Agenda item

OS Fields 8456, 7946 and 9744, Normanton Lane, Bottesford

Cllr Chandler left the room for the duration of application 17/00641/OUT at 6.07pm

 

Applicant:      Richborough Estates LLP

Location:        OS Fields 8456, 7946 and 9744 Normanton Lane, Bottesford

Proposal:      Outline application, with all matters other than access to be reserved for future approval, for residential development with associated access, community uses, landscaping, open space, drainage infrastructure and surface car park.

 

(a)       The Regulatory Services Manager stated that: Update

1. LCC Highways

Standard conditions and S106:

Conds – sep farm access to the north

a.    Travel Packs; to inform new residents from first occupation what sustainable travel choices are in the surrounding area (can be supplied by LCC at £52.85 per pack).

b.    6 month bus passes, two per dwelling (2 application forms to be included in Travel Packs and funded by the developer); to encourage new residents to use bus services, to establish changes in travel behaviour from first occupation and promote usage of sustainable travel modes other than the car (can be supplied through LCC at (average) £360.00 per pass).

c.    Raised kerb provision at the nearest bus stop at a cost of £3,500 to support modern bus fleets with low floor capabilities.

d.    STARSfor (Sustainable Travel Accreditation and Recognition Scheme) monitoring fee of £6,000.

II.   e) A contribution toward the consultation process for implementing a 40mph speed limit, prior to the existing 30mph speed limit on Normanton Lane at a total of £7,500.  (gateway feature to village – 30mph to north of site access) needs 40 mph buffer.

2. Letter from Bottesford Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group

Presentation from applicants addressed where practicable previous comments and genuine attempt to make attractive proposition. If pp granted design (indicative layout) can be preserved by conditions:

response -Landscaping and biodiversity – conditions can only relate to the whole principle of development

Low ridge heights to north of site to reduce visual impact from the Beacon and from existing village response - 

Set development back from Normanton Lane with adequate screening to reduce visual impact on approach to Bottesford. response - landscaping – conds 5 & 6; ecology (sth and nth boundaries) conds.12 & 15.

 

3. Clarification from applicants on details in committee report

- S106    will not refer to closure of level crossing. It is a separate process to surrender crossing licences (material consideration – condition that it should be closed of within a specified period) - applicants will pay £12,000 to improve boards at this crossing – via S106

- new car park will not be managed by Network Rail – Management Company will look after this and all POS on the application site

- Network Rail expect to see, as part of benefits, £112,000 to improve existing railway car park – do so via S106

 

The application

This application seeks outline planning permission for 88 dwellings and associated infrastructure. In line with local planning policy, the site will deliver affordable housing. In addition to the usual facilities and infrastructure required by this scale of development it is proposed that a new surface level car park for the railway station would be provided in the south –east of the site ,accessible to the station by a footbridge.

 

The application site is 5.75 ha of agricultural land situated to the northern edge of the built-up area of Bottesford.  (C. 15 ha)

The western boundary of the site is defined by Normanton Lane, a bridleway runs along the eastern boundary and to the north is agricultural land. The Nottingham – Grantham railway line runs along the southern boundary, separating the site from the village.

 

The application is in outline with only access considered at this time. The access is proposed on the western boundary of the site, from Normanton Lane.

It is considered that the main issues arising from this proposal are:

·         Compliance or otherwise with the Development Plan and the NPPF

Sustainable settlement (by any measure) adj railway station, LP and NP little weight.

Nos in LP reduced due to possible impact – detailed LVA study is convincing .so support 88 dwellings.

·         Impact upon the character of the area ,open countryside and heritage assets

Some impact, other side of railway line, LVA supports, lower part of the site, LB (church is prominent and CA in Botts.  Gap to Normanton 500m to first dwelling, 700m to main village – separated by brow of hill.

·         Impact from rail noise

Noise report addresses the issue, subject to condition

·         Impact upon highway and rail safety

     Highways OK   (late receipt) and positive railway gains

·         Sustainable development  - as above

In conclusion it is considered that, on the balance of the issues, there are significant benefits accruing from the proposal when assessed as required under the guidance in the NPPF in terms of housing supply and affordable housing in particular.  The balancing issues – development of a green field site, landscape impact and impact upon setting of village and heritage assets – are considered to be of limited harm. 

 

Applying the ‘test’ required by the NPPF that permission should be granted unless the impacts would “significantly and demonstrably” outweigh the benefits; it is considered that permission can be granted.

 

(b) Angela Smedley, agent on behalf of the applicant, was invited to speak and stated that:

• The scheme has undertaken extensive consultation and has the support of network rail.
• Numerous meetings with officers and the neighbourhood plan group which have shaped the indicative layout plan.
• Incorporated a large landscape set back from Normanton Lane to create an attractive entrance to the village.
• There will be a mixture of house types of varying ridge heights to create a village feel.
• Will protect sight lines to the church spire.
• Affordable housing. Large open space with childrens play areas.
• A new car park in the site managed by a management company and supported by network rail, alleviating existing pressures on Station Road.
• Enhancement to existing Station Road car park.
• Pedestrian crossing improvements.
• By facilitating access through the site for the farmer to the east we can close vehicle movements over the level crossing enabling it to become pedestrian only at that point.
• No objections from statutory consultees.
• Considered to be deliverable in its entirety in a 5 year period.
• Social and economic benefits.
• No significant adverse effects on the environment.

