North Somerset Councilapps.n-somerset.gov.uk/cairo/docs/doc27261.pdf · North Somerset Council REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND REGULATORY COMMITTEE ... CS32 Service Villages CS34 Infrastructure

Planning and Regulatory Committee 9.3.16

SECTION 2

1

North Somerset Council

REPORT TO THE PLANNING AND REGULATORY COMMITTEE

DATE OF MEETING: 9 MARCH 2016

SUBJECT OF REPORT: PLANNING APPLICATION 15/P/0519/O Outline

application for residential development of 54 single and two storey

dwellings (including 16 affordable homes) with vehicular access off

Wrington Lane/Cobthorn Way together with open space,

landscaping, drainage features and pumping station. Details of

access to be decided but all other matters reserved for subsequent

approval at land south of Cobthorn Way, off Wrington Lane,

Congresbury

TOWN OR PARISH: CONGRESBURY

OFFICER/MEMBER PRESENTING: HEAD OF DEVELOPMENT

MANAGEMENT

KEY DECISION: NO

RECOMMENDATIONS

The application is DEFERRED to enable to allow officers to seek amended proposals to address the refusal reasons identified by the Planning and Regulatory Committee on 10TH February 2015.

1. SUMMARY OF REPORT

The application was considered by the Committee at its last meeting where it was resolved that the application should be refused. As the Committee resolution was contrary to the officers’ recommendation, the application was held over to the next meeting in accordance with the provisions of the Scheme of Delegation, to enable the issues raised to be considered before the Committee confirms the decision. Further consideration of the reasons for refusal has taken place and it is recommended that the officers be given more time to seek further information and amendments from the applicant.


SECTION 2

2

2. POLICY

As set in the report to the Planning and Regulatory Committee report of 10th February attached as Appendix 1.

3. DETAILS

This is an outline application for the development of up to 54 dwellings with access from Cobthorn Way in Congresbury. The application was considered by the Committee at its last meeting where it was resolved that the application should be refused for the following reasons:

1. The scale and form of development was excessive and would have an

adverse effect on the character and setting of the village contrary to policies CS32 and CS12 of the North Somerset Core Strategy, policy H8 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan and policy DM32 of the North Somerset Sites and Policies Plan Part 1.

2. The proposal would generate additional traffic movements onto an inadequate local road network leading to danger to road users and pedestrians contrary to policies CS10 of the North Somerset Core Strategy, policy T/10 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan and policy DM24 and DM25 of the North Somerset Sites and Policies Plan Part 1.

3. The site has inadequate footpath links to the rest of the village which would result in future occupants having reliance on the private car and therefore in its current form the site is unsustainable and contrary to policies CS10 of the North Somerset Core Strategy and policy T/10 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan.

4. Insufficient information has been provided regarding the proposed surface water drainage proposals to allow the Local Planning Authority to be sure that surface water flooding issues would not be exacerbated contrary to policies CS3 of the North Somerset Core Strategy and policy DM1 of the North Somerset Sites and Policies Plan Part 1.

5. Insufficient information has been provided regarding the potential impacts on bat flight corridors and foraging grounds and whether any impacts can be satisfactorily mitigated contrary to policies CS4 of the North Somerset Core Strategy, policies ECH/11 and ECH/12 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan, and policy DM8 of the North Somerset Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 and the North Somerset Biodiversity SPD.


SECTION 2

3

As the Committee resolution was contrary to the officers’ recommendation, the application was held over to the this meeting in accordance with the provisions of the Scheme of Delegation, to enable the issues raised to be considered before the Committee confirms its decision.

At the time of writing, further consideration of the reasons for refusal has taken place in conjunction with the Ward Member and relevant officers. As the application is for outline permission, the proposed site layout is a matter for negotiation at the reserve matter stage. However, in order to seek to address the Committee’s concerns regarding the impact of the character and setting of the village, further discussion is required with the applicant in order to seek an amended illustrative layout. This would also require further consideration of the quantum of development.

The objection to the inadequacy of the local road network leading to danger to road users and pedestrians requires further detailed consideration particularly in respect of the proposed works along Wrington Lane. The Committee’s concerns regarding the adequacy of the local footpath network have also been noted. Further information is being sought and alternative measures being investigated to determine if and how improved footpath proposals could be secured.

The officer’s recommendation recognised that further information was required to resolve the ecological and drainage objections (reasons 4 and 5). This further clarification will continue to be sought.

Should the application be refused, the Local Planning Authority and the applicant are expected to resolve as many of the issues as possible before any appeal is heard. It is therefore recommended that the application be deferred to allow further consideration and investigation of these issues before the Committee confirms its decision.

4. CONSULTATION

Details of consultation responses are in the committee report in appendix 1.

5. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The Council is at risk of an award of costs against it in any future appeal proceedings, if it cannot justify its decision on the basis of development plan policy or other material considerations.

6. EQUALITY IMPLICATIONS

Equality issues are taken into account in all planning decisions.


SECTION 2

4

7. CORPORATE IMPLICATIONS

As set out in the previous Committee report.

8. OPTIONS CONSIDERED

Planning applications can either be approved or refused.

AUTHOR

Richard Kent. Head of Development Management

BACKGROUND PAPERS

Planning and Regulatory Committee report 10th February 2016, update sheet and draft minutes


SECTION 2

5

APPENDIX 1

APPLICATION NO: 15/P/0519/O CASE OFFICER: Roger Willmot

APPLICANT: Sunley Estates Limited

PARISH/WARD: Congresbury/Congresbury and Puxton WARD COUNCILLOR(S): Cllr T C Leimdorfer

TARGET DATE: 20 May 2015

SITE ADDRESS: Land south of Cobthorn Way, off Wrington Lane, Congresbury

LOCATION PLAN: The following plan shows the general location of the site only and is for illustrative purposes. The circle identifies the location of the site and is not a representation of the site boundaries. The site boundaries and other details submitted with the application can be viewed on the council’s website at www.n-somerset.gov.uk. This map is based upon Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office © Crown copyright and database rights 2015 Ordnance Survey 100023397. You are not permitted to copy, sub-license, distribute or sell any of this data to third parties in any form


SECTION 2

6

12. Section 2: 15/P/0519/O Outline application for residential development of

up to 54 single and two storey dwellings (including 16 affordable homes) with vehicular access off Wrington Lane/Cobthorn Way together with open space, landscaping, drainage features and pumping station. Details of access to be decided but all other matters reserved for subsequent approval at Land south of Cobthorn Way, off Wrington Lane, Congresbury

DEPARTURE FROM DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

Summary of recommendation It is recommended that, subject to referral to the Secretary of State and the completion of a legal agreement, the application be APPROVED subject to conditions. The full recommendation is set out at the end of this report. The Site This 8.15 hectare site consists of two fields and located south of Cobthorn Way close to the centre of the village of Congresbury and north of the River Yeo. The site falls from north to south and the levels for the area which the development is being promoted range from 8.55m AOD to 16.33m AOD. The site is also situated on the south east side of existing housing formed by Well Park, Cobthorn Way and Verlands. Wrington Lane is the main vehicular access into Cobthorn Way. A public footpath runs north/south across the application site. The Application This is an outline application for a residential development comprising up to 54 dwellings plus recreational and play space. The 54 dwellings comprise 16 affordable houses and 38 open market houses, with garages and parking spaces, pumping station, vehicular access from Cobthorn Way, sustainable drainage, landscaping, open space and informal footpaths on a site of 8.15ha. The residential development would be limited to 1.97 ha of the total site area (density 27.4dwellings per hectare on the developed part). The illustrative Masterplan shows a layout for development comprising: Affordable dwellings

4 x one bedroom flats

1 x two bedroom coach house

6 x two bedroom houses

5 x three bedroom houses Open Market Dwellings

3 x two bedroom bungalows


SECTION 2

7

2 x three bedroom bungalows

1 x two bedroom house

21 x three bedroom houses

11 x four bedroom houses The overall approach of the application is to locate development within the north-west corner of the site within the landscape features of hedges and trees and keeping clear of the River Yeo floodplain. This is also intended to ensure that the privacy and amenity of adjacent dwellings is respected. It is proposed that approximately a quarter of the land would be developed for housing with the remainder of the land being dedicated for public open space and grazing land, and where it already serves that purpose, continue as a flood storage area. The proposed public open space to the east of the residential area would be managed for the community of Congresbury in perpetuity. The proposal includes off-site highway improvement works in Wrington Lane. Relevant Planning History None Policy Framework The site is affected by the following constraints:

Outside the settlement boundary for Congresbury.

Within Aerodrome safeguarded zone.

Within Bat habitats.

The site is within three flood zones. The Development Plan North Somerset Core Strategy (NSCS) (adopted April 2012)* The following policies are particularly relevant to this proposal:

Policy Ref Policy heading CS1 Addressing climate change and carbon reduction CS2 Delivering sustainable design and construction CS3 Environmental impacts and flood risk management CS4 Nature Conservation CS5 Landscape and the historic environment CS9 Green infrastructure CS10 Transport and movement CS11 Parking CS12 Achieving high quality design and place making


SECTION 2

8

CS13 Scale of new housing CS14 Distribution of new housing CS15 Mixed and balanced communities CS16 Affordable housing CS25 Children, young people and higher education CS27 Sport, recreation and community facilities CS32 Service Villages CS34 Infrastructure delivery and Development Contributions

* Core Strategy - High Court Challenge Following a legal challenge to the adopted Core Strategy, Policy CS13 (housing requirement) was remitted back to the Planning Inspectorate for re-examination. In addition, Policies CS6, CS14, CS19, CS28, CS30, CS31, CS32, CS33 were also remitted on the grounds that should the housing requirement be increased, then this may have consequences for one or more of these policies. All other policies remain adopted. Policy CS13 was approved by the Secretary of State on 18 September 2015 and forms part of the development plan. The next stage is the examination of the other remitted policies. North Somerset Replacement Local Plan (NSRLP) (saved policies) (adopted March 2007) Three NSRLP policies were not saved in March 2010. The Core Strategy supersedes some but not all of the remainder. It does not fully supersede the policies listed below. The following policies are particularly relevant to this proposal:

Policy Ref Policy heading

GDP/3 Promoting good design and sustainable construction ECH/6 Archaeology ECH/11 Protected species and their habitats H/8 Residential development in the countryside T/6 Parking standards T/7 Protection, development and improvement of the rights of way

network and other forms of public access T/8 Strategic cycle routes T/10 Highway safety, traffic and the provision of infrastructure

associated with development T/11 Travel plans T/13 Air safety CF/1 Provision of cultural and community facilities (Developer

Contributions) CF/3 Cultural and community facilities in the countryside


SECTION 2

9

Other material policy guidance National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) The following is particularly relevant to this proposal:

Section No Section heading 4 Promoting sustainable transport 6 Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes 7 Requiring good design 8 Promoting healthy communities 10 Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal

change 11 Conserving and enhancing the natural environment

Other National Policy Guidance National Planning Practice Guidance (March 2014) Emerging Development Plan The Sites and Policies Plan Development Plan Document is being prepared and will replace the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan once adopted.

The Sites and Policies Plan Part 1: Development Management Policies is currently out for consultation on the proposed Main Modifications following the examination hearings in November 2015 and the Inspector’s interim report which was received on 13 November 2015. The consultation on the proposed Main Modifications ends on 2 March 2016 and following this it is anticipated that we will receive the Inspector’s final report in April 2016. The plan making is now in its final stages and close to adoption so policies within the plan carry significant weight in accordance with paragraph 216 of the NPPF and can be used to determine planning applications.

Part 2 of the Plan (the Site Allocations Plan) will address site allocations and is due to be published for consultation in February/March.

