Schedule of Applications PDF 14 MB
Transcription
Schedule of Applications PDF 14 MB
PLANNING COMMITTEE 13th March 2012 SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS REPORT OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (COMMUNITIES, PLANNING & PARTNERSHIPS) BOROUGH OF TAMWORTH PLANNING COMMITTEE SCHEDULE OF APPLICATIONS 13th March 2012 A Reports for Consideration 4 B Appeals Received 0 C Appeal Decisions 0 D Consultations 0 BACKGROUND PAPERS Staffordshire & Stoke on Trent Structure Plan 1996 - 2011 Tamworth Local Plan 2001 - 2011 All other documents referred to in individual reports SUMMARY OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS FOR DETERMINATION Part A Reports for consideration Application Number: 0558/2011 and 0568/2012 Development: Part change of use, alterations and extensions, reconstruction and demolition/replacement of identified existing buildings Location: 7 Lower Gungate, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 7AE Recommendations: 0558/2011 – Permit subject to conditions 0568/2011 – Consent subject to conditions Target Date: 28/02/2012 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Application Number: 0585/2011 Development: Proposed demolition of vacant retail unit A1 and erection of three adjoining A3 restaurant units Location: Allied Carpets, Ventura Park Road, Tamworth, B78 3HB Recommendation: Refuse Target Date: 03/02/2012 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Application Number: 0037/2012 Development: Alteration to existing access to allow maintenance vehicles to enter Tameside Nature Reserve Location: Tameside Nature Reserve, Peelers Way, Tamworth Recommendation: Permit subject to conditions Target Date: 15/03/2012 Application Number: 0558/2011 and 0568/2012 Development: Part change of use, alterations and extensions, reconstruction and demolition/replacement of identified existing buildings Location: 7 Lower Gungate, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79 7AE Target Date: 28/02/2012 1. Proposal 1.1 The application proposes the re-development of the courtyard to the rear of 3a-7 Lower Gungate. The proposals are for the part change of use to retail/café/office/residential, including the reconstruction, demolition, replacement, alteration, and extensions to this set of important but dilapidated buildings. The applications to be considered relate to an application for planning permission and its associated listed building consent. 1.2 The existing buildings on site are comprised of the following; A two storey building sited along the boundary with 3 Lower Gungate (Building A); A former cart shed to the rear of the site adjacent to its boundary with St Edithas Church (Building B); Part two-storey part single storey buildings to the northern boundary of the site, adjacent to the Deanery Wall (Buildings C and D); A two storey building linked to No 5 Lower Gungate (Building E); and A two storey building forming an extension to No 7 Lower Gungate (Building F). 1.3 The proposals for each building comprise; Building A; Renew the existing bowed roof and carry out localised rebuilding. Convert the building to provide a kiosk within the single storey part of the building adjacent to the site entrance, a retail unit at ground floor, and a one bedroom unit utilising the first floor Building B; The building would need reconstructing, with the provision of a pitched roof over the building to create a one and a half storey building to facilitate the provision of a café/retail facility. Buildings C/D; These buildings are severely damaged and require almost complete demolition. The proposal provides for the reconstruction of the building and its conversion/use as an office/studio/retail unit. Building E; Proposed to be retained and converted to provide a one bedroom residential unit. Building F; The application proposes its reconstruction of an existing extension to provide an entrance hall, stairs and a bathroom for the existing two bedroom residential unit above No 7 Lower Gungate. 1.4 The proposal also includes the removal of the existing canopy within the site, the provision of a residential amenity area to serve the flat above No 7 Lower Gungate, the resurfacing of the whole area, and the erection of a single storey extension to No 3a Lower Gungate (Truckles) to provide toilet facilities for the existing shop. 1.5 The following documents have been submitted in support of the application; • • • • • Design & Access Statement; Archaeological Desk Based Assessment; Report on Trial Hole Investigations; Structural Appraisal of the Buildings; Protected Species Report; Following consultation with the agent the following supplemental information has been submitted; 1.6 Photomontages; and Generic Fenestration Details. A separate application for Scheduled Monument Consent (SMC) was granted consent by English Heritage on the 27th February 2012. 2. Site and Surroundings 2.1 The site is located within the heart of the town centre, accessed from the pedestrianised part of Lower Gungate opposite the site of the approved Gungate redevelopment. The site is bound to the east by Lower Gungate, to the west by St Editha’s church yard and to the north and south by existing boundary walls. 2.2 The site consists of the buildings fronting Lower Gungate comprising No 7 and 5, both of which are grade II listed buildings dating from around 1840, with a courtyard of outbuildings to the rear which are considered to be curtilage listed as they were ancillary to Claridge’s the butchers (No 5 now occupied by Coates the butchers) at the time of listing. No 3a (Truckles) which also fronts Lower Gungate is locally listed and dates from the late 19th Century. The Deanery Wall also grade II listed, forms part of the northern boundary of the site, with the grade I listed St Editha’s Church beyond the site to the west. The site is also part of the Deanery Scheduled Ancient Monument and within the Town Centre Conservation Area. 3. Key Issues 3.1 The main issues for consideration are considered to be the principle of development and the impact of the proposal on the heritage assets of the site and their surroundings. In particular the grade 1 listed St Editha’s Church, the Deanery Scheduled Ancient Monument, the listed buildings themselves and the character and appearance of the town centre conservation area in general. 4. Conclusion 4.1 The proposed change of use of the buildings to provide a mix of retail, café and office uses, and residential accommodation, facilitated though their refurbishment and reconstruction is considered to enhance this part of the conservation area. The uses are considered to be compatible with the existing uses within the town centre and will aid in the maintenance of a vital and viable town centre, through the use of currently redundant and at risk buildings. Subject to conditions requiring the submission of further details of the proposed material specifications and restrictions on operating hours, the proposal would not detract from the amenity of town centre conservation area, the listed buildings to which the alterations are proposed or the setting of any of the nearby listed buildings. The development is therefore considered to comply with Policies ENV19, TCR1, TCR5, HSG5 and TCR12 of the Tamworth Local Plan, Policies D2, TC1, NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire and Stoke on Trent Structure Plan, the provisions of PPS4 and PPS5, and Sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. Recommendation 0558/2011; 0568/2011; Approve subject to conditions Approve subject to conditions 0558/2011 and 0568/2011 ER LOW A TE NG GU LANE OOL SCH CHUR CH LANE NING SPIN TLE LIT U CH H RC E LAN P The recin ct ST EDITHA'S CLOSE CHURCH STREET L HIL LE CO EL LEG COL IA OR CT VI MIDDLE ENTRY ANE E LEG Middle Entry COL E LA N BO LE B RI Market Place DG E ST RE ET rge Geo et Stre Lan mon Com e © Crown copyright and database rights 2011. Ordnance Survey 100018267 AD RO 5. Site History 5.1 0543/2004: Demolition of two storey rear range and making good. Consent with Conditions, 03/09/2004. 6. Consultation Responses 6.1 Tamworth Borough Council – Environmental Health 6.1.1 No specific objections to the proposed development. However, in the interests of the amenities of new residents conditions are recommended relating to noise and odour. 6.2 Tamworth Borough Council – Waste 6.2.1 No objections to the proposed scheme. It would be preferable if the domestic and commercial bins were stored separately, with the domestic bins needing to be presented on Lower Gungate. It should be noted that it is a legal requirement that commercial waste is securely contained is suitable and sufficient containers. 6.3 Staffordshire County Council – The Highway Authority 6.3.1 No objections 6.4 Staffordshire Police 6.4.1 No objections to the scheme. However, the importance of security being incorporated in to the proposal is highlighted. 6.5 Staffordshire County Council – Ecology 6.5.1 As the bat survey indicates that there is no evidence of bats within the building, the contents of the report and its recommendations are considered appropriate. 6.6 Severn Trent Water 6.6.1 No objections subject to the submission and approval of a drainage scheme. 6.7 Staffordshire County Council – Archaeology 6.7.1 As there is considerable archaeology potential in the area, the proposed works have the potential to impact upon significant and sensitive archaeological deposits. As such a condition requiring the securing and implementation of a programme of archaeological work including excavation, building recording, post excavation analysis, publication of a report and preparation of appropriate public interpretation media in accordance with a written scheme of investigation is recommended. 