur before early Spring 2015.

6.3 Paragraph 216 of the NPPF states that decision-takers may give weight to

relevant policies in emerging plans according to:

• the stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced the preparation, the greater the weight that may be given);

• the extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies (the less significant the unresolved objections, the greater the weight that may be given); and

• the degree of consistency of the relevant policies in the emerging plan to the policies in the NPPF (the closer the policies in the emerging plan to the policies in the NPPF, the greater the weight that may be given).

6.4 The emerging Local Plan is still being examined in public and its policies

and related evidence have not been fully tested. Following four days of hearings on strategic matters, the Inspector’s Interim Findings published on 11 November require additional work by the Council regarding the Sustainability Appraisal, Housing Need and Site Selection before further hearings are held. This is likely to take several months. As there are unresolved objections to the policies on housing provision, housing distribution and level of affordable housing, which can only be given limited weight in the balance of the application.



6.5 Notwithstanding its limited planning status at the current time, in terms of

the ‘direction of travel’ the following policies and supporting text of the Emerging Local Plan are considered to be of some relevance to the application:

o Principle 1 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development o Strategic Policy 1 – East Staffordshire Approach to Sustainable

Development o Strategic Policy 2 – A Strong Network of Settlements o Strategic Policy 3 – Provision of Homes and Jobs 2012-2031 o Strategic Policy 4 – Distribution of Housing Growth 2012-2031 o Strategic Policy 6 – Managing the Release of Housing and Employment

Land o Strategic Policy 9 – Infrastructure Delivery and Implementation

6.6 In the Settlement Hierarchy (Strategic Policy 2) Barton under Needwood is

defined as one of four ‘Tier 1’ Strategic Villages which meet rural needs by providing a good range of facilities and services to their own populations and a wider rural catchment area. The only settlements higher in the hierarchy are the Main Towns of Burton upon Trent and Uttoxeter.

6.7 With regard to the distribution of housing growth (Strategic Policy 4), the Site is included - Inset 5 of the Pre Submission Plan - within a strategic allocation at Efflinch Lane for 130 dwellings (which also incorporates all the land for the Phase 1 Scheme and additional land to the west of the Site). Therefore the Site is clearly considered by the Council to be suitable in principle for housing development.

6.8 The Council’s Proposed Modifications submitted with the Plan seek to more

tightly define the proposed strategic allocation at Efflinch Lane to just cover the land for the Phase 1 Scheme. This would leave a strip of undeveloped land between the Phase 1 Scheme and the existing housing development at Mill Lane and Mill Crescent. However, this proposed modification is a matter for discussion at the examination and subsequent consultation, with the applicant represented at all the relevant hearing sessions to make the



case that Barton under Needwood will need additional housing to deliver the required housing growth for the District. The basis of this position is as follows:

a) All the Strategic Villages and some are likely to have to make provision

for more growth than currently proposed because of the over-reliance on large, complex, major urban extensions that are unlikely to deliver at the required rate to underpin the Plan Strategy.

b) Barton under Needwood is the Premier village in the hierarchy, with its secondary school and the particular economic advantage of the Marina providing a leisure and tourism hub close to the Site.

6.9 Moreover, as well as the proposed strategic allocation, the submitted Plan sets a ‘Windfall/Development allowance’ for Barton under Needwood of 25 dwellings (minimum). The supporting text (page 82) to Strategic Policy 4 states:

“Tier 1-3 settlements are given a development allowance which can either be allocated or come forward as windfall. Tier 1 settlements can accommodate a small allowance without the need to amend settlement boundaries.” The supporting text also clarifies that greenfield sites can be classed as windfall.

6.10 Therefore, with this application proposing to accommodate no more than

25 dwellings it is clear that this amount of housing accords with the emerging Plan irrespective of where the settlement boundary is eventually drawn. Prematurity

6.11 The NPPG states that in some circumstances, it may be justifiable to refuse

planning permission on grounds of prematurity where a plan is in preparation. However, this is likely to be limited to situations where both:



a) the development proposed is so substantial, or its cumulative effect would be so significant, that to grant permission would undermine the plan-making process by predetermining decisions about the scale, location or phasing of new development that are central to an emerging Local Plan or Neighbourhood Planning; and b) the emerging plan is at an advanced stage but is not yet formally part of the development plan for the area.