The following policies are relevant to this proposal:

Policy Policy heading SP1 Presumption in favour of sustainable development

DM1 Flooding and drainage DM2 Renewable and low carbon energy DM6 Archaeology DM8 Nature Conservation DM9 Trees DM10 Landscape DM11 Mendip Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty DM19 Green infrastructure DM25 Public rights of way, pedestrian and cycle access


SECTION 2

10

DM26 Travel plans DM27 Bus accessibility criteria DM32 High quality design and place making DM36 Residential densities DM70 Development infrastructure DM71 Development contributions, Community Infrastructure Levy and

viability Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD) and Development Plan Documents (DPD)

Residential Design Guide (RDG1) Section 1: Protecting living conditions of neighbours SPD (adopted January 2013)

Residential Design Guide (RDG2) Section 2: Appearance and character of house extensions and alterations (adopted April 2014)

North Somerset Parking Standards SPD (adopted November 2013)

Affordable Housing SPD (adopted November 2013)

Travel Plans SPD (adopted November 2010)

North Somerset Landscape Character Assessment SPD (adopted December 2005)

Biodiversity and Trees SPD (adopted December 2005)

Creating Sustainable Buildings and Places SPD (adopted March 2015)

Development Contributions SPD (adopted January 2016) Consultations Copies of representations received can be viewed on the council’s website. This report contains summaries only. Third Parties 239 letters of objection have been received. The principal planning points made are as follows:

The site is outside the village boundary

Increase traffic will cause congestion on Wrington Lane

Inadequate infrastructure to support expansion of village.

Loss of wildlife habitat.

Drainage/sewage systems will not cope.

Located on agricultural land outside settlement boundary.

Impact of development on the ecology of the area.

Concern over flooding

There are no local jobs

The site is urban sprawl and is in an unsustainable location

Loss of greenfield site

Not enough local amenities

Lack of local employment

Already a lack of capacity at the doctors surgery and schools


SECTION 2

11

An impact on the rural setting

The properties will probably be out of “locals” price range

The application is not community led

A potential flood risk

Heavy construction vehicles would not be able to manoeuvre safely

A danger for environmental damage

Added noise and air pollution

It is questionable whether Congresbury need any more housing

Access to the site is very narrow

The area designated for public open space will be a continuing maintenance liability for the community

52 letters of support have been received. The principal planning points made are as follows:

The layout is good with bungalows

Support for additional recreation

There could be a less- attractive scheme

Support housing for young people

Support the Wrington Lane improvement with footpath

The site is a natural extension to the village

CRAG does not speak for the whole village

Good housing mix

Will keep the village alive

There is still plenty of green space

There is a need for more affordable housing

There is a good amount of houses Congresbury Parish Council: Objection - The Congresbury Parish Council Planning Committee unanimously agreed that the comments to be sent to North Somerset Council are that Congresbury Parish Council wishes that the previous comments dated 13th April be considered with the following additional comments;

The proposed Wrington Lane highways and footpath changes will alter the character of the lane from rural to urban in nature.

The plan shows the eastern end of Wrington lane as 2 way, this quickly changes to a single lane road only. This should be considered as part of the proposed improvements and the fact that the change of priority will cause confusion to users

The removal of the layby where the proposed give way to on coming vehicles sign and new footpath is planned to be constructed will mean that there is additional pressure as parked cars and other vehicles that currently use this space will be forced to park on Cobthorn Way and Wrington Mead.

The removal of the hedges to make way for the construction of the footpath will have a detrimental effect on wildlife and the security and privacy of properties.

The Parish Council appreciates that vegetation will be trimmed back to the highway boundary as outlined in the plan; however this must be maintained


SECTION 2

12

for visibility and highways safety. The Parish Council has concerns that this has not been considered and that maintenance will not be adequate.

Other comments received: Environment Agency Provided the Local Planning Authority (LPA) is satisfied the requirements of the Sequential test under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) are met, the Environment Agency would have no objection, in principle, to the proposed development, subject to the inclusion of conditions. North Somerset Levels Internal Drainage Board: The Board would suggest that the proposals are premature and they are minded to object. However should the LPA consider that the application is to be approved the conditions set out and an informative must be included within any certificate granted. Officer comment: this is addressed in the officer recommendation below. Bristol Airport: The Airport have undertaken an assessment concerning any potential impact on the operating capabilities of the Airport. The proposed drainage basins, of which one is identified as a permanent water feature, does have the potential to attract hazardous waterfowl which is turn could impact upon the risk of bird-strikes to aircraft operating into and out of Bristol Airport. With the proposals in outline, no information is provided at this stage on the size or design of the pond feature. There are mitigation measures available which will detract the use of the proposed pond by hazardous waterfowl. Providing the waterfowl populations at the site are kept low, the likely increase in waterfowl movements through airspace shared with aircraft will be negligible compared to the current “background” level. In line with similar proposals in the area, we therefore raise no objection to the proposed development subject to conditions. Natural England: The application site lies within 300m of the Kings Wood and Urchin Wood SSSI and 4km of Brockley Hall SSSI, which form part of the North Somerset and Mendip Bats Special Area of Conservation (SAC). As a competent authority under the provisions of the Habitats Regulations, North Somerset Council should have regard for any potential impacts that a plan or project may have. To demonstrate that the requirements of Regulations 61 and 62 have been considered a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) will need to be undertaken.

There is currently not enough information to determine whether the likelihood of significant effects can be ruled out and further bat surveys should be carried out to provide sufficient confidence that the use of the site by horseshoe bats can be


SECTION 2

13

adequately understood and that proposed mitigation is achievable. Previous surveys indicate that the site is of value to horseshoe bats.

Highway Agency: No objections. Wales & West Utilities No objection in principle. Principal Planning Issues The principal planning issues in this case are (1) the principle of development (2) transport and access considerations, (3) landscape character impact (4) flood risk and drainage, (5) ecology, (6) archaeology, (7) impact on living conditions of neighbouring residential occupiers, (8) Other environmental matters and (9) planning obligations. Issue 1: The principle of development in this location Housing requirement

Section 38 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Act 2004 requires that planning applications are determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. This is consolidated in paragraphs 11 and 196 of the NPPF. The relevant parts of the development plan for the site comprises the saved policies of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan 2007 and the adopted policies within the Core Strategy. Following a legal challenge to the Core Strategy regarding the housing numbers, Policy CS13 (scale of new housing) was remitted back to the Planning Inspectorate for re-examination, along with 8 other related policies. On 18 September 2015 the Secretary of State confirmed that he had reviewed the Core Strategy Inspector’s conclusions and was satisfied that the recommended housing requirement of 20,985 dwellings over the period 2006-2026 was appropriate. The approval of the new housing requirement means that Policy CS13 is now an adopted as part of the development plan.

5 year supply of deliverable housing sites

Paragraph 47 of the NPPF requires local planning authorities to identify and update annually a supply of specific deliverable sites sufficient to provide five years’ worth of housing against their housing requirements plus an additional buffer of 5% moved forward from later in the plan period to ensure choice and competition in the market for land.

With the Core Strategy housing requirement now fixed at 20,985, in relation to the annual assessment at 1 April 2015 the Council does not have sufficient sites to meet the 5 year housing land supply. This was confirmed as common ground between the


SECTION 2

14

parties at the recent Brinsea Road, Congresbury appeal (14/P/1901/O). Under the circumstances where the Council is unable to demonstrate a five year supply of deliverable housing sites, the housing policies in the Core Strategy are not considered to be up to date and paragraph 14 of the NPPF is engaged. This states that where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, the presumption is to approve sustainable development unless any adverse impacts of doing so would “significantly and demonstrably” outweigh the benefits.

As a result, in the absence of a 5 year housing supply, the settlement boundaries and other criteria identified through policy CS32 to control housing development are deemed out of date and carry little weight. This means that whilst the application site is outside the previously defined limit for development and is not supported by the local community, this cannot be used to oppose the principle of development until the five year supply is restored.

Core Strategy policies CS14 and CS33 and policy H/8 of the Local Plan are also related to the supply of housing. If the Council cannot demonstrate a 5 year housing land supply, they too can only be afforded limited weight in so far as they relate to the supply of housing. However, significant weight can nevertheless still be given where those policies reflect other aspects of the NPPF such as the need for any development to respect the character and appearance of the area.

It is in this context that the principle of development must be assessed.

Housing Distribution Strategy

The increased housing figure in Policy CS13 will affect other ‘remitted’ policies. This starts with Policy CS14 (Distribution of new housing) which must be updated to identify, in broad terms, where the remaining housing balance up to 2026 will be delivered.

A report to the Council’s Executive Committee in October 2015 set out that the Council must find land for an additional 1,175 dwellings for the plan period up to 2026 to meet the remaining shortfall. The report indicated that this is expected to be distributed across the main towns and Service Villages. No additional housing other than ‘windfall’ development is expected at ‘Infill’ villages on the basis that they are the least sustainable locations.

This strategy will steer the detailed housing allocations in Part 2 of the Sites and Policies Plan (the Sites Allocation Plan). The Sites Allocation Plan is however at an early stage of preparation and the consultation and examination process means that it will be at least 12 months before it can be formally adopted. In the meantime the Council must determine planning applications for housing and the urgent need to provide a deliverable supply 5-year housing land must carry substantial weight in the decision making process.

At the time of writing, the draft Site Allocations Plan is to be considered at Executive Committee on 2 February 2016. This includes additional residential allocations to address the new Core Strategy housing requirement. Preparation of this document and the associated evidence base has informed the Council’s position on 5 year supply. The draft to be considered by the Executive includes proposed new housing allocations at Weston-super-Mare, the three towns and at some key service villages,


SECTION 2

15

including Yatton. No allocations are proposed at infill villages on sustainability grounds.

It is recognised that given the circumstances, the Council cannot rely on the plan-making process alone to address the housing shortfall, and must also actively grant permissions in parallel with the plan making process. This is already in progress with, for example, the Committee resolving to approve a proposed development at Pudding Pie Lane, Churchill (141) at its last meeting in January. In addition, when considering a site at Venus Street, Congresbury (14) (which is subject of a non-determination appeal) at the same meeting the Committee resolved that, had it had the opportunity to consider the proposal, it would have been minded to approve it, subject to conditions and a S106 agreement. It is anticipated that by granting planning permission for other similar sites in and around the main towns and service villages in accordance with the draft Site Allocations Plan the 5 year supply will be secured.

Sustainability National policy supports a sustainable approach to development in the rural areas with the emphasis being on supporting services, employment and facilities in larger villages. In the planning system substantial benefit is attached to housing supply by the Government, however this does not override all other considerations. As set out in the NPPF, where the adverse impacts of a proposal “significantly and demonstrably” outweigh the benefits, then planning permission should be refused.

The Government’s view of sustainable development is set out in the NPPF. Sustainable development has many strands, but its core dimensions fall into 3 broad limbs - economic, social and environmental. This outline application therefore should be assessed against each of these dimensions.

The Core Strategy already identifies Congresbury as a service village. For service villages the strategy is for them to provide a service function beyond the immediate locality and become a focal point for local housing need, services and community facilities. In terms of general principles it is noted that the intentions of Policy CS32 is for larger villages to become more self-contained in terms of supporting services, employment and facilities. To meet this aim, ‘small scale’ development is considered acceptable where supported by the community. However, in the absence of a 5 year housing land supply this part of CS32 is deemed to be out of date and can be given little weight. The application must be assessed on its own merits against paragraph 14 of the NPPF and the objective to significantly increase housing numbers.

In assessing the relative sustainability at both settlement and site level, significant weight must therefore be given to the NPPFs presumption in favour of sustainable development. Meeting housing demand is seen by the Government as a key economic driver and the provision of new housing, and in particular affordable housing, is in the wider public benefit. In line with national planning guidance the Council therefore must give substantial weight to the provision of additional housing in the wider ambit of sustainable development. This presumption in favour of development will only be outweighed if specific and significant harm can be identified that supersedes the wider public benefit.