6.8 English Heritage 6.8.1 Have not commented in detail on the application as an application for Scheduled Ancient Monument Consent (SMC) had been submitted to them. One condition of the SMC will require the supervision of groundworks by a suitably qualified person and should be made a condition of the planning permission. 6.9 Conservation Officer 6.9.1 Has some concerns that the proposed increase in height of Building B (to the boundary with St Editha’s church) would make this building more dominant in views in and out of the churchyard. However, in the context of the other buildings surrounding the churchyard it is considered on balance the impact of the proposal would be difficult to uphold on appeal. The proposals are considered to create a harmonious group but much will be down to the detail and materials used. In principle the refurbishment and rebuilding of the group of 19th Century outbuildings is to be supported. 6.10 Conservation Area Advisory Committee 6.10.1 General support for the reuse of the buildings. Concerns were raised in respect of the servicing, archaeology, and fenestration detail. Would prefer the views to be opened up and the introduction of a physical link 7. Additional Representations 7.1 One letter of representation has been received in respect of the application. The concerns raised relate to the impact of the proposed development on the residential properties at 1-3 Lower Gungate to the south of the site. Opening times of the proposed uses was requested to normal opening hours of 08:30 – 17:30. 8. Planning Considerations 8.1 The main issues for consideration in the determination of this application are considered to be; • • • • • Principle of Development; Impact on Heritage Assets / Siting and Design Considerations Amenity Considerations; Protected Species; and Section 106 Contributions. 8.2 Principle of Development 8.2.1 The application site is located both within the town centre conservation area, and the primary shopping area. The application proposes the provision of café/retail/office facilities along with residential accommodation. An assessment of the proposed uses needs to be considered in context of the health, vitality, and viability of the Town Centre. Therefore it is considered that the starting point for assessing the acceptability of the current proposals is the contents of Local Plan Policies TCR1, TCR5 and HSG5. In addition, the national policy guidance which relates to town centre uses is contained within Planning Policy Statement 4: Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth (PPS4). 8.2.2 Policy TCR1 of the Local Plan seeks to reinforce the retail and commercial role of the town centre, through supporting the refurbishment of existing buildings providing they are designed to enhance the character and appearance of the area. As the site is located to the rear of Lower Gungate which is identified as a secondary shopping frontage there are no restrictions on uses which are considered to be appropriate to the shopping area. In principle therefore there are no objections to the provision of café/retail/office facilities, which will aid in maintaining the health, vitality, and viability of the town centre. Support for the location of these uses within the town centre is echoed in PPS4 and the draft National Planning Policy Framework. 8.2.3 As the application site is located within the town centre and proposes the conversion of part of the buildings in to residential accommodation, Policy TCR5 of the Local Plan is also of relevance in considering the principle of the proposed development. This policy states that planning permission will be granted for residential development consisting of the conversion of outbuildings, and as part of mixed use development schemes. The scheme is consistent with the policy. 8.2.4 In addition, Policy HSG5 of the local plan requires that new residential development does not harm an area or building of architectural or historic interest (amongst other things). The application proposes the conversion of existing curtilage listed buildings, which will secure the retention of important buildings within the town centre, ensuring the reuse of the buildings. Similarly HSG5 also seeks to protect the character and amenity of the locality. As the proposal provides for the refurbishment and reconstruction of currently dilapidated buildings, the principle of converting parts of the buildings in to residential units raises no adverse issues and would improve the character and amenity of the locality through an increase in night time activity and surveillance within the town centre thus improving the vitality of the town centre. 8.2.5 Overall the proposed uses are considered to acceptable within this town centre location, the uses are considered to be compatible with the existing uses within the Town Centre and will aid in the maintenance of a vital and viable Town Centre. 8.3 Impact on Heritage Assets / General Design Considerations 8.3.1 The proposed scheme lies within the historic core of Tamworth, within an area of considerable archaeological significance. The site has been identified by researchers as the ecclesiastical core of Tamworth with the Grade I Listed Church of St. Editha immediately to the west. The proposals are located within the site of the medieval Deanery, the northern stone boundary wall to No.7 Lower Gungate dates to the fourteenth century and belonged to the Deanery. The site is considered to be nationally important and has been designated as a Scheduled Ancient Monument (SAM). No 3a (Truckles), 5 (Coates) and 7 (vacant) Lower Gungate form an attractive row of three mid 19th Century shops, which contribute significantly to the character and appearance of this part of the town centre particularly with their late 19th Century shop fronts. These shop fronts have recently undergone refurbishment, helped in part by the Councils Conservation Grant scheme. 8.3.2 The Tamworth Town Centre Conservation Area Appraisal 2007 (CAA) acknowledges the importance of the existing outbuildings across the site, and the views through the site to the church and its tower. ‘The yard contains late 19th Century outbuildings and workshops which, although in poor condition, are characterful and a rare survival. The yard backs onto the churchyard and fine, picturesque views of the church and its tower with the roofs of the workshops in the foreground, are available through the gap in the street frontage. The yard and its outbuildings should be protected, although substantial maintenance is clearly needed.’ ‘The outbuildings behind No 3a Lower Gungate are rare survivors, and an attractive part of the view to the church from the street, forming a strong visual link to the past use of the rear plots along Lower Gungate. However, the buildings appear unused and in poor condition. Their restoration and sensitive reuse may be beneficial to the character of this part of the conservation area.’ 8.3.3 The application as submitted was supported by a Desk-Based Archaeological Assessment, which acknowledges the sensitivity of the site. As a requirement of the site being located on a SAM, consent has recently been granted for Scheduled Ancient Monument Consent from English Heritage for the works comprised in these current applications. Following consultation with Staffordshire County Council Archaeology, and English Heritage the need to ensure that the development has minimal impact upon the nationally important archaeological deposits is highlighted. A condition is therefore recommended requiring the implementation of a programme of archaeological work, including excavation, building recording, post-excavation analysis, publication of a report and preparation of appropriate public interpretation media. It is worthwhile noting that the Scheduled Ancient Monument Consent take precedence over any permissions or consents granted. 8.3.5 The Church of St. Editha is located directly to the west of the application site, with the churchyard wall forming the sites western boundary. The Conservation Area Appraisal describes the churchyard as ‘... a green, enclosed oasis which evokes the feeling of a churchyard in a Victorian suburb or village…. Views east and northeast across it look out towards a jumble of red brick and tiled roofs and take in the attractive properties on Church Lane and Little Church Lane, which cut through to Lower Gungate.’ The proposed development is visible from the churchyard, particularly with the addition of a pitched roof over building B which forms the boundary of the site. Photomontages of the site when viewed from the churchyard have been requested and received from the applicant’s agent to aid in assessing the impact of the proposals on the setting of St. Editha’s. The part of the building visible from the churchyard would be two courses of bricks and a plain clay roof. The building originally included roof lights in this elevation but these have been removed in order to keep the simplicity of the roofscape akin to other buildings visible from the churchyard. Overall, whilst the provision of a pitched roof of the building would make the site more visible in views in and out of the churchyard the jumble of red brick and tiled roofs would help integrate this building within the setting of the church and is not considered to significantly harm its setting. 