6.12 The guidance clarifies prematurity in relation to the presumption in favour of sustainable development in the NPPF. It states that arguments that an application is premature are unlikely to justify a refusal of planning permission other than where it is clear that the adverse impacts of granting permission would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, taking the policies in the NPPF and any other material considerations into account.

6.13 Given that the Site falls entirely within a housing allocation proposed in the

Pre-Submission Plan, there has been no suggestion to date that there would be clear, adverse impacts of granting permission here that would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits.

6.14 As the amount of dwellings required on new sites may increase as a result

of the on-going hearing sessions and the scrutiny of the deliverability of its proposed allocations, there is no reason to set aside the presumption in favour of sustainable development on the grounds of prematurity. Although the Plan has been formally submitted for examination, the Inspector has raised many issues of deliverability of major sites and related issues of housing land supply, therefore until he reports the housing policies cannot be said to be at an advanced stage.

6.15 As noted above, the Site is located in one of the largest settlements in the

District with only two settlements higher in the settlement hierarchy: Burton upon Trent (proposed strategic allocation amounting to 6,473 dwellings) and Uttoxeter (proposed strategic allocation amounting to 1,557



dwellings). Tutbury is also a Strategic Village where 224 dwellings are proposed as a strategic allocation, a number much greater than the 130 at Barton plus the 25 proposed in this application. In the context, the scale of growth proposed by this application is not so substantial as to undermine the whole Plan. Indeed, it fits precisely the Plan’s proposed development allowance for Barton under Needwood.



7. SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL

7.1 This section outlines the elements of the scheme that address sustainable development issues, including the environmental, social and economic implications. It demonstrates how the proposal constitutes sustainable development as set out in the NPPF; the Government’s view of what sustainable development means in practice is to be found in paragraphs 18 to 219 of the NPPF taken as a whole (as stated in paragraph 6 of the NPPF).

7.2 The various aspects of sustainability are set out below with a summary of how the scheme contributes to each. Building a strong, competitive economy

7.3 Evidence from Professor Michael Ball (Labour Needs of Extra Housing Input, commissioned by the Home Builders Federation) shows that each home built creates 1.5 full time jobs. The proposal will benefit the economy of the area directly as a result of the construction work.

7.4 The increased housing choice for employees and increased expenditure from the future residents of the development will also bring economic benefits. Promoting sustainable transport

7.5 The Site is currently in an accessible location within walking distance of bus stops, schools, shops and other facilities in Barton under Needood. There are frequent buses into Burton upon Trent and other towns. Its location will consequently help to facilitate sustainable travel choices and reduce reliance on the private car.

7.6 The Transport Assessment demonstrates that the additional traffic

generated by the proposal can be satisfactorily accommodated within the transport network. The proposal does not require major transport infrastructure. Instead, the Site will be connected to the Phase 1 Scheme for



130 dwellings to ensure the existing road network will be able to function safely and with satisfactory levels of flows.

7.7 The submitted Design and Access Statement shows how safe and suitable access can be achieved for all people and how the indicative layout has followed the principles within Manual for Streets, including encouragement of walking and cycling. The layout links well to the surrounding network of routes and will have excellent links into the surrounding strategic green space. Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes

7.8 The scheme will make a valuable contribution towards the supply of deliverable housing land and to meeting the area’s affordable housing needs.

7.9 The April 2014 update of the Council’s Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) suggests that there is an annual need for 112 affordable dwellings across the District. This scheme proposes to deliver eight affordable dwellings (32% of 25) to exceed the ‘average negotiable target’ set out in of the Local Plan (supporting text to saved policy H12).

7.10 Four (16% of 25) of these would be on-site and four off-site, to accord with

the Housing Choice SPD (as amended February 2014). Appendix 1 of this document (Current Affordable Housing Requirements) states that the affordable housing contribution currently being sought on sites not part of urban brownfield or Major Sustainable Urban Extensions is 30% of dwellings, in accordance with need and the Affordable Housing Viability Study (paragraph 1.1). It also confirms that the Council is prepared to accept a commuted sum in lieu of more than 15% on-site affordable housing and hence the Council will accept on sites - that are not urban brownfield - 15% of dwellings on-site plus a commuted sum in lieu of other affordable dwellings (paragraph 1.2).