SECTION 2

16

It was accepted by the parties on the Brinsea Road appeal that Congresbury is a sustainable settlement that benefits from a range of existing services and facilities and the Inspector concurred with this view. The Inspector in that case, however disputed the accessibility of that particular site to these facilities and services, finding that the location did not facilitate easy and safe access for pedestrians and cyclists who would have to use routes with poor quality footway connections and narrow roads where average traffic speeds and road conditions was not conducive to encouraging cycle usage. Each case must be examined on its individual merits and in this case specific assessment of the accessibility is necessary. The main village centre facilities are within walking distance of the application site and Broad Street (1.1km) where there are a range of shops, a primary school and leisure facilities together with a further small supermarket on the A370 approximately 200m away. Although proximity to local services is only one of the requirements of sustainable development the above site will also benefit from its proximity to bus and rail links that serve higher order facilities, thus allowing a choice of modes of transport. The NPPF indicates that developments should be located and designed where practical to give priority to pedestrian and cycle movements, and have access to high quality public transport facilities. In this respect, there is a regular Weston to Bristol bus service using the A370 which operates every 20 minutes from early morning until the evening with a reduced service running till midnight from Monday to Saturday and a half hourly service running on Sundays and Public Holidays. The site is approximately 200m from the nearest bus stop on the A370 and the nearest rail station at Yatton is 2.8 km (1.7 miles) from the site. The distance from these important public transport modes gives a choice of travel modes which may be sufficiently attractive to encourage use. This accords with the NPPF (paragraphs 34 & 35) which seeks to ensure that developments that generate significant movement are located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable transport modes can be maximised. Congresbury Primary School is located some 1.5km (0.9mile) from the site. There is no secondary school in the village; the nearest is Churchill School some 3.7km from the site. The village contains several meeting places and other facilities including a doctors’ surgery and pharmacy and since the site is located close to the centre of the village it is in a suitable position to create sustainable links to these local facilities. Currently Cobthorn Way provides access via estate roads and a footpath link to the village centre or via Cobthorn Way and the A370, though this route is narrow in places and not always continuous. A public footpath route across the application site leads to the stoned surface paths of the Millennium Green, the Millennium bridge and thence to the village centre. The proposed new footpath links from the site would enable attractive pedestrian access to the village, though these are unlikely to be significantly quicker or more convenient for school or other trips to the village centre. Whilst some routes are currently not particularly obvious for walkers, the applicant is prepared to make contributions to signposting and localised improvements.


SECTION 2

17

An overall assessment of sustainability should also take into account the environmental sustainability of the village. The site and the manner in which the indicative master plan has been designed suggest that it is possible to develop this site as a natural extension to this part of the village that would not seriously affect the rural character and setting of the village, nor would it impact materially on wildlife or flood risk, subject to meeting the IDB requirements. An update on this will be given at the meeting. The chosen location of development will not contribute to significant amounts of traffic movements beyond that of the surrounding catchment and the site will offer realistic alternative travel modes for the economically active. In terms of the social dimension, the village is an active community with many community activities and several community meeting places. It is accepted that some development is appropriate at service villages particularly where it addresses local objectives and contributes to improvements in overall sustainability. It is also considered that there are few more sustainable locations within the village that have better transport links or ones that could be improved as this one can. Considering the sustainability issues throughout the village as a whole, the proposed addition of 54 dwellings in this part of the village will deliver reasonably sustainable development in relation to the guidance set out in paragraph 7 of the NPPF It is therefore concluded that the proposal is not in direct conflict with the settlement strategy as set out in Policy CS32 of the Core Strategy and Policy H/8 of the Replacement Local Plan. Issue 2: The Transport and access considerations

Wrington Lane provides the only vehicular access to Cobthorn Way and thus the development. Although narrow in some places, speeds are low and generally lower than the 30mph limit. To the east of Cobthorn Way, Wrington Lane narrows to just 2.9m wide and has a national speed limit to its junction with Wrington Road. At its western end it connects with Kent Road and then the A370 Bristol Road. There are a number of rural footways in the vicinity of the site which provide walking routes to amenities in Congresbury as well as serving a leisure function.

The application is supported by a Transport Assessment (TA) which includes details of a proposed priority system and new footway through two pinch points on Wrington Lane. The developer has predicted the likely vehicular trip generation of the development in the morning (AM) and evening (PM) peak periods by reference to the TRICS database. The analysis suggests that the development will generate 29 two way trips in the AM peak and 33 in the PM. These figures are robust and, if anything assume higher trip rates than is evident from existing developed areas of Congresbury. The sole vehicular access to the residential development is to be connected to the turning head of Cobthorn Way, which is an adequate for the volumes of traffic likely to be generated. Wrington Lane is substandard in width when compared to current standards and the addition of 54 dwellings would result in an increase vehicular and pedestrian movement on the lane. At present the peak hour in the section between Kent Road


SECTION 2

18

and Cobthorn Way is 1700 to 1800hrs when surveys show a total two way flow of 66 vehicles. Adding the 33 predicted new trips would increase the total two way flow to 99 in that hour. Nevertheless the flows should be well within the capacity of the lane. Existing traffic flows have been obtained from the TAs of other developments in the area and the development shown to produce an increase of up to 2.4% at the Bristol Road/ Kent Road and Kent Road/Wrington Lane junctions and a 1% increase on nearby junctions. Traffic from the development arriving at the Smallway traffic signals would be in lower volume and proportion. The existing junctions; Kent Road with Wrington Lane and Kent Road with Bristol Road have been modelled and shown to operate satisfactorily with the predicted traffic volumes. Although a capacity analysis of the proposed rearrangement of the Cobthorn Way/ Wrington Lane junction has not been provided, given the low flows through the link, capacity issues are considered unlikely. Certainly the predicted impact of the proposal on local junctions would not be such that it could be considered material under the terms of NPPF and there is little evidence of accidents that could be expected to rise as a result of the proposal. During public consultation on proposals some local residents expressed a view that, if the development were to proceed, some improvement would be needed on two sections of Wrington Lane to improve highway safety. In response the applicant has developed a scheme to create two sections of formalised priority working and provide a footway alongside the greater length of the section of Wrington Lane between Kent Road and Cobthorn Way. These propose a new section of footway and a “give way” line to formalise shuttle working at the eastern end of the narrow section between Kent Road and Wrington Mead and a similar arrangement between Wrington Mead and Cobthorn Way. The proposals include provision of a footway along the north side of Wrington Lane at a width, generally, of 1.5m reducing in 1 location to 1.2m. Whilst this is less than the current 2m standard for a new build situation, it is considered that the provision of a footway of 1.5m would provide significant safety benefits for both existing and new users of the lane. Existing lighting columns and telegraph poles would be relocated to the rear of the footway to minimise intrusion on the space available to pedestrians. The schemes have been subject to Stage 1 Road Safety Audit and concerns have been addressed

Overall the proposals represent an appropriate and proportionate response to the issues raised during public consultation. Bearing in mind the likely increase in traffic on the lane combined with a modest increase in the number of pedestrians, the proposals offer a degree of betterment when compared to the existing situation. The works will need to be secured by S106 agreement and completed prior to any occupations. The proposed on-site car parking provision exceeds the minimum required by the North Somerset Parking Standards. However, parking is a reserved matter and is not for formal consideration at this stage. A travel plan has been submitted, with a final version to be produced following initial resident travel surveys. The travel plan includes provision of information on


SECTION 2

19

sustainable travel, promotional events, improving and maintaining footways through the site, promotion of car sharing. This includes more robust targets with a modal shift towards public transport. Measures will be required to ensure that this modal shift is achieved and the reduction in trips as predicted in the modelling is realized. A S106 contribution of £26,400 (£120 per dwelling) towards Travel Information Packs, public transport taster tickets and cycle vouchers is required to support the Travel Plan. The travel plan has assessed the walking distances from the site to services within Congresbury against acceptable distances specified by the Institute of Highways and Transportation (IHT) in their publication ‘Guidelines for Providing for Journeys on Foot 2000’. The distances provided are just within the acceptable walking distances although it should be noted that actual walking distances will be longer e.g. the distance between the site and the town centre (via Weetwood Road and Southland Way which is the shortest possible route) was found to be approximately 1100m, rather than the 750m quoted. There is also a closer Tesco Express approximately 450m from Cobthorn Way (via Wrington Lane). Additionally measurements from the site entrance are shorter than they will be for residents of some parts of the site. Whilst in this case some of the walking distances exceed recommendations based on pedestrians without mobility impairments they are not so excessive as to justify a reason for refusal on highways grounds. However, they need to be noted in the overall assessment of sustainability of the proposal. Cycling distances are agreed to be within reasonable limits. Overall it is considered that whilst surrounding roads raise some concerns they are adequate to safely support the development without congestion and the site is situated sufficiently close that, with some improvements, pedestrian journeys to services and facilities is possible. Whilst not strictly a pre-requisite of granting permission the developer is willing to undertake or fund minor improvements to substandard features of the network. This is considered to have some merit, In conclusion it is considered that the proposal is in accordance with policy as it will not prejudice road safety or cause congestion and junctions do not cause concerns that merit a refusal. Issue 3: Impact on the landscape character of the area and village The site is outside the defined settlement boundary of the village and in the countryside. Planning policies CS5 & CS12 of the Core Strategy and Policy GDP/3 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan aim to minimise the dispersal of dwellings outside existing settlements in order to protect the character of the countryside. The site does not lie within either a statutory or local landscape designation. The village Character Statement published in 1998, contains useful principles which are still understood to be broadly representative of local aims and aspirations. The applicant has provided a Landscape Appraisal that considers the potential impact the development might have on both the landscape character and visual


SECTION 2

20

amenity of the site and surrounding area having regard to the above policies. The Appraisal suggests that the pastoral landscape is not unattractive but its character is weakened by intrusive elements especially to the west, in particular the L-shaped village infill of modern housing development. It is said to be typical of the character of land on the edge of the residential areas and is visually affected by the presence of a large number of electricity pylons that further detract from the rural character. This is true but the current route of pylons is not highly visible in the same way as the more solid mass of building would be. However, on the illustrative master plan the development is shown to be kept away from the lower level area closer to the river, which would be more intrusive in the foreground of views from the public paths by the river and has to some extent an existing backcloth of development at Cobthorn Way and Verlands at the upper slopes. In addition the building heights plan shows that the applicant has considered the surrounding development and proposes a mix of 1 and 2 storey buildings close to existing dwellings and on the lower fringes of the development which should add variety but also minimize the prominence of the development. In considering the application it should be noted that the application is for outline permission and whilst it is considered appropriate to limit by condition, the heights of development, actual layout will be determined by consideration of reserved matters. It is proposed however to specify that no development should be located outside the area shown for actual built development on the illustrative plan which broadly forms a suitable approach to developable areas. It is considered to be advisable to allow final numbers to be dictated by layout and landscape considerations but the applicant has been requested to agree that the application be amended to up to 54 dwellings rather than a specific number and that this be reflected in a condition. Key elements to be considered at reserved matters include: the relationship with existing adjacent development; treatment of edges; entrance to the site, and a preference to soften the southern edge with the establishment of a native hedge and strengthening of retained hedges, which will also benefit ecology. Other critical matters will include design of the proposed pumping station; improvements to elements of the illustrated layout to secure a more sensitive treatment, the range of building typologies and orientations, varying setbacks, roof heights, spacing, gables, dormers etc. to ensure an interesting informal townscape/roofscape appropriate to edge of village development. The location and layout of the development with public open space has taken account of the potential effect on local character, flood risk considerations and the intention to retain features, such as the existing boundary vegetation and trees and the central hedge which are characteristic of the local character area. Although the development lies outside the settlement boundary, it nevertheless appears reasonably related to the village edge and the extensive area of allocated open space will allow the planting of new trees and landscaping that will help to soften the visual impact of the development and help integrate it with its surroundings, though the applicant has been advised and accepts that further native planting including a strong hedge line and trees would be advisable on the southern boundary of development.