8.3.6 The application proposes the refurbishment, and where necessary, rebuilding of the existing buildings within the site. As detailed within the proposals section above the main areas that require rebuilding relate to buildings C, D and F which are currently in a significantly poor state of repair, with buildings A, B and E requiring some rebuilding, re-roofing and stability work. In accordance with the submitted structural survey the works are considered necessary if the existing building form is to be retained, which is considered the most appropriate approach in this sensitive historic setting. 8.3.7 An important element of the scheme and the town centre conservation area are the views of the Church from Lower Gungate, which are currently framed by No3 and 3a Lower Gungate. Whilst the addition of a pitched roof to building B would screen views of the churchyard from within the site itself, the important vista from Lower Gungate would not be affected. In fact, the refurbishment of the buildings visible from Lower Gungate would improve this vista and overall the setting of the Church and the Town Centre Conservation Area. 8.3.8 The proposed works are considered to substantially improve this part of the conservation area and secure the retention of the curtilage listed buildings, which allows a glimpse of what existed within the rear yards of properties on Lower Gungate. In addition, the setting of the grade II listed buildings fronting Lower Gungate would be substantially improved and the proposals would secure the long term retention of these buildings which are currently substantially at risk. 8.3.9 Whilst the overall principles of converting and rebuilding the existing buildings within the site are considered acceptable, the details contained within the conversion are of paramount importance. During the life of the application typical fenestration details have been submitted, which are generally acceptable. It is considered necessary to condition precise details of the proposed works such as materials, bonding, precise details of the rebuilding and reconstruction, repair and refurbishment works, surfacing of the courtyard area, and a scheme for the protection of the Deanery wall. Subject to these conditions (as detailed below) the development will ensure a high quality of architectural expression for the buildings which will enhance the appearance and character of the conservation area, and the setting of these listed buildings. The proposals are therefore considered to comply with policies NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire and Stoke on Trent Structure Plan, the provisions PPS5, and Sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 8.4 Amenity Considerations 8.4.1 In assessing the impact of the proposed development and in particular the proposed commercial uses regard need to be had to the impact of the proposals on existing residents in the area and the new residents proposed within the residential element of the scheme. The site is located within the town centre, with the directly adjacent uses being ground floor retail units with offices, and residential uses above. An existing residential dwelling (No3 Lower Gungate) is located directly to the south of the site. 8.4.2 In accordance with the consultation response from Environmental Health and as the proposal includes the provision of residential accommodation above commercial units conditions are considered necessary that require the noise environment of the residential units to meet a certain standard, and that precise details of any extraction systems are submitted for approval in order to ensure the amenities of new residents is protected. In addition, due to the close proximity of the existing adjacent residential property it is considered necessary to restrict the operating hours of the commercial elements of the premises to between 07:00 – 21:00 hours. 8.5 Protected Species 8.5.1 A Protected Species Report has been undertaken at the site to assess the existence of any protected species, particularly bats. The survey results indicate that the proposed development is not likely to adversely affect any legally protected species, with no evidence of the existing buildings being use by bats or nesting birds. 8.5.2 In accordance with the consultation response from Staffordshire County Council Ecology there is no objection to proposed development subject to the securing of suitable compensation for roosting and nesting. 8.6 Section 106 Contributions 8.6.1 As the application proposes the conversion and alteration of the buildings into retail/café/office units and the provision of two new residential units the requirements of Policy TCR12 of the LP is relevant. Policy TCR12 seeks to ensure that the necessary infrastructure, parking facilities and access is in place and maintained within the town centre. Contributions are based upon the differences in parking requirements between buildings to which changes of use are proposed. The requirements of this policy are expanded upon by the ‘Planning Obligations’ SPD. In accordance with the Planning Obligations SPD consideration has been given to the benefits that will accrue from the development. It is considered that as the proposals would secure the safeguarding and reuse of important curtilage listed buildings, improve the character and appearance of the conservation area, and enhance the setting of listed buildings, these improvements would benefit the town centre to such an extent that these befits outweigh the benefits that would accrue form the benefits to transport and the environment and as such a contribution is not considered appropriate. 9. Conclusion 9.1 The proposed change of use of the buildings to provide a mix of retail, café and office uses, and residential accommodation, facilitated though their refurbishment and reconstruction is considered to enhance this part of the conservation area. The uses are considered to be compatible with the existing uses within the town centre and will aid in the maintenance of a vital and viable town centre, through the use of currently redundant and at risk buildings. Subject to conditions requiring the submission of further details of the proposed material specifications and restrictions on operating hours, the proposal would not detract from the amenity of town centre conservation area, the listed buildings to which the alterations are proposed or the setting of any of the nearby listed buildings. The development is therefore considered to comply with Policies ENV19, TCR1, TCR5, HSG5 and TCR12 of the Tamworth Local Plan, Policies D2, TC1, NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire and Stoke on Trent Structure Plan, the provisions of PPS4 and PPS5, and Sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. Conditions / Reasons 0558/2012; Planning Permission 1. The development shall be started within three years of the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004). 2. The development hereby approved shall only be carried out in accordance with the application form, Protected Species Report, Structural Appraisal and drawing numbers 712-01 Revision A, 712-05 Revision A, 712-06 Revision A, and 712-07 Revision B unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To define the approval 3. No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work, including excavation, building recording, post-excavation analysis, publication of a report and preparation of appropriate public interpretation media, in accordance with a written scheme of investigation, which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The programme of archaeological work shall be fully implemented in accordance with the approved written scheme of investigation. Reason: The site is of archaeological and historical interest and it is important that archaeological remains are appropriately understood to inform the scale and impact and need for further archaeological recording prior to their damage or destruction by the development in accordance with PPS5. 4. No development shall take place until a detailed scheme for the rebuilding and reconstruction of the buildings has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall detail in plan and written form the precise areas of the buildings requiring rebuilding and shall include precise details of how they will be reconstructed. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with Policies NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2011 and the provisions of PPS5. 5. No development shall take place until a detailed scheme for the repair and refurbishment of the buildings has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall detail in plan and written form the precise areas of the buildings requiring repair and shall include precise details of how the buildings will be repaired including internal finishes of these listed buildings. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with Policies NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2011 and the provisions of PPS5. No development shall take place until an assessment of the structural stability of all of the boundary walls surrounding the site and a scheme for their protection and retention including where necessary details of any necessary works to secure their protection and retention have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with Policies NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2011 and the provisions of PPS5. 6. 7. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved details of all materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with Policies NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2011 and the provisions of PPS5. 8. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme for the disposal surface waters shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the development is provided with a satisfactory means of drainage in accordance with Tamworth Local Plan Policy HSG5. 