7.11 This amount of affordable housing would be consistent with the Phase 1 Scheme which will deliver 20 affordable units on-site (15% of 130).

7.12 The precise on-site mix is to be agreed (having regard to the Council’s latest evidence on local housing need), but for the purposes of drawing the indicative layout it has been assumed that the housing mix would follow the agreed mix for the Phase 1 Scheme, which would broadly equate to the following: Table 5. Indicative Dwelling Mix

MARKET AFFORDABLE

2-bed 2 3

3-bed 2 1

4-bed 13 0

5-bed 4 0

TOTAL 21 4

7.13 The tenure split of the affordable housing is to be agreed, but to be

consistent with the Phase 1 scheme it has been assumed that two units will be social rented and two units would be shared ownership.

Requiring good design and promoting healthy communities

7.14 The Design and Access Statement addresses the design quality of the proposal and how it will support the promotion of healthy communities. This includes an indicative layout that takes full account of the adopted car and cycle parking standards.

7.15 The Phase 1 Scheme follows a green infrastructure-led approach where extensive multi-functional open space will provide a range of benefits including informal recreation, play, visual amenity, ecological protection/enhancement and space for sustainable drainage. The Design and Access Statement shows how the public open space is located to maximise the amenity and conservation benefits of the scheme and provide



effective buffering to the countryside. Given the extent of this provision, there is no need to add further public open space. However, the new housing will relate well to that which is already approved and ensure it will be well overlooked by buildings (‘natural surveillance’) and enclosed by active frontages to encourage people to positively interact and to ensure community safety.

7.16 Place-making will be at the heart of the design, with streets and spaces

designed to avoid a highway dominated design that are sympathetic to the local area. The Design and Access Statement sets out the key design principles. It demonstrates that the development will fit acceptably into the context of adjoining built form by way of its siting, scale, massing and design. It will make use of the spine road of the Phase 1 Scheme which will minimise any amenity impacts.

7.17 Conditions can control impacts of construction noise, odour, fumes and

dust in the interests of residential amenity. Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change

7.18 The Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy demonstrates how the proposal is fully able to meet the challenges of climate change in relation to future flood risk. The development avoids building on the floodplain and is therefore preferable to sites at higher probability of flooding. Conserving and enhancing the natural environment

7.19 The key natural features of the Site will be conserved and enhanced, namely the hedgerows, trees, ditch and occasionally wet pond. The Ecological Appraisal provides advice on how the Site can be enhanced with native species that will provide a net gain in terms of biodiversity.

7.20 In accordance with National Forest policy, off-site contributions can increase woodland cover in the wider area.



7.21 Contaminated land conditions can ensure further investigation and remediation works if this is considered necessary. Conserving and enhancing the historic environment

7.22 There are no known heritage assets affected by the proposed development. Nevertheless a planning condition can require a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation if such is considered necessary.



8. SECTION 106 OBLIGATION

8.1 Applicants for planning permission can by agreement or unilaterally, enter into a planning obligation to:

• restrict the development or use of land an any specified way;

• require specified operations or activities to be carried out on the land;

• require the land to be used in a specific way; and/or

• require a sum or sums to be paid to the authority on a specified date for an agreed purpose.

8.2 The applicant proposes a planning obligation under section 106 of the

Town and Country Planning Act. The obligation will accord with the tests set out in Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Regulations 2010: (a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; (b) directly related to the development; and (c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

8.3 Although the adopted Local Plan is out-of-date, saved Policy CSP5 (Infrastructure and Community Provision) and saved Policy IMR2 (Contributions and Legal Agreements) provide the basis for section 106 requirements. The Council’s SPD’s on Open Space and Housing provide additional advice.