SECTION 2

21

Also, the developable area on the edge of village is not a significant part of the overall character of the river valley and the proposal would not result in a serious deterioration in the landscape setting. It is likely to have a neutral effect on the landscape character of the area. Nevertheless it is important that a landscaping scheme be designed to create and improve stronger boundaries around the immediate built edge with native hedges. The applicant will need to commission a survey of trees and hedging (including any on land adjacent to the site that could be impacted by the proposal) and to use the information from this to inform the layout and design of the site. Trees and hedging worthy of retention (and those to be planted) will need to be given adequate space to grow to maturity without conflicting with site uses. The development is also well connected with surrounding parts of the village with a degree of visual connection between the adjoining streets together with suitable links that will encourage pedestrian connectivity and usability. The landscape plan indicates that a section of existing public footpath will be raised and surfaced to increase usability in the winter months. As such the applicant has had regard to sustainable design principles and accessibility standards to reach local facilities. It is not considered that the proposed development will have any material impact on the character of the village and is not likely to result in any off site works e.g. to increase the capacity of the A370/High Street junction. The proposal itself is some distance from the Conservation Area and any listed buildings and therefore will not damage its heritage value. In conclusion, although the proposed development will change the character and appearance of the area as well as some views across the site, this change is not regarded as significant and does not outweigh the benefits of providing the additional housing. With careful consideration of the layout and extent of the development together with sympathetic landscaping, the proposed development is capable of integrating well into the existing edge of the settlement and enhancing its setting. Issue 4: Flood Risk and Drainage The site is bounded by a system of ditches on the east and west side which discharge into the River Yeo. The ditch on the eastern boundary serves the catchment to the north of the site which has been developed. There is concern among the residents that the existing infrastructure is insufficient to the north of the development. In particular, the network discharging into the ditch and also the existing foul water system, and in the past flooding has occurred where both surface and foul water systems have exceeded capacity. The applicant has advised that Wessex Water are being engaged to determine the capacity of the public sewer network in the area, including any infrastructure upgrades that are required. This may be an upgrade that is required for the current situation, which would be the responsibility of Wessex Water, or an upgrade that is required for the additional foul water from the proposed development. Further detail on this matter is being sought and will be reported through the update sheet.


SECTION 2

22

The majority of the site falls within Flood Zone 1 (low probability of flooding). Whilst a section of field to the south west of the application site is classified as being in Flood Zone 2 and 3 (less than 1 in 100 annual probability of fluvial flooding or 1 in 200 probability of tidal flooding), this part of the site would not be developed for housing. Since the primary flood risk comes from fluvial flooding from the River Yeo, all finished floor levels would be set at 8.85m AOD so as to provide 300mm freeboard to the predicted flood level. All other sources of flooding for the site have been investigated and shown to be of minimal or no risk and the development provides the opportunity to increase the Millennium Green flood storage area. This will reduce risk to the proposed development and surrounding properties. The Environment Agency has raised no objection to the proposal subject to the submission of an appropriate surface water drainage scheme for the site, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development. The Council’s Flood Risk Management team has reviewed the surface water drainage proposals which use SuDS principles. Surface water will be managed through the use of swales, ponds and crates and discharged at a controlled rate into the Yeo. The overall principles of the design are considered sound though there are a number of specific points that will need to be acknowledged when submitting detailed design. In addition the applicant needs to demonstrate where surface water will be directed to after this swale or that water entering this swale will fully infiltrate into the ground. The overall principal of the flooding and drainage design is acceptable, subject to suitable conditions being applied. Issue 5: Ecology When dealing with cases where a European Protected Species, in this case, principally bats, may be affected, the Council has a statutory duty to have regard to the requirements of the Habitats Directive in exercising its functions. Engagement involves a consideration by the authority of those provisions and considering whether the derogation requirements might be met. This is not a substitute for the licence application which will follow if permission is given. Members should be clear therefore that the requirements of the Directive can be met because there is no satisfactory alternative or because there are "other imperative reasons of overriding public interest or the favourable conservation status of the species is maintained." If it is unclear to the authority whether the requirements will be met the committee must take a view whether in all circumstances it should affect the grant or not. If a survey demonstrates that development is likely to affect bat foraging and/or commuting habitat then linear features such as tree lines should be retained, and compensatory planting should be considered wherever possible. In addition, should a survey demonstrate that bats and/or a known roost are likely to be affected by the


SECTION 2

23

proposed development, and planning permission is to be granted, a condition should be placed on the decision notice requiring the developer to apply for, and obtain, a European Protected Species Licence before work commences. The licence will specify conditions such as timing of works and mitigation to lessen impacts. The bat surveys referred to indicates that the site is of value to horseshoe bats, not least because of its grazing activity. Additionally the proximity of nearby woodland and linear routes such as hedge lines (though patchy) and the river are suggestive of a habitat that is suitable for foraging. It is also not a great distance from a major roost at Brockley Hall. There are no buildings on the site and it is understood that none of the trees or surrounding hedgerows show sign of roosts or potential for roost sites for bats although the boundary features, especially the trees, hedges and ditches, are likely to be used by bats for commuting and foraging. There are also several trees around the area and most are immediately outside the boundaries. These include ash, oak, lime and alder. None of the trees will be impacted by the proposed development. The applicant’s ecology plan shows how cattle can graze the land on the eastern portion of the site and the Management Strategy for the site will allow for this. The applicant has indicated that the development is specifically designed to reflect the location with a soft fluid rural edge. There are opportunities to enhance the existing hedge lines and create a new one and a satisfactory amount of new tree planting which has space to mature is proposed. Further measures to minimise light spill and keep it within certain parameters should be possible within the reserved matters. At present however Natural England consider that more surveys are required though clarification is sought as to the extent of these given the large amounts of open space that remain in the context of this application. The proposals could impact on bats due to the loss of foraging habitat, or indirect disturbance (e.g. light spill) but the Council does have the ability to negotiate on this at reserved matters stage and to apply conditions requiring a lighting strategy and other objectives that might provide some enhancement of the site from an ecological perspective notwithstanding the loss of the developed area and the drainage infrastructure proposed. The information for other species is considered to be sufficient and there should not be any adverse impacts, although appropriate avoidance and mitigation measures would need to be secured through conditions e.g. the methodology for nesting birds is not sufficiently detailed. The applicant’s ecologist has also suggested resurveying the site before development to ensure it remains free of badger activity and advocates a strategy for wildlife on the site that promotes mixed habitat appropriate to the area and identifies the potential of the large areas of open space to enable this and linkages with surrounding wildlife corridors particularly if some of this is retained as grazing land. In addition to the above, opportunities for ecological enhancement should be considered in order to meet Core Strategy Policy CS4, the NPPF and the NERC Act 2006. This should include biodiversity enhancements, creation of ponds or swales, appropriate management, inclusion of native species of local provenance within landscape design and in-built features for bats and nesting birds, such as house martins and house sparrows, to be incorporated within buildings. In this case the


SECTION 2

24

applicant proposes to retain large areas which are close to the river, as this is at risk of flood and areas of open space within the site to ensure space for further flood storage SuDS measures. The proposed public open space should seek to maximize opportunities for biodiversity. If a Biodiversity Management Plan was provided for the public open space, this would help ensure that ecological enhancement and compensation measures could be secured in accordance with NPPF paragraph 9 which emphasizes that “pursuing sustainable development involves seeking positive improvements in the quality of the built, natural and historic environment, as well as in people’s quality of life”. Natural England advised that where the effects from a project are not likely to be significant alone, but could affect a European site in some way, the competent authority needs to consider whether significant effects would be likely when combined with other plans or projects. In this case however it is considered that subject to further evidence and clarification on proportionate additional survey work there does not appear to be a significant loss of foraging ground or severance to any commuting route.

Issue 6: Archaeology It is recommended that results from the initial gradiometry surveys, suggestive of possible early pottery kilns merit further investigation and a strategy be drawn up for recording or preserving them in situ. Ideally the layout would be designed to enable re-examination at a future time and this is a matter that can be discussed at reserved matters stage. Issue 7: Impact on living conditions of neighbouring residential occupiers The planning application is in outline where the siting, design and landscaping will be considered at a later stage. It is considered that the objections to the development in terms of visual impact can be addressed when the detailed layout is submitted. Issue 8: Other Environmental Matters The representations received have been numerous and varied in their content. These issues and other relevant issues associated with the development proposal have been given careful consideration. If permission were granted, conditions would be imposed to protect and mitigate the risk to the future residents of the development from contamination, pollution, noise, flooding and lighting concerns. Relevant conditions would also be imposed to secure the delivery of 15% on site renewables. All other matters raised by the consultees have been taken into account, but none is of such significance so as to outweigh the considerations that led the recommendation below.


SECTION 2

25

Issue 9: Planning Obligations The adopted Policy CF/1 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan requires that major residential developments should provide financial contributions to cover the costs for provision of community services to serve the new residents. This is supported by the recently adopted Developer Contributions SPD. In addition to Policy CF/1 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan and the SPD, the Council also relies on Policy CS34 of the North Somerset Core Strategy. This policy states that development proposals will be expected to provide a contribution towards the cost of any infrastructure required to support development and regeneration. In this case the following Heads of Terms have been agreed with officers: 30% affordable housing at nil public subsidy This would be subject to viability in accordance with the adopted Core Strategy target of up to 30%. The affordable housing would be integrated into the scheme using the same design principles as for the open market housing. The affordable housing would include affordable rented, shared ownership and low cost/reduced cost market units. The tenure of the proposed affordable housing units is expected to be split 82% social rented and 18% intermediate ownership. Libraries Provision The sum sought for library services is £16, 212. Provision of on-site Children’s Play (LEAP) & POS 15 years commuted maintenance contribution of £30,038 (to cover a period of 15 years). Fencing to enclose the LEAP together with self-closing gate Public Open Space Supervision fee and Bond Agreement on how the proposed grazing arrangements will function and be maintained on the land to the east and discussion of strengthening of field boundaries where appropriate to discourage trespass on adjacent farmland Off-site Sports Pitches: £25,600 Sports & Leisure Facilities: £61,320 plus indexation. Schools Primary School £40,000 Secondary School £150,000 Special Education £25,000 Early Years (voluntary) £10,000 Total £225,000 Drainage: It is the intention of the applicant to transfer the proposed attenuation pond to a private management company and protection will be sought to ensure this meets with the Council’s policies on adoptions.


SECTION 2

26

Footpath and accessibility improvements The applicant is agreeable to the principle of a contribution to enable a number of improvements to the routes available to access the village centre, and the main road and bus routes. This might include widening of Wrington Road to secure footpath improvements, signposting, widening of footpaths and addressing gaps in provision, surfacing and lighting and other measures, on any of the routes identified in the report between the site and the village centre or key public transport connections, which can be addressed in consultation with the local community. The applicants have indicated they are minded to accept the above terms but confirmation is sought, without prejudice to the recommendation, as to whether they will also fully fund the highway improvements. S106 contributions will be subject to detailed drafting negotiation, agreement of phased payments where appropriate, evidence of proper expenditure and suitable claw-back clause if the money is not spent within a reasonable period of signing the S106. Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 The proposed development will not have a material detrimental impact upon bio-diversity subject to the receipt of satisfactory plans and the implementation and compliance of the conditions if they are so recommended. The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 The proposed development will not have a material detrimental impact upon crime and disorder subject to the receipt of satisfactory plans. The proposed development of this site for residential development, if it were to be approved, will need careful consideration to design out crime from an early stage to create a safe sustainable development and this will form part of a reserved matters application, rather than this outline stage. Local Financial Considerations The Localism Act 2011 amended section 70 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 so that local financial considerations are now a material consideration in the determination of planning applications. This development is expected to generate New Homes Bonus contributions for the authority. However, it is considered that the development plan and other material considerations, as set out in this report, continue to be the matters that carry greatest weight in the determination of this application Conclusion Congresbury is considered to be a sustainable village and within the settlement it is also considered that this is a sustainable site with satisfactory transport links and potential to improve them. The proposed development can be justified in terms of delivering sustainable development in relation to the guidance set out in the NPPF.