9. Prior to the commencement of development details of the proposed bonding, pointing and mortar mix shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with Policies NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2011 and the provisions of PPS5. 10. Prior to the commencement of development details of all new external joinery including materials and finish, and sections to a minimum scale of 1:5 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details, and windows and doors shall not be replaced with any alternative type without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with Policies NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2011 and the provisions of PPS5. 11. Prior to the commencement of development details of the proposed eaves and verge details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of thses curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with Policies NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2011 and the provisions of PPS5. 12. Prior to the commencement of development details of the rainwater goods shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with Policies NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2011 and the provisions of PPS5. 13. Prior to the commencement of development details of the type, number, position and finish of all plumbing and service pipework, soil and vent pipes, electricity and gas meter cupboards, and heating and ventilation flues shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with Policies NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2011 and the provisions of PPS5. 14. Prior to the commencement of development precise details of the commercial waste storage area and precise details of the waste collection contract shall be submitted to an approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure that suitable waste storage facilities are provided for the development in accordance with Policy ENV19 of the Tamworth Local Plan 1996-2011. 15. Prior to the commencement of development precise details of any proposed gates to Lower Gungate shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with Policies NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2011 and the provisions of PPS5. 16. Prior to the commencement of development a full hard landscaping scheme (incorporating the surfacing of the courtyard area) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with Policies NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2011 and the provisions of PPS5. 17. Prior to the commencement of development details of bird and bat boxes to be incorporated in to the building shall be submitted to an approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved boxes shall subsequently be implemented in accordance with the approved details before the development is completed and thereafter retained for the life of the development. Reason: In the interests of biodiversity interests to accord with Policies ENV7 and ENV8 of the Tamworth Local Plan and the provisions of PPS9. 18. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme of sound insulation to residences shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The scheme shall be designed following the completion of a noise survey undertaken by a competent person. The scheme shall take account of the need to provide adequate ventilation, which may be by mechanical or passive means and shall be designed to achieve the following criteria with the ventilation operating: Bedrooms Living rooms Bedrooms 30 dB LAeq (2300 hrs – 0700 hrs) 35 dB LAeq (0700 hrs – 2300 hrs) 45 dB LAmax (2300 hrs – 0700 hrs) Before the development is occupied the completed scheme shall be validated by a competent person and a validation report submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Reason: As recommended by the Environmental Protection Manager in the interest of the amenities of occupiers of the development and nearby land uses in accordance with PPG24. 19. Prior to the commencement of development a scheme for the extraction, dispersal and where necessary abatement and control of cooking odour, along with details of all elements of the inlet and extract systems shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full prior to the first use of the development hereby approved and shall be retained as such thereafter. No modifications to the scheme shall be undertaken without the prior written approval of the local planning authority. The scheme shall have regard to the requirements of the following guidance document – “Guidance on the control of odour and noise from commercial kitchen exhaust systems (DEFRA; Jan 2005)” Reason: As recommended by the Environmental Protection Manager In the interest of the amenities of occupiers of the development and nearby land uses in accordance with PPG23. 20. The hereby approved commercial uses shall not be open to customers or members of the public outside the following times; Monday - Sunday 07:00-21:00hrs unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of adjoining land uses in accordance with Policy D2 of the Staffordshire and Stoke on Trent Structure Plan 1996-2011. 21. No floodlights shall be installed on the building and any external lighting shall be downward facing. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with Policies NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2011 and the provisions of PPS5. 22. Notwithstanding the provisions of Classes A, B, C, D, E, G and H of Schedule 2 Part 1 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking or reenacting that Order), there shall be no external alterations to the dwelling or its roof, and no buildings or structures shall be erected within the curtilage of the dwelling unless permission has first been granted by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with Policies NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2011 and the provisions of PPS5. 0568/2012; Listed Building Consent 1. The development shall be started within three years of the date of this consent. Reason: To comply with Section 18 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act) 1990 (as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. The development hereby approved shall only be carried out in accordance with the application form, Protected Species Report, Structural Appraisal and drawing numbers 712-01 Revision A, 712-05 Revision A, 712-06 Revision A, and 712-07 Revision B unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To define the approval 3. No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work, including excavation, building recording, post-excavation analysis, publication of a report and preparation of appropriate public interpretation media, in accordance with a written scheme of investigation, which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The programme of archaeological work shall be fully implemented in accordance with the approved written scheme of investigation. Reason: The site is of archaeological and historical interest and it is important that archaeological remains are appropriately understood to inform the scale and impact and need for further archaeological recording prior to their damage or destruction by the development in accordance with PPS5 and Sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 4. No development shall take place until a detailed scheme for the rebuilding and reconstruction of the buildings has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall detail in plan and written form the precise areas of the buildings requiring rebuilding and shall include precise details of how they will be reconstructed. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with the provisions of PPS5 and Sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 5. No development shall take place until a detailed scheme for the repair and refurbishment of the buildings has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The scheme shall detail in plan and written form the precise areas of the buildings requiring repair and shall include precise details of how the buildings will be repaired including internal finishes of these listed buildings. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with the provisions of PPS5 and Sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 6. No development shall take place until an assessment of the structural stability of all of the boundary walls surrounding the site and a scheme for their protection and retention including where necessary details of any necessary works to secure their protection and retention have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with the provisions of PPS5 and Sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 7. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby approved details of all materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with the provisions of PPS5 and Sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 8. Prior to the commencement of development details of the proposed bonding, pointing and mortar mix shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with the provisions of PPS5 and Sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 9. Prior to the commencement of development details of all new external joinery including materials and finish, and sections to a minimum scale of 1:5 shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details, and windows and doors shall not be replaced with any alternative type without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of this curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with Policies NC18 and NC19 of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2011 and the provisions of PPS5. 