 

A Cllr raised concerns regarding the amount of street furniture proposed for the entrance to the village and felt it should be more aesthetically pleasing.

 

Angela Smedley responded that having heard the consultation response this evening they would be willing to undertake different levels of street furniture to overcome this concern.

 

A Cllr asked who would be responsible for the car park.

 

Angela Smedley responded that it would form part of the S106 and a management company will be responsible for the car park as well as the open spaces.

 

A Cllr raised concerns regarding agricultural vehicles and equipment travelling through the village.

 

Angela Smedley responded that there would be no change to this so the agricultural traffic doesn’t have to go across the level crossing.

 

A Cllr asked if the arterial road would be wider than a normal estate road especially when there is not enough drive ways.

 

Angela Smedley responded that there is no highway or technical objection. Angela Smedley’s colleague stepped forward and provided the following further information - The road is proposed as 5 ½ metres wide through the middle of the site. It is a bendy road to prevent parking on the main route through the middle of the site. It is intentional along with the extra parking spaces to the houses. The road where the agricultural vehicles will come in and out is 6 ½ metres wide so there is an extra metre there.

 

A Cllr raised concerns regarding the amount of street furniture and if the application goes through they would like to see a condition to have a more aesthetically pleasing approach to village. Also if the proposed car park is chargeable commuters will park on the road.

 

A Cllr raised concerns regarding road safety as the road is straight through the site it looks like vehicles could get some speed up. They also asked if officers had taken in to consideration the recently built houses to ensure there were enough education places in junior and senior schools at Bottesford.

 

The Regulatory Services Manager referred to pages 10 and 11 of the committee report and noted that the education figure is up to date. There are no requirements at present but if other applications come up there may be a requirement in the future.

 

A Cllr asked for clarification regarding the separation distances.

 

The Regulatory Services Manager responded that the separation distance from the northern end of the site and the first dwellings as you go in to Normanton is about 500m. Across the fields from the northern end of the site to the main village of Normanton is about 700m. It’s separated by the rising

land so there is a reasonable level of separation.

 

A Cllr offered their congratulations to Bottesford Parish Council that if the application is approved, the estimated costs of £50,000 towards the skate park will be met in full.

 

Cllr Wyatt proposed to permit the application.

 

Cllr Posnett seconded the proposal. It’s a well thought out development. One concern regarding noise implications from the railway station being so close.  When a more detailed application comes through would like to see proper protection for people with regard to noise.

 

A Cllr noted that the noise implications was a good point and also asked if the proposer and seconder would add a condition regarding a suitable entrance enhancement.

 

Cllr Wyatt as the proposer agreed to delegate to officers to come up with the relevant conditions.

 

The Regulatory Services Manager noted that it doesn’t need to be a condition as officers will work together with the applicants and highways to ensure the entrance is aesthetically pleasing.

 

A Cllr commented that it needs to be clear who will be looking after the car park and if the road will be adopted.

 

The Regulatory Services Manager responded that the maintenance of the car park will be managed by a management company along with the open space covered by the section 106. The intention with the road is that it will be designed to the usual standard and will be adopted by highways..

 

A vote was taken and the Members voted unanimously to permit the application.

 

Determination: PERMIT, subject to;

(a) Ta s106 covering the items set out in the Committee report

(b) Conditions , as set out in the committee report

 

For the following reasons:

 

The Borough is not deficient in terms of housing land supply. The methodology used to demonstrate that there is a 5year supply has included sustainable sites, such as this, which have been scrutinised as part of the evidence supporting the new local plan.

 

Affordable housing provision remains of the Council’s key priorities. This application presents affordable housing that helps to meet identified local needs. Accordingly, the application represents a vehicle for the delivery of affordable housing of the appropriate quantity, in proportion with the development and of a type to support the housing need. Bottesford is considered to be one of the most sustainable locations in the Borough , with a good range of facilities and capacity to accommodate growth. It is considered that there are material considerations of significant weight in favour of the application, and its partial alignment with the Pre-submission Local plan adds additional support.

 

The site is considered to perform well in terms of access to facilities and transport links.

 

It is considered that balanced against the positive elements are the specific concerns raised in representations, particularly the development of the site from its green field state and the impact on the character of the rural village and approaches to it from the north and the relationship with Normanton and local heritage assets.

 

In conclusion it is considered that, on the balance of the issues, there are significant benefits accruing from the proposal when assessed as required under the guidance in the NPPF in terms of housing supply and affordable housing in particular. The balancing issues – development of a green field site, landscape impact and impact upon setting of village and heritage assets – are considered to be of limited harm.

 

Applying the ‘test’ required by the NPPF that permission should be granted unless the impacts would “significantly and demonstrably” outweigh the benefits; it is considered that permission should be granted.