SECTION 2

27

There are no serious adverse transport, sustainability and landscape character impacts that would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the additional housing. Further clarification is required of the ecological impact on bats, but this may be outweighed in the balance of consideration by the lack of suitable alternative sites that do not also have evidence of bat presence and the strong need to provide a supply of housing sites. If this can be resolved then the balance is considered to weigh more heavily in favour of granting permission, given the potential mitigation measures that are proposed or could be applied. Consideration will be given to the need for a condition requiring submission of a biodiversity management plan and if required a condition will be proposed. The significant benefit which derives from boosting the council’s housing supply is an important consideration and it is therefore concluded that the proposal may be seen to be in support of the settlement strategy as set out in Policy CS32 of the Core Strategy, Policy H/8 of the Replacement Local Plan, the emerging Site Allocations Plan and policies in the Framework taken as a whole. There is no objection in principle on drainage or flood risk grounds although certain detailed points relating to flood risk and drainage need to be resolved at the detailed design stage. Further clarification is needed concerning impacts on bat flight corridors and foraging but provided these can be addressed satisfactorily then permission should be granted. There are not strong grounds for recommending refusal in this case. On this basis and taking account the material considerations to be weighed in the overall planning balance it is recommended that this application be approved. RECOMMENDATION: Subject to 1) confirmation that no unacceptable impacts on bat flight corridors and foraging grounds that cannot be satisfactorily mitigated will arise, 2) further information to demonstrate that the detailed matters relating to storm water runoff and storage can be satisfactorily addressed and 3) the completion of a legal agreement securing (a) 30% affordable housing at nil public subsidy, b) school place contributions, c) Provision of on-site Children’s Play and Public Open Space d) library contributions, e) contributions to off-site sports pitches and sports and leisure facilities g)) future management and adoption of drainage infrastructure arrangements and i) footpath and accessibility improvements The application be APPROVED subject to the following conditions together with any additional conditions or amendments required as a result of further information or clarification

1. The application for approval of the reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiry of three years from the date of this permission.


SECTION 2

28

Reason: In accordance with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be begun either before the

expiry of five years from the date of this permission, or before the expiry of two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved, whichever is the later. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

3. Approval of the details of the layout, scale and appearance of the

buildings, and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called 'the reserved matters') shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority, in writing before any development is commenced unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: The application was submitted as an outline application in accordance with the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995 (as amended) and in accordance with Policy of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan.

4. The development hereby permitted shall, unless otherwise subsequently agreed by the Local Planning Authority in writing, be carried out in accordance with the following supporting documents and approved plans: Reason: In accordance with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.

5. The dwellings shall not be occupied until sight lines have been provided at the junction between Cobthorn Way and Wrington Lane have been provided in accordance with the approved plans. Reason: In the interests of road safety and in accordance with Policy CS10 of the North Somerset Core Strategy and Policy T/10 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan.

6. No dwellings shall not be occupied until the surface of the public

footpath, between the site and River Yeo, has been improved and enhanced and it has been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Local planning Authority that flood flow routes are not adversely affected in accordance with details to be submitted to and approved be the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of pedestrian access and safety and in accordance with Policies T/10 and GDP/3 of the North Somerset


SECTION 2

29

Replacement Local Plan and Policy DM1 of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 Publication Version 2015

7. No development shall commence until a detailed surface water drainage scheme, based on sustainable drainage principles and an assessment of the hydrological and hydrogeological context of the development and enhancement of the ditches for plants and invertebrates, has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is completed. The scheme shall include details of how the scheme shall be maintained and managed after completion. Reason: In accordance with paragraph 17 and sections 10 and 11 of the National Planning Policy Framework, the Technical Guidance to the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) and policy CS/3 of the North Somerset Core Strategy.

8. No development approved by this permission shall be commenced until a scheme for the disposal of foul water has been approved by the Local Planning Authority unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. On commencement of the development the scheme shall be implemented and shall be managed in accordance with this in perpetuity unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To prevent pollution of the water environment in accordance with paragraph 17 and sections 10 and 11 of the National Planning Policy Framework, the Technical Guidance to the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) and Policy CS/3 of the North Somerset Core Strategy.

9. All works comprised in the approved details of landscaping should be carried out during the months of October to March inclusive following completion of the dwellings. Reason: To ensure that a satisfactory landscaping scheme is implemented and in accordance with Policy GDP/3 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan and Policy DM9 and DM10 of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 Publication Version 2015

10. Trees, hedges and plants shown in the landscaping scheme to be retained or planted which, during the development works or a period of ten years following full implementation of the landscaping scheme, are removed without prior written consent from the Local Planning Authority or die, become seriously diseased or are damaged, shall be replaced in the first available planting season with others of such species and size as the Authority may specify in accordance with DM9


SECTION 2

30

and DM10 of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 Publication Version 2015 Reason: To ensure as far as possible that the landscaping scheme is fully effective and in accordance with Policy GDP/3 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan.

11. No development shall commence until the materials to be used in the external walls and roofs of the buildings and hard landscaped areas are agreed and samples have been provided and been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The materials to be used in the development shall be in strict accordance with those approved and no other material shall be used unless the Local Planning Authority has first approved it in writing. Reason: To ensure that materials to be used are acceptable and in accordance with Policy GDP/3 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan.

12. No development shall commence until details indicating the boundary treatment for the development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these approved details shall be completed for each dwelling before that dwelling is occupied. Reason: To ensure that a satisfactory scheme of boundary treatment is agreed and implemented and in accordance with Policy GDP/3 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan.

13. No street lighting within the site shall be installed until details of a lighting strategy, lighting and the timing of installation have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved lighting thereafter shall be installed in accordance with those details to be approved. Reason: To prevent light pollution in accordance with Policy CS3 of the North Somerset Council Core Strategy and in accordance with Policy ECH/11 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan and DM32 of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 Publication Version 2015

14. The development hereby permitted shall not be commenced until details of a strategy to protect wildlife has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Once approved the works shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details and timing of the works unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that ecological mitigation is carried out to an acceptable methodology and standard, in accordance with Policy


SECTION 2

31

ECH/11 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan and in accordance with DM8 and DM32 of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 Publication Version 2015

15. Not more than 30 dwellings shall be occupied before the Local Equipped Area for Play (LEAP) with informal open space totalling a minimum of 1600m2 has been constructed in accordance with details that have first been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the play area and open space shall be permanently retained and shall not be used for any other purpose. Reason: To ensure that an appropriate public open space is provided in accordance with policy CS27 of the North Somerset Core Strategy.

16. If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development (unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority shall be carried out until the developer has submitted a remediation strategy to the Local Planning Authority detailing how this unsuspected contamination shall be dealt with and obtained written approval from the Local Planning Authority. The remediation strategy shall be implemented as approved. Reason: To ensure the proposed development will not cause pollution or harm to public health in accordance with Policy CS3 of the North Somerset Council Core Strategy.

17. No development shall take place on the site until a detailed site development project plan setting out key milestones in the development, including site preparation, plot commencements, installation of street lights, submission of drawings for approval in principle to structures and open spaces and play equipment, and land drainage consents, and relates them to proposed dates for adoptions of each element has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall proceed in accordance with this timetable unless any variations have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway and pedestrian safety and in accordance with Policies T/10 and GDP/3 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan.

18.

The developer shall notify the Local Planning Authority not less than seven days before the initial excavations are due to commence and shall afford access at all times to any archaeologist nominated by the Local Planning Authority, and allow him or her to observe the initial excavations and record items of interest and finds. Reason: So that records may be made before the archaeological remains are affected by the development and in accordance with


SECTION 2

32

19.

paragraphs 128 and 169 of the National Planning Policy Framework, policy CS5 of the North Somerset Core Strategy and policy ECH/6 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan. No development including any ground preparation shall take place until an archaeological evaluation and mitigation strategy has first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In order to ensure that any archaeological features of interest are fully understood and properly recorded or preserved in accordance with paragraphs 128 and 169 of the National Planning Policy Framework, policy CS5 of the North Somerset Core Strategy and policy ECH/6 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan and in accordance with DM6 of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 Publication Version 2015

20. The dwellings shall be provided with a water storage butt and composter prior to occupation unless details of proposed exceptions have first been supplied to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: The Local Planning Authority wish to encourage sustainable water storage and recycling initiatives in line with Government Policy and in accordance with Policy CS1 of the North Somerset Replacement Local Plan.

21. No development shall take place, until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall provide for: (i) the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors (ii) loading and unloading of plant and materials (iii) storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development (iv) the erection and maintenance of security hoarding including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing, where appropriate (v) wheel washing facilities (vi) measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction (vii) a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction works (viii) measures to control noise from works on the site. Reason: In order to preserve the living conditions of nearby residents as required by Policy CS3 of the North Somerset Core Strategy 2012.


SECTION 2

33

22. The dwellings hereby approved shall not be occupied until measures to generate 15% (less if agreed with the local planning authority) of the energy required by the use of the development (measured in carbon) through the use of micro renewable or low-carbon technologies and a programme for their implementation have been submitted to and agreed in writing by the LPA. Once agreed the measures shall be installed on site and become fully operational in accordance with the agreed details and programme. Thereafter, the approved technologies shall be permanently retained unless otherwise first agreed in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: In order to secure a high level of energy saving by reducing carbon emissions generated by the use of the dwellings and in accordance with paragraph 17 and section 10 of the National Planning Policy Framework and policies CS1 and CS2 of the North Somerset Core Strategy Plan and in accordance with DM2 of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 Publication Version 2015.

23. The development hereby permitted shall not commence until details of the design, implementation, maintenance and management of the sustainable drainage scheme have been submitted to the LPA and approved in writing by the LPA. Those details shall include:

1. Information about the design storm period and intensity, discharge rates and volumes (both pre and post development), temporary storage facilities, means of access for maintenance, the methods employed to delay and control surface water discharged from the site, infiltration rates if considering infiltration, and the measures taken to prevent flooding and pollution of the receiving groundwater and/or surface waters;

2. Any works required off-site to ensure adequate discharge of surface water without causing flooding or pollution (which should include refurbishment of existing culverts and headwalls or removal of unused culverts where relevant);

3. Flood water exceedance routes, both on and off site;

4. A timetable for implementation; and

5. A management and maintenance plan for the lifetime of the development which shall include the arrangements for adoption by an appropriate public body or statutory undertaker, management company or maintenance by a Residents’ Management Company and / or any other arrangements to secure the operation of the sustainable drainage scheme throughout its lifetime.

Reason: This is in accordance with paragraph 17 and sections 10 and 11 of the National Planning Policy Framework, Paragraph 103 of the


SECTION 2

34

National Planning Policy Framework and the Technical Guidance to the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2015) and policy CS/3 of the North Somerset Core Strategy. It is necessary to secure a working drainage system to the approved details shall thereafter be implemented, retained, managed and maintained in accordance with the approved details throughout the lifetime of the development and in accordance with DM1 and DM32 of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 Publication Version 2015

24. No development will take place within 5 metres of the top of the bank of

the drainage ditches to allow access for maintenance and a biodiversity

corridor

Reason: To ensure clear access for maintenance over the lifetime of the

development in accordance with SPD on Biodiversity and Trees.