10. Prior to the commencement of development details of the proposed eaves and verge details shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with the provisions of PPS5 and Sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 11. Prior to the commencement of development details of the rainwater goods shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with the provisions of PPS5 and Sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 12. Prior to the commencement of development details of the type, number, position and finish of all plumbing and service pipework, soil and vent pipes, electricity and gas meter cupboards, and heating and ventilation flues shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with the provisions of PPS5 and Sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 13. Prior to the commencement of development precise details of the commercial waste storage area and precise details of the waste collection contract shall be submitted to an approved in writing by the local planning authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with the provisions of PPS5 and Sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 14. Prior to the commencement of development precise details of any proposed gates to Lower Gungate shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with the provisions of PPS5 and Sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. 15. Prior to the commencement of development a full hard landscaping scheme (incorporating the surfacing of the courtyard area) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To safeguard the character and appearance of these curtilage listed buildings and the Town Centre Conservation Area in accordance with the provisions of PPS5 and Sections 16 and 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. Application Number: 0585/2011 Development: Proposed demolition of vacant retail unit A1 and erection of three adjoining A3 restaurant units Location: Allied Carpets, Ventura Park Road, Tamworth, B78 3HB Target Date: 03/02/2012 1. Proposal 1.1. The current application seeks the demolition of the existing A1 retail unit on the site and its replacement through the erection of a single building comprising three separate A3 (restaurant) units, with an overall gross floor area of 854 sq.m, one unit of 350 sq.m and two of 250 sq.m (approximately) including proposed mezzanine floors. Vehicular access to the site is to remain as from Ventura Park Road, with an increase in the parking provision at the site from 32 to 44. 1.2. The siting of the proposed building sits in a similar position as the existing building at the site although more elongated. The proposed building takes the form of a contemporary building, constructed with large glazed areas to the main visible facades of the building and dark grey modular cladding to the remainder. The building has an overall appearance similar to the recently constructed John Lewis store to the south. 1.3. The following documentation has been submitted in support of the application; • • • Planning, Design & Access Statement (including Sequential Test); Transportation Statement; and Flood Risk and Run-off Assessment. In addition, following consultation with the agent the following supplemental information has been submitted; 2. Arboricultural Report; Supplemental Transport Statement; and Supplemental Sequential Test. Site and Surroundings 2.1. The application site is located on the Borough’s out of town retail park known as Ventura Park located to the north of the A5 trunk road and to the south west of the town centre. The site is bound to the east by Bitterscote Drive, to the south by Ventura Park Road with the recently constructed John Lewis store beyond, and to the north and east by the existing Sainsbury’s store and the Jolly Sailor retail park. Ventura Park is an out of centre retail park. 2.2. The site occupies a prominent location when entering the retail park from the A5 trunk road, with an existing single storey retail building located on the site historically occupied by Allied Carpets which represents the existing building form on the site, which is of little merit. 3. Key Issues 3.1. The key issues, which underpin the assessment of the acceptability of the proposed restaurant units are considered to be the principle of development and the impact of the proposal on highway safety. The principle of development in this case warrants an assessment of the suitability of the site for the proposed use in terms of its location relative to the town centre and the likely impact that out of town restaurants would have on the town centre. This involves an assessment of whether there are alternative available, suitable and appropriately sized units within the town centre. 3.2. In addition, the siting and design of the proposed building, flood risk and the impact of the proposed building on the protected trees within the site are also important considerations. 4. Conclusion 4.1 The council considers that the application fails to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the sequential approach. The application fails to demonstrate that a flexible approach to the assessment of alternative sites has been adopted, with little assessment for the scope of disaggregating the three operators. The council considers that there are sequentially preferable town centre and edge of centre sites, which are available, suitable and viable, and as a result the proposal would have an adverse impact on the vitality and viability of the town centre. The development is therefore considered to be contrary to policy EC17.1a of PPS4. In addition, as the site is inadequately served by public transport the resultant reliance on car borne customers would not accord with policy EC10.2a of PPS4 which seeks to limit carbon emissions. Recommendation Refuse Reason for Refusal 1 The council considers that the application fails to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the sequential approach. The application fails to demonstrate that a flexible approach to the assessment of alternative sites has been adopted, with little assessment for the scope of disaggregating the three operators. The council considers that there are sequentially preferable town centre and edge of centre sites, which are available, suitable and viable, and as a result the proposal would have an adverse impact on the vitality and viability of the town centre. The development is therefore considered to be contrary to policy EC17.1a of PPS4. 2. Insufficient information has been submitted in support of the application to allow a full assessment of the impacts of the proposed development on Tamworth town centre. The council consider that the proposed development would be likely to have a significant impact on the town centre and as such the proposed development is contrary to Policy EC17 of PPS4. 3. The site is not adequately served by public transport and as a result would rely on a significant proportion of customers making dedicated car borne trips, thereby being contrary to the provisions of planning policy which seeks to direct new development to locations which are accessible by a choice of means of transport, reduce reliance on the private car, and limit carbon emissions. The proposed development is therefore considered to be contrary to the provisions of PPS1, PPS4 and policy T1A of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2001. 0585/2011 Drain Drain DUNS TALL ON ST AR M PA HILL BONE LANE BONEHILL ROAD ROAD RK in Dra RO HILL BONE AD A 453 BON EHIL L RIV ER RO AD BO NE HIL L RO A D Drain Dra in ETC LL HE A RO D NTU VE RA RK PA AD RO A PARK VENTUR ROAD A5 A5 Drain Drain © Crown copyright and database rights 2011. Ordnance Survey 100018267 DR IV E trips, thereby being contrary to the provisions of planning policy which seeks to direct new development to locations which are accessible by a choice of means of transport, reduce reliance on the private car, and limit carbon emissions. As the site is not considered to be such a location the proposal is considered to be contrary to the provisions of PPS1, PPS4 and policy T1A of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2001. 9.5 Trees / Landscape 9.5.1 The application site is previously developed and has been previously operated as an A1 retail unit, which as laid out provided a grass/shrub verge to the highway and provided for the retention of two oak trees within the site. An Arboricultural Report has been submitted in support of the application at the request of the Council’s Tree Officer. 9.5.2 The report considers the impact of the proposed development on the health of the trees, which will mainly be affected by the proposed alterations to the car park. In the interests of the health and long term retention of the trees the report recommends the hand digging of trenches along the line of the new car park edge to assess the spread of the root systems. As recommended by the Council’s Tree Officer providing the recommendations contained within the report are strictly adhered to the proposals will ensure the retention of these valuable trees without detrimentally impacting upon their retention or their contribution to the visual amenity of the area. 9.6 Flood Risk 9.6.1 The application site is located within Flood Zone 3, which represents an area with a greater than 1% chance of annually flooding. However, the site does benefit from existing flood defences. A Flood Risk and Run-off Assessment (FRA) has been submitted in support of the application. The report concludes that the works would provide a reduction in local surface water runoff and flood risk through the use of permeable paving and rainwater harvesting, in addition to flood resilient measures within the units. The Environment Agency have no objections to the proposed development providing the recommendations contained within the FRA are secured by planning conditions. 