8.4 The NPPF and NPPG provide the national context. Draft Heads of Terms

8.5 Having regard to the relevant planning policies, it is proposed that the following elements can be secured by a planning obligation:

a) On-site provision of affordable housing (equivalent to 15%); b) Financial contribution to off-site provision of affordable housing

(equivalent to 15%); c) Financial contribution to off-site provision of National Forest planting

(equivalent to 30% of site area);



d) Financial contribution to off-site sports pitch provision if required; e) Financial contribution to off-site education provision (primary and

secondary) if required; f) Financial contribution to provision of domestic refuse and recycling

storage containers if required; and g) Legal and monitoring fees as agreed.

8.6 The justification of the proposed affordable housing provision is provided in a separate Affordable Housing Statement.

8.7 The justification of the proposed off-site sports pitch provision is provided in a separate Open Space Assessment.

Financial Considerations

8.8 Section 70 subsection 2 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) states that any local financial considerations are a matter to which local planning authorities must have regard to in determining planning applications; as far as they are material for the application. The weight to be attached to these considerations is a matter for the decision maker. Local financial considerations are defined as grants from Government or sums payable to the authority under the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). This means that the New Homes Bonus is capable of being a material consideration where relevant.



9. CONCLUSIONS

9.1 This proposal for up to 25 homes at Barton under Needwood represents an opportunity to deliver a high quality development at a sustainable settlement where the principle of growth has been accepted in the emerging Local Plan and its evidence base.

9.2 The Site relates well to the existing built form and will form a logical small village extension that infills between existing and proposed dwellings. It is directly adjacent to existing residential properties to the south and the Phase 1 residential properties under construction to the north. Land to the west falls within the same proposed housing allocation in Pre Submission Plan and the land to the east is already approved for strategic green infrastructure related to the Phase 1 Scheme. The presence of the Trent and Mersey Canal and the A38 road beyond ensure there will be no visual impact on the wider landscape or setting of the village.

9.3 Having regard to the plan period for the adopted Local Plan and the absence of a five-year supply of deliverable housing it is clear that the Plan is out of date in relation to housing provision. As such, the NPPF takes precedence over any saved Local Plan policies and the presumption in favour of sustainable development applies. This means that planning permission should be granted unless: ! any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably

outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or

! specific policies in the NPPF indicate development should be restricted.

9.4 There are no specific policies in the NPPF that indicate development should be restricted. The Site is not protected under the Birds and Habitats Directives and/or designated as Sites of Special Scientific Interest; it is not land designated as Green Belt, Local Green Space, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, or within a National Park. Nor does it materially affect a designated heritage asset or fall within a location at risk of flooding.



9.5 The Council has concluded as part of the plan-making process that the Site

has no constraints and is suitable. The only current constraint is the existing general countryside protection policy of the out-of-date Local Plan which does not take account of current housing needs.

9.6 As demonstrated in the Sustainability Appraisal, the proposal constitutes sustainable development that will deliver significant economic, social and environmental benefits:

o It will make a material contribution to the Council’s housing land

supply, against a growing backlog of need resulting from the lack of an up-to-date Local Plan;

o It will provide a range and mix of house types and tenures;

o It is in an accessible location in relation to Barton under Needwood;

o It will provide housing in ways that will not harm the local landscape

and is able to respond positively to the distinctive character of the area;

o It will not harm an agricultural holding or the rural economy;

o It has a low probability of flooding and can be developed without increasing flood risk elsewhere;

o it will preserved the environmental assets of the Site and enhance

biodiversity;

o It will result in a package of infrastructure improvements for the local community and appropriate financial contributions to support local services and infrastructure; and

o The development will qualify for a New Homes Bonus over a six year

period which can be used to benefit the local community.



9.7 The Site is surrounded by built development, transport and green infrastructure and the visual impacts will be very limited. It will not extend the village and further than existing development and instead will round off and complete the village form. As such, any harm from the loss of countryside does not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits set out above.

9.8 Having regard to all the above matters and the presumption in favour of

development in paragraph 14 of the NPPF, the proposal should be granted planning permission.

Planning and Sustainability Statement - East … Application...Planning and Sustainability Statement...

Documents

Transcript of Planning and Sustainability Statement - East … Application...Planning and Sustainability Statement...