25. Finished floor levels should be set at a minimum of 8.85mAOD.

Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants

26. No residential development, new buildings or structures, including gates, fences or other means of enclosure or surface water attenuation features should be sited within Flood Zone 3 or within the Millennium Green/Gooseum Rhyne flood storage area without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority. No ground including paths shall be raised where this would affect existing flood flow paths without the approval of the Local Planning Authority Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding to the proposed development and future occupants and to prevent flooding elsewhere by ensuring that the storage of flood water is unaffected by the development and to ensure existing flood flow paths are maintained and in accordance with DM1 and DM32 of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 Publication Version 2015

27. The floor level of proposed foul water pumping station at the edge of the flood storage area/Flood Zone 3 shall be located above the 8.55m Above Ordnance Datum flood level including an allowance for climate change. There should be no ground raising to allow construction of this building unless it is outside of the 8.85m AOD contour. Reason: To prevent flooding elsewhere by ensuring that the storage of flood water is unaffected by the development and to ensure existing flood flow paths are maintained and in accordance with DM1 and DM32 of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 Publication Version 2015


SECTION 2

35

28. No construction of the proposed new bund to protect existing

properties from the Millennium Green/Gooseum Rhyne flood storage area, and no construction of the proposed re-profiled land to provide an additional flood storage bund to protect existing properties, shall be commenced until detailed designs have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Details of how the flood storage land will be maintained and managed after completion shall also be provided. Reason: To prevent flooding elsewhere by ensuring that the storage of flood water is unaffected by the development and in accordance with DM1 and DM32 of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 Publication Version 2015

29. No construction of the proposed ditch improvements shall be commenced until detailed design including future maintenance and management has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To prevent flooding elsewhere by ensuring that the storage of flood water is unaffected by the development and in accordance with DM1 and DM32 of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 Publication Version 2015

30. Not more than 54 dwellings shall be erected on the site and built

development shall be restricted to the area shown on the illustrative master plan, drawing number (to be inserted) Reason: It is considered that this is the maximum desirable number that can be accommodated on the site in order to maintain the quality of the scheme and it is essential that to minimize the impact on the landscape and to avoid flood risk areas that development is restricted to this area and in accordance with DM32 of the Sites and Policies Plan Part 1 Publication Version 2015

Summary of advice notes to be included on the decision notice There must be no interruption to the surface water drainage system of the surrounding land as a result of the operations on the site. Provisions must be made to ensure that all existing drainage systems continue to operate effectively and that riparian owners upstream and downstream of the site are not adversely affected. Under the terms of the Water Resources Act 1991 and the Land Drainage Byelaws, the prior written consent of the Agency is required for any proposed works or structures in, under, over or within 8 metres of the top of the bank of the Congresbury Yeo, designated a 'main river' or within the Millennium


SECTION 2

36

Green/Gooseum Rhyne flood storage area . To discuss the scope of our controls and to obtain an application form please contact [email protected]. Under the Water Resources Act 1991 and The Land Drainage Act 1991 both the Agency and Local Authority have permissive powers to maintain watercourses. Their jurisdiction depends on the watercourse designation as 'Main River' or 'Ordinary Watercourse'. However, responsibility for general maintenance of the watercourses and their banks rest with riparian owners (i.e. the owner of the bed and / or bank of river). Part of the site is within the Internal Drainage Board's area. The North Somerset Levels Internal Drainage Board (01934 833388) should be consulted as the site may be prone to problems of high water table and possible flooding, or exacerbate the Board's flooding problems elsewhere due to additional runoff. We recommend the applicant contacts the Environment Agency on 0345 988 1188 to sign up for our free Floodline Warnings Direct service. Future occupants of the properties are also advised to sign up to this service.The applicant is advised that Land Drainage Consent will need to be concluded for any works proposed within 9.0 metres of the top of bank of any watercourse or connection to a watercourse under the Board’s control. Those details will need to be agreed and consented by the North Somerset Levels Internal Drainage Board. Any Maintenance strip should be unhindered by any buildings, structures, planting, and fencing or surfacing. The applicant will have to ensure that the watercourses into which they intend to connect are fully maintained over and above an agricultural standard and able to convey flows freely and to be free of vegetation and fit for purpose, Land Drainage Consent will be required for any connections also. The applicant is advised to discuss the design of the water storage areas at an early stage. This is necessary to ensure that mitigation measures are incorporated to to minimize the risk of conflict between birds and aircraft.

The applicant is advised that archaeological advice on the archaeological mitigation strategy to investigate, preserve in situ and/or record finds of interest should be sought at earliest possible stage.

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]


SECTION 2

37

Appendix 1-representations of Congresbury Parish Council dated 13th April

2015 on planning application ref: 15/P/0519/O

Objection to the outline planning application 15/P/0519/O – Residential development of 54 single and two storey dwellings (including 16 affordable homes) with vehicular access off Wrington Lane/Cobthorn Way together with open space, landscaping, drainage features and pumping station. Congresbury Parish Council recommends refusal of planning application 15/P/0519/O. Applicant: Sunley Estates Limited Unit 1 Town Mill Bagshot Road Chobham Surrey GU24 8BZ Agent acting for applicant: Southern Planning Practice Ltd c/o Mr I Ellis Youngs Yard Churchfields Tyford Winchester SO21 1NN Position agreed at Congresbury Full Parish Council on 13th April 2015. 1.0 Congresbury Parish Council statement Congresbury Parish Council objects to the full planning application 15/P/0519/O. The application proposes to erect a residential development of 54 single and two storey dwellings (including 16 affordable homes) with vehicular access off Wrington Lane/Cobthorn Way together with open space, landscaping, drainage features and pumping station. Congresbury Parish Council recommends and expects North Somerset Council to refuse planning permission as this application would not adhere to North Somerset Council or Congresbury Parish Council policy and does not adhere to national policy. We expect North Somerset Council to demonstrate that it would not allow any development outside Congresbury settlement boundary until the Parish Council, representing the village decides it is the right time and the right place for development. Congresbury Parish Council objects to this development according to the following issues (more detail is provided in section 2): This development does not adhere to the following:

Principles of sustainability development as outlined in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)i . The applicant does not adhere to the principles of a sustainable development as outlined in paragraph 7 of the NPPFii.

North Somerset Core Strategy – This development is against the policies and principles set out in North Somerset Core Strategy. The development does not have the support of the local population, will not provide any long term job opportunities and will not protect the character of the community. The development will not help to achieve the Councils Vision and six aims based on the views of local people and government priorities set out within the Core Strategy.

Congresbury Parish Council planning policy - The development is outside the settlement boundary so contravenes policies set out in section 5 of Congresbury Parish Council iii planning policy. Section 5 states ‘The overall aim is to protect the countryside for the sake of its intrinsic character and beauty, the diversity of its landscape, heritage and wildlife, so it may be enjoyed by all’. Paragraph 5.2 states that in order to protect the character of the village, residential development should not be permitted outside the settlement boundary.


SECTION 2

38

The development also would have the following issues:

The development goes against local opinion. The agent has not provided any evidence of a majority of Congresbury residents supporting this development outside the village boundary.

The development could increase the risk of accidents on the A370 and via access road of Wrington Lane. The access to the site is limited and there could be an increase risk to new and existing residents with a higher volume of traffic using Wrington Lane.

Existing issues with sewer flooding and surface water flooding in the surrounding area. In 2012 there was extensive flooding of Wrington Lane, Verlands and Weetwood roads with water draining into the proposed development. The applicant has proposed a drainage plan, which lacks evidence to demonstrate that is sustainable in the long term as no details are provided about the maintenance of the system of swales and underground storage crates.

Local need for housing. The agent has not provided any evidence to support this application about the local need for housing within the village. The application is based on the uncertainty caused by the challenge to North Somerset Council Core Strategy and the remittance of key planning policies. 2.0 Congresbury Parish Council objections in detail The follow sections provide further details and reasons for the summary provided in section 1. 2.1 Sustainable development The agent has justified the application on the grounds that the housing estate will be a ‘sustainable development’ so should be supported as outlined in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The agent considers that North Somerset Council’s Five Year Land Supply Position Statement October 2014 is fundamentally flawed and a severe overstatement of the Council’s demonstrable supply. Therefore the application should be made in presumption in favour on its credentials of sustainable development. This is supported in NPPF in paragraph 14 which states ‘At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development’. However Congresbury Parish Council does not believe that the agent has demonstrated the housing development fits the sustainable development criteria outlined in paragraph 7 therefore planning can be refused on this basis. The agent has provided a case in the planning statement but provides no evidence. We believe that in the absence of any substantive evidence, the agent has failed to demonstrate that the housing estate will be sustainable and can be refused due to it being outside the settlement boundary, and the adverse impacts it will cause. We would expect new homes to be in places where people will want to live, close to jobs and cause the least harm to the environment.


SECTION 2

39

2.1.1 Economic role The agent has stated in paragraph 9.25 of the Planning statement that ‘the village does not have a plethora of business estates but two businesses (Cadbury House Hotel and Cadbury Garden Centre) each employs over 100 people with other service employment to be found in and around the village.’ There are very few local jobs in Congresbury to support this proposed housing, therefore this cannot be justified as a sustainable development. Even though we have two large service industry employers (Cadbury Hotel and Cadbury Garden Centre) many of their employees come from other parts of North Somerset. With no proposed building of business units on the site, there are no new long term job opportunities for local people or any sustained economic benefit to the village. The scheme will inevitably contribute to further out-commuting. Therefore we don’t understand how this development would achieve ‘contributing to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy’ as outlined in paragraph 7 of NPPF. 2.1.2 Social role Paragraph 7 of the NPPF states ‘supporting strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations; and by creating a high quality built environment, with accessible local services that reflect the community’s needs and support its health, social and cultural well-being’. The agent offers no evidence of local need for housing in the village or has offered any supporting evidence of how the housing estate outside the village boundary would support a healthy Congresbury Parish Council Page 4 of 15 Objection to Sunley Homes Limited development 20 April 2015 Application - 15/P/0519/O community. The developers planning statement concentrates their evidence on the fact that the scheme provides a mixture of housing types and tenures of a high quality design and on the case that in their view North Somerset Council has a deficit in its five year housing supply. There is no local evidence specific to Congresbury provided which the Parish Council would expect as supporting evidence for such a scheme. The agent states in paragraph 10.2 of their Planning Statement that ‘Congresbury is acknowledged to be a sustainable settlement and one where additional housing development can be provided bringing a significant boost to local affordable housing and contributing to the vitality of the village’. An overall assessment of sustainability must take into account that Congresbury has a very limited range of shops and services. Larger food stores are found at Yatton, Clevedon, Weston-super-Mare and Nailsea, the closest services such as the dentist, veterinary service and bank are all located in Yatton. All of these services are likely to be accessed solely by car due to lack of public transport, therefore Congresbury cannot be defined as a sustainable settlement. CS32 states that ‘Proposals for small scale development appropriate to the size and character of the village which respects the character of the village and supports or enhances the village’s role as a local hub for community facilities and services, employment and affordable housing, including public transport will be supported’. There is no evidence provided on how the development fits these criteria and that there are sufficient local services and infrastructures in place including public transport and safe footpaths and cycling routes.