10 Conclusion 10.1 Whilst the proposed development would improve the appearance of the site and provide employment opportunities, these factors are not considered to outweigh the fact that the proposal would clearly take investment out of the town centre, with a commensurate impact on its vitality and viability. The proposed development would facilitate the provision of a leisure use appropriate for the town centre in an out of centre location, contrary to the thrust of current and emerging planning policy and the primary objectives of PPS4, expanded upon in the practice guidance. In addition, the sites unsustainable nature and likely customers reliance on car borne customers would not accord with the provisions of PPS1, PPS4 and policy T1A of the Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2001. 5. Relevant Site History 5.1. None relevant to the current application 6. Consultation Responses 6.1. Tamworth Borough Council – Development Plans 6.1.1 The general principles of the development plan, the emerging core strategy/local plan, draft national planning policy framework and Planning Policy Statement 4 are commented upon with the overarching aim of all being to focus investment within the town centre. It is considered that the sequential assessment should assess alternative sites based on the individual operators. On the basis of the information submitted the applicant has failed to demonstrate flexibility and the potential for disaggregating the proposal in to three independent operators. It is clear from the sequential assessment that if this were to be undertaken, there are sequentially preferable town centre and edge of centre locations which are available, suitable and viable. Refusal of the application is therefore requested. 6.2. Tamworth Borough Council – Economic Development 6.2.1 The Economic Development team recognise that this application will bring some Economic Impact to Tamworth and the surrounding area, through the creation of employment opportunities and potential spin off benefits from the brands that will choose to locate to the units. We also welcome new investment and enhancement of the current offer to further strengthen Tamworth’s position a significant regional visitor location. 6.2.2 However, it is felt that were this application to be approved, the creation of employment opportunities would be significantly outweighed by the medium and long term negative impact on Tamworth Town Centre, an important focal point for residents and traders alike. 6.2.3 A3 consent of 3 new build units on the former Allied carpets site, would contribute to the following. - - 6.2.4 Keeping visitors and shoppers purely on the Ventura shopping retail area, not creating sustainable links with the Town Centre. Increase potential for congestion and traffic around the site, creating a negative image and reputation for Tamworth as a place to visit and shop. There is already significant evidence of the issues this causes for local residents with numerous articles in the local press and letters. Anecdotally many businesses ask what is going to be done about the congestion situation. Exhibit a lack of market confidence for further much needed investment in the Town Centre. Lack of sustainable transport links for employees who are residents of Tamworth to access Ventura retail area. With regards this application we feel that this would be better suited to the direct environs of the Town Centre, as one new build on the former Gungate shopping centre or as individual units located within currently vacant retail outlets. The benefits of would see a long term economic impact on the Town. Benefits are as follows. - Already sustainable transport links to the Town to encourage local employment. Strengthening of image, offer and reputation and Town Centre. Already vacant units including McDonalds that would be suitable for use. Exhibiting market confidence in Tamworth town centre, providing a strong catalyst for further Town Centre investment, particularly around Gungate. Encourage links between the Ventura shopping area and the Town Centre Improve amenities for local residents in the Town Centre and contribute towards the strengthening of the local night time economy. 6.3. Tamworth Borough Council – Environmental Health 6.3.1 No comments received at the time of writing this report 6.4 Tamworth Borough Council – Tree Officer 6.4.1 Due to the presence of two protected Oak trees within the site, and one directly adjacent to the site an Arboricultural Report was requested and submitted during the application. The report details the limited impact that the proposed development would have on the trees and makes recommendations for suitable protection of the trees during the development. In addition, methodologies for works such as hand digging the realigned car parking area in the vicinity of the protected trees are recommended. Subject to the recommendations contained within the report being secured by condition the Council’s Tree Officer has no objection to the proposed development. 6.5 Tamworth Borough Council – Waste 6.5.1 No objections 6.6 Staffordshire County Council – The Highway Authority 6.6.1 No objections to the proposed scheme subject to conditions relating to the submission of a delivery vehicle management plan, surface water drainage, and provision of the parking/manoeuvring areas. Traffic Regulation Order (TRO). The recommendation of no objection is following the submission of a Supplemental Transport Statement. 6.7 Highways Agency (responsible for the A5 – Thomas Guy Way) 6.7.1 No objections. 6.8 Staffordshire Police 6.8.1 No objections to the proposed scheme. However, the importance of security being incorporated in to the proposal is highlighted. These details include recommendations for fencing to secure the rear service yard, lighting, landscaping and patio furniture. Any such details would be secured by condition. 6.9 Environment Agency 6.9.1 No objections to the proposed scheme following a review of the submitted Flood Risk and Run-off Assessment (FRA). The recommendation of no objection is subject to the imposition of conditions securing the recommended measures detailed in the FRA relating to surface water drainage and attenuation, registration with the flood warning service, and the inclusion of flood proofing measures. 6.10 Severn Trent Water 6.10 1 No objection to the scheme subject to the imposition of a condition requiring the submission and approval of surface and foul water drainage. 6.11 British Pipelines 6.11.1 No objections. 7 Additional Representations 7.1 Two letters of representation have been received objecting to the application, the salient points raised in the objections are summarised below. Copies of these objections are attached to this report; • • • • • • • The units would be better suited nearer or in the town centre to assist in revitalising town centre viability; The units would attract users from other retail units in Ventura Park thus generating additional traffic movements; The proposals would exacerbate existing traffic congestion; The proposal discourages the use of sustainable modes of transport; Insufficient car parking in the area; Insufficient car parking for the proposal; The T.R.I.C.S data should be based on local traffic characteristics. 8 Planning Considerations 8.1 The main issues for consideration in the determination of this application are considered to be; • • • • Principle of Development; Siting and Design Considerations; Highway Safety / Accessibility; Trees / Landscape; and • Flood Risk. 8.2 Principle of development 8.2.1 In assessing the principle of development regard needs to be had to the current Tamworth Local Plan 2001-2011, The Staffordshire Structure Plan 1996-2011, The Regional Spatial Strategy, National Planning Guidance in the form of PPS1 and PPS4. In addition, the emerging Tamworth Core Strategy/Local Plan and Draft National Planning Policy Framework (dNPPF) whilst not formally adopted or enacted need to be considered in terms of assessing both the local and national direction of travel with regard to the currently evolving planning policy framework. 8.2.2 As members will be aware the current Tamworth Local Plan (LP) should be that starting point in assessing the acceptability of planning applications in accordance with Section 38 (6) of the Act, closely followed by the Staffordshire Structure Plan (SP). However, in the case of both plans those policies which referred to new town centre uses have not been saved. The requests to save LP Policy TCR3 and SP Policies TC3A and TC3B was not accepted as more up to date national policies had replaced them. 8.2.3 In their current guise planning policies which relate specifically to town centre uses are contained within Planning Policy Statement 4: Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth (PPS4). Therefore it is considered that the starting point for assessing the acceptability of the current proposals for these town centre uses not located within the town centre is PPS4, particularly Policies EC10, EC14, EC15, EC16 and EC17. 