SECTION 2

40

2.1.3 Environmental role The agent has stated that as the site is not within a sensitive area and the development for housing is located entirely within Flood Zone 1 that the proposed development can be comprehensively mitigated to ensure that it can proceed without significant and demonstrable adverse impacts. The agent offers little evidence of how the development would ‘contribute to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; and, as part of this, helping to improve biodiversity, use natural resources prudently, minimise waste and pollution, and mitigate and adapt to climate change including moving to a low carbon economy.’ The Planning Statement outlines how the open space is generous and amounts to three quarters of the application site, although this is seen as a positive aspect the Parish Council is concerned that no evidence has been provided on how this open space will be managed and financed in perpetuity for both new and existing residents. The applicant talks about it needing to be maintained to a high standard with regular grass cutting and maintenance of the pond area by a Management Company but it is not clear who is expected to pay for this annual maintenance. If the residents are paying for it will they welcome members of the public, dog walkers etc. using the space? Transport issues with regard to sustainability are outlined in section 2.21. 2.2 Congresbury Parish Council policies and settlement boundary Congresbury Parish Council has policies in place to protect residents and the character of the village. The Parish Council has a number of important policies and documents showing local needs and does not support this development which is outside the settlement boundary. Congresbury Planning Principles and Statements section 5 ‘The overall aim is to protect the countryside for the sake of its intrinsic character and beauty, the diversity of its landscape, heritage and wildlife, so it may be enjoyed by all’. Paragraph 5.2 states that in order to protect the character of the village, residential development should not be permitted outside the settlement boundary. Appendix 2 is a copy of Congresbury Parish Council key planning policy principles and statements. The agent has not provided a justified need for the development to be outside of this settlement boundary. Instead of working with the community as intended by Government (both local and national policies), the applicant has decided that the village needs these houses in this location, seeking to discredit North Somerset Council’s land supply. This demonstrates a lack of collectiveness on behalf of the agent and applicant. By disregarding the views of the local community they do not support the local community. The agent has not outlined why it has chosen this location in preference to other more sustainable locations within North Somerset that have better transport infrastructure and employment opportunities. The area of land chosen was identified in the Strategic Housing Land Assessment 2013 but Congresbury Parish Council did not support any of the proposed locations when originally they were consulted on in 2012. Although the site was identified, the


SECTION 2

41

detailed dwelling yield has been shown as 30; this is to reflect the need for sites adjacent to service village settlement boundaries to be of suitable scale. The SHLA , Appendix Sites schedule has also indicated that the identified constraints of the site is that the ‘Site is bounded on the southern edge by flood zone 3b functional flood plain, but the site itself falls outside this’ and ‘potential visual impact’ of the site. The SHLA clearly states that there is a constraint due to visual impact and the development should be capped at 30 rather than consider a development size of 54 dwellings. Congresbury Parish Council believes there has been sufficient development in recent years. The Parish Council are currently starting work on identifying when and where possible future developments might happen. We would expect the applicant to withdraw its application and work with the Parish Council and allow the community to decide on where development should take place. The applicant has stated that it is a vital material consideration that the proposed development would assist in meeting Congresbury Parish Council’s key planning policy principles. This appears as a statement in paragraph 9.37 of the applicant’s planning statement. Congresbury Parish Council would argue that no evidence has been provided on how the development assists in meeting these key principles especially as the development provides no local job opportunities so therefore is in conflict with principle d) supporting growth of local employment; the development is outside of the settlement boundary so therefore does not ‘preserving and enhancing the character of the village (planning policy principle e); sufficient evidence has not been provided on how the development will affect the river Yeo floodplain and how the open land will be managed and financed in perpetuity so does not comply with principle f)‘developments should be well designed and not impose burdens on the residents or create problems for the future’. The development would have negative impacts on the: 2.2.1 Traffic and transport Policy T10 of the Local Plan states that development will only be permitted if it would not prejudice safety or emergency vehicle access. The applicants Transport Statement provides detailed data on the highways impact at two junctions which are Wrington lane with Kent Road and Kent Road with Bristol Road. The summary of these results stated in paragraph 4.10 that the junctions perform very well and that there would be no predicted queues or delays in either peak hours. The Parish Council is concerned that the applicant has not considered it necessary to model other junctions including the Smallway junction and the Congresbury cross junction. The Notice of Decision for Application No: 14/P/1901/O, Land off Brinsea Road, Congresbury, BS49 5EX states ‘the existing road network in Congresbury has insufficient capacity to accommodate the increase in traffic likely to be generated by the proposed development, leading to unacceptable queues and delay on a route performing a Congresbury Parish Council Page 6 of 15 Objection to Sunley Homes Limited development 20 April 2015 Application - 15/P/0519/O strategic function’. Congresbury Parish Council would have expected that the impact on the A370/Smallway twin junction to have been considered in the submitted Transport Statement especially as the development would increase the use at peak times. Additionally any extra traffic will increase the number of vehicles turning right


SECTION 2

42

into the bottom of Kent Road and into Smallway. The A370 lane on the bridge towards Bristol is a single lane which means that any drivers wanting to turn right into Kent Road block the road which quickly leads to a build-up of traffic back to the junction traffic lights. Congresbury Parish Council believes that the site is not sustainable as most of the residents would be highly dependent on their cars as the proposed development is not well served by transport links and safe pedestrian and cycling routes. There is a regular Weston to Bristol bus service and the closest bus stop from the site is approximately 500 m along the Bristol Road. The X5 and A2 services no longer run through Congresbury. The applicants travel plan framework has outlined that Yatton railway station is a short bus ride away or can be easily cycled to (14 minutes). This would be acceptable if the nature of the route was conducive to safe cycling; the route to the station has heavy traffic for most of the day and goes through the centre of Yatton high street, often blocked with parked cars. The proposed changes to Wrington lane with the new footpath link would be an improvement as far as pedestrian safety is concerned, however to ensure that this is effective the proposed footpath must be continuous, which at present this is not shown. The applicant has indicated that the existing link from Weetwood Road would also be improved to provide enhanced access to the Bristol Road. Pedestrians using this footpath will be exiting the path by most likely stationary vehicles waiting for traffic coming from Kent Road and also have restricted vision of vehicles approaching from their left due to a curve in the road. No form of pedestrian crossing has been indicated or any improvement to the width of the footpath to aid disabled and users with pushchairs and buggies. These concerns lead the Parish Council to refuse the current outline application on the grounds that the proposed mitigation scheme for Wrington Lane is not satisfactory and would not encourage cycling and walking to access services and facilities. The residents would be dependent on using their cars, increasing the current heavy use of the village road network. 2.2.2 Infrastructure In 2012 there was extensive flooding of Wrington Lane, Verlands and Weetwood roads from surface water and sewage. Water was seen draining from this area into the field which will house the proposed development. The Environment Agency map showing the risk of surface water flooding clearly shows this area at medium and high risk of flooding leading onto the proposed site and the drainage ditch runs to the west of the development site. However this seems to have been dismissed in Flood Assessment Appendix L. Sewer flooding has been reported showing evidence of a lack capacity in the system however the flood assessment and drainage strategy plan by the applicant both dismiss previously reported issues and state it is a Wessex Water issue. The applicant has proposed a drainage plan, which lacks evidence to demonstrate that is sustainable in the long term as no details are provided about the maintenance of the system of swales and underground storage crates.


SECTION 2

43

Particular issues with the proposed drainage plan would be: a. In Section 5.6 it states water runoff from roof areas will be collected in ‘water butts’. Given a typical water butt would be just 200 litres and one storm could easily fill this, we expect the applicant to revise its terminology and ensure complete rainwater harvesting systems are installed that will be of a more suitable size. b. In section 5.8 the applicant describes how car parking areas will be used to store water during floods. This would suggest that owners of vehicles will need to be warned about this. c. According to the diagram in appendix H, only half the site will drain to the open space and system of swales on the eastern boundary. The rest of the site will drain into swales in the middle of the development and the rest to the ditch on the western edge via underground storage crates. However there are no details of the ‘Whole Life Design & Maintenance’ and the system could easily become a long term issue making this development unsustainable. There is a lack of evidence to suggest this system would be sustainable in the long term and would cope with an extreme event. d. Issue of the site of the pumping station for sewage that could cause a pollution risk. This is very close to the drainage ditch that is at high risk of flooding. There is a real issue of pollution should the site fail and discharge into the ditch that runs to the Congresbury Yeo. e. The applicant has not demonstrated that the development will not increase water entering the Congresbury Yeo and this would increase the flood risk to other properties within Congresbury. Congresbury Parish Council would also request that further information is provided to ensure that there is sufficient capacity to:

From Bristol Water to supply these additional homes and would not cause reduce water pressure to other residents in Congresbury.

The necessary consents from the Environment Agency and North Somerset Internal Drainage Board for water to be discharged into water courses leading to the Congresbury Yeo.

Cope with the additional sewage the site will produce. There have been previous issues with regard to the foul sewers with frequent blockages. There are concerns from residents that any additional capacity would cause deterioration to the rest of the village. No details have been provided apart from a standard maps showing size of pipes. The applicant should provide detailed modelling of likely outflows and details of the age and condition of the sewers in the local area.

The proposed new development site is currently under evaluation for the ‘Connecting Devon and Somerset’ for superfast broadband which aims to bring broadband speeds of at least 2Mbps to 90% of premises within the area. Further development in an area not guaranteed to benefit from a faster service may add issues to the network and deteriorate quality to existing residents especially at peak usage times. 3.0 Community support and financial arrangements through section 106 Congresbury Parish Council objects to this planning application but has included as Appendix 1 to this application the template form to request a section 106 planning


SECTION 2

44

obligation. We would expect a wide range of long term projects and guarantees to ensure any future impacts of the development would be supported by the applicant. 4.0 Final statement Congresbury Parish Council objects to the full planning application 15/P/0519/O. The application proposes to erect a residential development of 54 single and two storey dwellings (including 16 Congresbury Parish Council Page 8 of 15 Objection to Sunley Homes Limited development 20 April 2015 Application - 15/P/0519/O affordable homes) with vehicular access off Wrington Lane/Cobthorn Way together with open space, landscaping, drainage features and pumping station. We recommend and expect North Somerset Council to refuse this application due to contravening national and local planning policies, that the application does not support sustainable development, has an adverse impact on the local community and supporting infrastructure. We completely disagree with the summary in paragraph 10.4 of document titled ‘Cobthorn Way Congresbury Planning Statement’ prepared by the agent that states ‘The development can be accommodated at the edge of an identified settlement without any significant ill effects. Indeed the proposal makes excellent use of an undeveloped site closely connected to existing built form and providing a logical rounding off of the settlement. The site is suitable, sustainable and deliverable’. No evidence has been submitted to support this statement and Congresbury Parish Council does not agree especially that that the development would have no significant ill effects and that it is suitable and sustainable. The application conclusions are based on how Sunley Homes Limited considers that North Somerset Council’s Five Year Land Supply Position Statement October 2014 is fundamentally flawed and a severe overstatement of the Council’s demonstrable supply. Congresbury Parish Council believes that any planning decisions must be based on the need for such development and the positive aspects that are brought to the community. Development must be community and plan led rather than speculative developer led. Appendix 1 – s106 request form FORM TO REQUEST A SECTION 106 PLANNING OBLIGATION (Community requests format) Section 1: Application details to be completed by Development Management officers Application no: 15/P/0519/O Case officer & contact number: David Tate Description of development: Residential development of 54 single and two storey dwellings (including 16 affordable homes) with vehicular access off Wrington Lane/Cobthorn Way together with open space, landscaping, drainage features and pumping station. Location: Land off Wrington Lane/Cobthorn Way Parish: Congresbury Application status: Outline Planning Application Other relevant information: Section 2: Request for S106 obligations to be completed by whoever is making the request– please note that all sections must be completed and that you should be as specific as possible in your answers.