8.2.4 There is a generic requirement for local planning authorities to adopt a positive approach to economic development, which secures sustainable economic growth. PPS4 requires planning applications such as the current application to be supported by a sequential assessment, where the proposal is not in an existing centre. Ventura Park is in an out of centre location as defined in PPS4. In addition, where development plans have not been updated to accord with PPS4 (as in the case of Tamworth) and the proposal would be likely to have significant impacts on an existing town centre an assessment of impacts is also necessary. A sequential assessment has been submitted in support of the application, and an Impact Assessment currently being prepared. 8.2.5 Whilst in draft form and subject to change, the contents of the draft NPPF echo the requirements of the current PPS4, in terms of its general support for new economic development. It also reaffirms the need to promote the vitality and viability of town centres by carrying through the application of the sequential approach to new town centre uses and the need for an assessment of impacts. 8.2.6 The fundamental spatial objective underpinning the emerging Core Strategy/Local Plan is to focus investment in the town centre. It seeks to direct new retail and leisure development, including A3 uses, as proposed, to the town centre whilst restricting further growth at the out of centre retail parks. The strategy seeks to deliver a town centre offer which complements the out of town retail offer; capitalising on the independent retail offer and leisure facilities; with particular emphasis on creating a vibrant night time economy. The Tamworth Town Centre & Retail Study (2011) identified a significant opportunity for the restaurant market in the town centre to exploit and widen the town centre’s attractiveness and vitality. A3 uses such as proposed by this application are fundamental to delivering this objective as they assist in diversifying the town centre offer. 8.2.7 The Sequential Assessment 8.2.8 The application of the sequential site assessment needs to be attached significant weight in assessing the acceptability of the proposal. This approach to site selection seeks to focus new development within existing town centres, where only if sites within or on the edge of the centre are not available will an out of centre site be appropriate. The application site, located at Ventura Park is an out of centre site, which is why the sequential assessment to site selection is necessary. 8.2.9 In assessing alternative options, the discounting of more central sites need to be rejected for sound reasons, which are clearly explained and justified with the onus on the applicant to demonstrate compliance with the sequential approach. There is a requirement for proposed operators to demonstrate flexibility in their business model when considering sites, in respect of scale, format, car parking provision, and the scope for disaggregation. In assessing each site regard needs to be had to the availability, suitability and viability of each assessed site. These assessment tools are defined in PPS4 as; • Availability; whether the site is available now or likely to become available for development within a reasonable period of time. • Suitability; with due regard to the operator demonstrating flexibility, whether the sites are suitable to accommodate the need or demand which the proposal is intended to meet. • Viability; whether there is reasonable prospect that development will occur on the site. 8.2.10 The current application proposes the erection of a single building containing three separate operators within three separate units, two of 250 sq.m and one of 350 sq.m. So in applying the sequential approach to site selection it is entirely reasonable and in accordance with PPS4 to apply the test as individual retailers and as three separate units. 8.2.11 During the application three letters have been received from the three proposed operators; Nando’s; Pizza Express; and Starbucks. These letters detail that the operators would not be willing to locate within the town centre, as the sites suggested do not meet their specification for a combined operation in a bespoke modern structure. Confirming that they would not be looking to operate individually or in the combined format from the town centre. From these letters it is quite clear that the operators themselves are not willing to be flexible in their approach to site selection, not considering separate sites or any sites within the town centre as being acceptable for commercial reasons. 8.2.12 The commercial objectives of a particular operator should not be a determining factor in the acceptability of a particular site. Operators that claim to be unable to be flexible about their chosen ‘business model’ need to demonstrate why smaller stores would not meet a similar need. The requirement to incorporate a number of uses/operators to achieve a viable development is not sufficient reason for promoting development in out of centre locations where more central sites exist. It is quite clear that the operators have not demonstrated flexibility in their approach and thus have not complied with the requirements of PPS4. 8.2.13 Irrespective of the clear indication of the operators not to locate within the town centre the applicant’s agent have provided a sequential test, which was submitted in support of the application assessing 22 sites within the town centre. Following discussions with the agent (prior to the receipt of the above described letters) an additional 19 sites were identified by the Council, in order to help the agents to find a suitable site for the operations within the town centre. All of these sites have been assessed in terms of their size, availability and suitability with brief comments on the viability of the sites. No details have been provided as to how the sequential assessment has been approached in terms of whether each site was considered for each operator individually or just as a three operator site. As detailed above each site needs to be considered for each operator and not exclusively for the three combined units. 8.2.14 According to the submitted assessment none of the 41 sites meet the three assessment criteria. This is not judged by officers to be the case, whilst it is not considered appropriate to detail each of the sites it is worthwhile mentioning a number which are considered to meet the requirements of any of the three operators. 8.2.15 The former Coventry Building Society (Common Lane); Planning permission has been granted (0368/2010) for the A3/A4/A5 use of the building which is 407 sq.m. The building has a street frontage to Common Lane and approved ‘shop’ windows to the first and second floors above Shoe Zone. This site has been discounted due to the high Section 106 costs, which would impact upon the viability of the conversion. The required contributions amount to £15,260 and relate to the parking requirements for the use and accord with the Council’s adopted Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document. However, the Council would be willing to negotiate this figure with any prospective occupier in order to ensure that no contributions affected the viability of a scheme. This site is therefore considered to be available, suitable, and subject to an agreement viable. 8.2.16 The former Tourist Information Centre (Market Street); the building is comprised of three floors of accommodation, with a total of 263 sq.m floorspace. This building has been discounted as being too small and being grade II listed. These reasons are not considered appropriate as two of the units are proposed under the available floor space, and the fact that the building is listed should not mean that the building is not suitable or viable. This site is considered to be available, suitable and viable. 8.2.17 The White House (Church Street); The available floor space is over the ground, first and second floors and comprises a total of 538 sq.m. This site has been discounted by the agents as only having the first and second floors available, being grade II listed, too big for one unit and not being big enough for three users, that it lacks ground floor presence, and not is within the primary shopping area. Again these reasons for discounting the site are not considered to be reasonable, with all floors available (as detailed on showcase a property website). This assessment demonstrates how inflexible the agents have been in assessing sites, which is considered to represent a good quality opportunity for a new restaurant to locate within the town centre. 8.2.18 There are a number of sites within and adjacent to Middle Entry, which are considered to be available, suitable and viable for an individual unit. Namely No’s 1 and 17 Middle Entry and No 19 George Street. These sites have been discounted primarily due to the building not meeting the applicants’ aspirations in respect to the appearance and the type and quality of neighbouring retailers, which are considered incompatible with the proposed users. This kind of reason for discounting a site within the central area of the town centre is not considered appropriate and would not accord with the approach required by PPS4. 8.2.19 A number of sites were assessed by the applicant’s agent as not being located within a primary shopping location, these sites assessed are located within the town centre boundary as defined in the local plan. The sites include the Tweedale Arms (Albert Road), and the Former Jailhouse Rock Pub (Lichfield Street). Whilst the location of these sites is not within the primary retail area they are located within the town centre boundary as defined in the current local plan and represent sequentially preferable more central sites than the application site, and would aid in the maintenance an vital and viable town centre. 