SECTION 2

45

1. Summary of request(s): A – Contribute towards the provision of an improved safe access route from the village to the Strawberry Line for both pedestrians and cyclists. B - To make contributions for preschool provision within the village. C- To make contributions for youth provision in off-site community facilities. D- To contribute towards the improvement of sports pitches and courts. E – To contribute to improvements to the Millennium Green play area. F – To contribute to the improvement of current and emerging community halls. 2. Reason for Section 106 request: (a) Please explain the specific problem that this development will cause that you are trying to solve. Give details of any evidence that would support your case, for example, transport or education statistics: A - The provision of an improved safe access route from the village to the Strawberry Line for both pedestrians and cyclists is key to encourage sustainable modes of transport and reduce the reliance on the use of cars. B- Congresbury has a community led preschool which provided places for children aged 2-4. The preschool has limited capacity and any new development would generate an estimate of 3-6 children who would request a place. C- There would be an increase in young people generated by a development of this nature, the provision of funding for youth provision within existing buildings in the community would mitigate any negative impacts. D- There would be an increase in numbers of residents and visitors using sports pitches and courts. E – There would be an increase in number of residents using the existing play areas at the Millennium Green. F – There would be an increase in numbers of residents using current community buildings; a contribution towards current and emerging buildings would reflect the community needs for providing accessible social facilities. (b) Please explain how your request will address the problem you have identified. What would the consequences (short-/medium-/long-term) be if the request is not granted? A – The provision of an improved safe access route from the village to the Strawberry Line for both pedestrians and cyclists is key to encourage sustainable modes of transport and reduce the reliance on the use of cars. The consequences of not granting this request may be to reduce the use of the Strawberry Line and increase reliance on cars for shorter journeys that could have been made by in a more sustainable way. B - The consequences are that local residents would need to access preschool care out of the village; this would increase the use of vehicles at peak times, increasing traffic congestion. Lack of investment into the Community Preschool could jeopardise its future. C - The request for youth provision is to mitigate the negative consequences that can result from disaffected young people.


SECTION 2

46

D – Improvement to sports pitches and courts ensures that facilities are adequate for additional use, consequences of not addressing this issue is that residents would travel outside of the village to access other sports clubs and facilities. E – A contribution to improve the Millennium Green play areas would ensure equipment can be updated to ensure current standards are met and areas have a variety of equipment to encourage learning and social development. Consequences of a grant towards play areas would be that damaged equipment may not be replaced. F -The improvement of existing and emerging village halls would ensure that in the medium and longer term Congresbury has community halls that are fit for purpose. The consequences of not addressing this need is that current facilities would not be able to afford to improve standards reducing their use having the consequence that the village would be lacking in buildings for social and community services. (c) Are there any other ways in which this problem might be solved? Please give details and explain why other options have been ruled out: A- The provision of cycle lanes on key roads B- No C- No D- No E- No F- No 3. Details of request: (a) What are you requesting? Please be as specific as possible. e.g. (i) Financial contribution(s): how much do you need and how has that been calculated? (ii) Land contribution(s): how much is needed and where does it need to be (e.g. near a main road / in a quiet location / highly visible etc)? (iii) Works-in-kind (e.g. something that the developer would build): please give detailed requirements of what is needed and where. (iv) Other: please provide as much detail as possible. Congresbury Parish Council would be happy to discuss the financial contributions and liaise with the relevant officer(s) from North Somerset Council for all requests. (c) When is the request needed (this would normally be a trigger related to the build-out of the development, e.g. a certain number of houses occupied)? Please give reasons for the proposed timing: Requests A and C should be considered at the start of the occupation phase of the development. Requests B, D and E can be following the completion of the development. 5. Support for the proposal: (a) Has this request been discussed with the developer? If so, please provide a summary of the discussions and the developer’s response: Congresbury Parish Council has had no discussions with the developer over s106 requests.


SECTION 2

47

(b) Does the request have support from any of the following: North Somerset Council? Your local Parish Council? Any other local organisation? If so, please give details of discussions to date and the level of support offered (for example, any formal votes of support)? A- Parish Council B- Parish Council and the Chairman of Congresbury Community Preschool C- Parish Council D/E & F- Parish Council and Helen Mitchell, Operation and Support Officer Development & Environment 6. Long-term sustainability: Please give details of how the project or service requested would be sustained in the long-term? e.g. who will manage it, how will it be funded? A- Parish Council B- Community Preschool C - Congresbury Youth Partnership and Congresbury Parish Council D - For sports pitches and courts it would be the responsibility of the football, cricket and tennis clubs. E – Millennium Green Trust and Congresbury Parish Council F- Existing arrangements for the management and maintenance of community hall facilities. 7. Any other information: Please use this space to add any further information you think relevant: Appendix 2 – Copy of Congresbury Planning policy Date of adoption by Parish Council 12th January 2015 for policy principles and statements Next review date January 2016 Key Planning Policy principles The Planning Committee will ensure all decisions are based on sustainable development principles including: a) Social inclusion, recognising the needs of everyone. b) Effective protection and enhancement of the environment. c) Where appropriate through the provision of good quality affordable housing so that the vitality of the village can be perpetuated. d) Support growth of local employment. e) Preserving and enhancing the character of the village. f) Development should be well designed and not impose burdens on the residents or create problems for the future g) Ensuring planning decisions conform to the Local Plan, unless there are overriding material considerations. h) Ensure that any development or change in use does not have a detrimental impact on infrastructure on the village or its surroundings. Any “planning gains” i.e. Section 106 of the Town and Country


SECTION 2

48

Planning Act 1990 monies and/or Community Infrastructure Levy (when adopted) to be used for the benefit of the village. Planning Policy statements 1. Economic Development Benefit to area – look favourably on any proposed development within its policy parameters which would offer marked public benefit e.g. improved community facilities, and/or improvements in traffic and road safety or increased local employment. 2. Community Services & Facilities Encourage mixed and multi-purpose uses that maintain community vitality and quality of life and developments that reduce the need to travel. 3. Housing - a place to live All applications must be considered against the need for the village to be a community to live in. 3.1 Affordable housing (housing association homes for rent or shared ownership) – consider sympathetically the merits of any suitable scheme put forward for affordable housing if there is proof of a local housing need even if outside the settlement boundary. 3.2 When dealing with extensions for dependent relatives and holiday annexes, care should be taken not to permit a sizeable unit that could become a semi-detached separate dwelling. 3.3 The word infill is to be interpreted as development on vacant unused land amid an existing group or settlement. Infill within an existing boundary should be supported as long as it is not to the detriment of the neighbour’s amenity and does not contribute to creating a dormitory settlement, with high levels of out-commuting. 3.4 Flats, conversions and houses of multiple occupation: Conversion of dwelling will be permitted if it does not have an adverse effect on the character and amenities of the property or adjoining properties. The standard of the accommodation must not create an over intensive use of the site. The converted property must not have an effect on the character of the wider area. 3.5 The provision of off street parking is encouraged. Developments that cause on-street parking and potentially harm the safety of the highway for road users and pedestrians will be strongly discouraged. 3.6 New developments will be looked at favourably if they are sustainable homes, eco-friendly, designed as “homes for life”, use Sustainable Drainage Systems (Suds) or are Secured by Design (SBD) which is a police initiative to guide and encourage those engaged within the specification, design and build of new homes to adopt crime prevention measures. All standards must be as per North Somerset current requirements; information is available on the North Somerset Council website at; http://www.nsomerset.gov.uk/Environment/Planning_and_development_management/Pages/PlanningHome-page.aspx 4. Conservation Area & Design / Character of Congresbury Ensure development respects and where possible enhances local character. Designs should be of good quality using appropriate materials. It is essential that a cohesive impression of the distinctive character of the area be respected and enhanced.

http://www.nsomerset.gov.uk/Environment/Planning_and_development_management/Pages/PlanningHome-page.aspx

http://www.nsomerset.gov.uk/Environment/Planning_and_development_management/Pages/PlanningHome-page.aspx


SECTION 2

49

4.1 The character, appearance and setting of the Conservation area should be preserved and enhanced. Advice should be sought from Congresbury Conservation Group and where appropriate other agencies e.g. English Heritage, the North Somerset Council Conservation Officer, County Archaeologist, Tree Preservation Officer etc. Appendix 2 outlines the Congresbury Conservation area. 4.2 Cables should be placed underground wherever possible, especially within the conservation area. Telecommunications companies should be required to share masts wherever possible. 4.3 Strategic open spaces and recreation spaces within the village should be retained. 4.4 All traditional stone boundary walls should be retained and repaired where necessary and encouragement given to the planting of native hedging where appropriate. Where new development adjoins existing stone walls, it should incorporate matching stone boundary walls. 4.5 Existing/original features such as windows, doors, and railings which contribute to the character of the building/area should be retained. Replacement windows and doors should match the original in terms of size, design, colour and material. 4.6 The scale, design and materials of any redevelopment or new development (including extensions) must be appropriate to the area in which it is located. 4.7 Scheduled Ancient Monuments and Listed Buildings must be protected and preserved; the County Archaeologist is to be kept informed of any proposed plan involving these. Appendix 1 provides details of buildings listed under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 as amended in the village of Congresbury for its special architectural or historic interest. 5. Settlement Boundary & Countryside around Congresbury The overall aim is to protect the countryside for the sake of its intrinsic character and beauty, the diversity of its landscape, heritage and wildlife, so it may be enjoyed by all. 5.1 Reuse of an existing building can be accepted provided it meets the following

criteria: It is suitable for conversion And/or there is need to preserve a building of

historical or architectural importance It makes no significant impact on the

countryside, landscapes or wildlife Has no detrimental impact on the surrounding infrastructure. 5.2 In order to protect the character of the village residential development should not be permitted outside the settlement boundary as defined in the North Somerset Local Plan, with the exception of affordable housing. This will be reviewed once the North Somerset Core Strategy is in place. 5.3All sensitive views of the village should be protected. 6. Character of Landscape 6.1 Permit no development on areas that have been statutorily designated for their landscape, wildlife or historic qualities (e.g. Cadbury Hill and moors) and areas which give the village its unique character such as the river Yeo, moors and woodland. 7. Agricultural Land & Farm Diversification 7.1 Encourage development that delivers diverse and sustainable farming enterprises.


SECTION 2

50

8. Open Spaces 8.1 Encourage other country side based enterprises and activities which contribute to rural activity (e.g. The Strawberry Line). 8.2 Support the preservation of footpaths, bridges, stiles, kissing gates and access points, to enable people to enjoy and fully utilize the countryside (e.g. walking, running, and cycling). 9. Equine Related Activities 9.1 To recognise horse riding & other equestrian activity are popular forms of recreation in Congresbury and can provide a useful form of farm diversification. 9.2 Development should be closely monitored to ensure against the proliferation of riding stables in the countryside which may adversely affect an area by nature of their design or location. Account should be taken of their locality to designated bridleways and byways open to all traffic (BOATs). Support will be given to equine enterprises that maintain environmental quality. 10. Woodland 10.1 Sustainable management of existing woodland is to be encouraged. 11. Transport Development will only be supported if it would not prejudice highway safety or emergency vehicle access. 11.1 Development giving rise to a significant number of travel movements will only be supported if it is not likely to lead to an unacceptable degree of traffic congestion or to generate traffic that cannot be accommodated without seriously affecting the character of the village and its surrounding area. 11.2 Development which can show it can be readily integrated with the public transport system or other forms of sustainable travel will be encouraged, i.e. a travel plan. 11.3 Encourage developments which reduce the need to out-commute. References i National Planning Policy Framework, Department for Communities and Local Government, March 2012 ii National Planning Policy Framework, Department for Communities and Local Government, March 2012, page 2, paragraph 7 iii Congresbury Parish Council, Planning policy, February 2014, revised January 2015 for policy principles and statement Section 5, page 6