8.2.20 In addition, the Council have recently learned that the McDonalds in George Street is due to be vacated on the 20th March. Situations such as this are mentioned in the practice guidance to PPS4, which allows sites that become available unexpectedly after the receipt of an application to be taken in to account in the assessment of the application. Quite clearly, the McDonalds site has become available, is perfectly suitable and more than viable for any of the three operators in Nando’s, Pizza Express or Starbucks. This style of building would be similar to existing facilities occupied by all three operators in a considerable number of towns and cities across the UK. 8.2.21 PPS4 states that if it is proposed to refuse an application based on the sequential approach, it needs to be on the basis that there are, or maybe, a reasonable prospect of a sequentially preferable opportunity coming forward which are capable of meeting the same requirements as the application is intended to meet. It is quite clear that there are sequentially preferable sites and that the applicant has not demonstrated compliance with the requirements of the sequential approach in terms of being flexible and the application should be refused for this reason in accordance with Policy EC17 of PPS4. 8.2.22 A full copy of the submitted (as amended) sequential assessment is attached for members’ information (Appendix A). 8.2.23 The Impact Assessment 8.2.24 The application of the impact assessment in relation to the provision of commercial leisure proposals for restaurants needs to be assessed against the impacts outlined in policy EC16 PPS4. An impact assessment has been requested from the applicant’s agent, which has not been received in support of this application. An impact assessment is considered necessary in this circumstance as the proposed development is not in an existing centre and is not in accordance with an up to date development plan, and the proposed development would be likely to have a significant impact on Tamworth town centre. Without such an assessment Officers consider that insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that the proposed development would not lead to a significant adverse impact upon the town centre with regard to the impact tests detailed within Policy EC16 of PPS4.. 8.2.25 Local Employment 8.2.26 The impact of the proposal on local employment is one of the criteria for determining the acceptability of new proposals for economic development. The letters received from the operators have detailed that approximately 70 new jobs (with no details supplied as to whether these are full time equivalent jobs or part time) would be created as a result of the new facilities. Clearly the proposals would result in the creation of new jobs, which would be of benefit to the local community. Officers would welcome the opportunity for the creation of new jobs within the Borough. However, in accordance with the above assessment on sequentially preferable sites these jobs should and would be best placed to be located within the town centre as the Boroughs most accessible and sustainable location 8.2.27 The governments’ current agenda particularly with regard to ‘Planning for Growth’ is underpinned by the aim of achieving sustainable growth and promoting prosperity and the creation of jobs. However, it is not considered that this should be a cue for abandoning existing policies and objectives. Whilst every endeavour should be taken to promote growth this should not be at the expense of the overarching principles of national and local policy, which aim to promote and help maintain vital and viable town centres. Therefore the creation of jobs in this out of centre location should not take precedence over the overarching principles of planning policy. 8.3 Siting and Design Considerations 8.3.1 An important consideration in determining the acceptability of this proposal is the impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of its immediate environs. The site is located within the confines of Ventura Park, an out of town retail park that has development over the last 15 years with building styles and designs which reflect changes in retail design over this period. The most recent of the buildings being the John Lewis store and Cardinal Point Retail Park, which have been constructed in dark modular cladding, with integrated glazing areas. 9.3.2 The main prominent frontage of the site faces towards the A5 junction and the roundabout. The current building is visible from this area, however due to the single storey nature of the building its built form is not obvious. The building is proposed with its frontage facing in a south-easterly direction, with an outdoor seating/dining area and parking proposed in-between the building and the highway frontage. The waste storage and servicing areas are contained to the rear of the buildings. 8.3.2 The proposed building has been designed with a modern form and detailing, a common theme of the more recent development within the retail the park, with large areas of glazing comparable with the recent John Lewis store. The materials of construction comprise dark grey modular cladding, and glazed areas which wrap around the building. Overall the design provides a modern building similar to those in the vicinity, which is considered to be appropriate for this site and will preserve and enhance the built character of this site. 8.4 Highway Safety / Accessibility 8.4.1 The site benefits from a single vehicular access to Ventura Park Road, approximately 27m to the west of access on to the Sainsbury roundabout. A Transport Statement (TS) has been submitted in support of the application. The TS assesses the policy background, sustainable transport, traffic generated from the proposed development; and traffic impact of the development proposals. Following receipt of the Transport Statement the Highway Authority raised a number of concerns with the statement in relation to; the lack of justification for the figures use for the proposed traffic generation; the failure of the model to consider impact on the surrounding highway network; and the failure to justify the parking level proposed. 8.4.2 The submitted Supplementary Transport Statement justifies the representative TRICS (Trip Rate Information Computer System) data used in the assessment, which has satisfied the Highway Authority. Additional modelling of the impact of the proposal on the Sainsbury roundabout has been undertaken, which demonstrates that the proposal would result in an increase in traffic of 0.7% during the week and 0.8% during the Saturday peak. The Highway Authority have confirmed that due consideration has been given to vehicular movements across Ventura Park, with the impact on the highway network considered to be acceptable. 8.4.3 The application proposes the provision of 44 parking spaces, which is considered by the TS to be more than sufficient for the proposed A3 uses. Using the TRICS database, the peak parking demand for the site on a Saturday would be 28 spaces, which results in the site having a 57% higher provision of spaces than would be required during the peak Saturday demand for spaces. Whilst the current issues and concerns with regard to car parking on Ventura Park are acknowledged The Highway Authority consider that the proposal would not lead to an increase in highway danger. However, they have recommended the provision of a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) along Ventura Park Road to prevent parking along the highway as part of a mitigation strategy. The applicant’s have indicated that they are willing to enter in to such an agreement. This is in addition to the requirement to comply with the for submitted delivery vehicle management plan. 8.4.4 Turning to public transport access to the site, the TS details that there are 7 services with three operators operating in the vicinity of Ventura Park. Of these services detailed three only operate one service a day, which can be discounted. The three services which serve Ventura Park Road (No 6, 80 and 115) all cease services at approximately 1800hrs and do not operate on Sundays. The one service which operates in to the evening (ceasing services at 2221hrs) and operates on Sundays is the 110 service. This Arriva service stops at the Fazeley Road end of Ventura Park, which is located approximately 522m walking distance from the site. Due to this distance it is unlikely to be attractive potential to customers of the restaurants. Therefore when considered in the context of the likely operating hours of the restaurants, the proposal would not be adequately served by public transport, and would consequently rely on a significant proportion of customers making dedicated car borne Appendix A Sequential Test Gis Ref Site name/description Appro priate Size Available Suitable Comments 1 4 Units within the Ankerside some of which can be combined Only 3 units available, none of them suitable as the shopping centre shuts at 6pm. 2 Vacant upstairs above (Shipleys Amusement Centre) First floor former gym, not suitable. Too small. Not within primary area 3 Former Coventry Building Society 4 Vacant George St Now Subway Too small Unreasonably high S106 cost in respect to payment for parking provision. End users see this as prohibitive to development on viability grounds particularly given no parking on site and that customers will have to pay to park in any event. 5 Vacant (former Tourist Information Centre) Not suitable, too small. Grade 2 listed. 6 Vacant (Retreat) Now let. Grade 2 listed. 7 Vacant (Jayman Estate Agents) Not suitable, currently under offer. 8 Vacant Colehill Not suitable for purpose, first floor. 9 Vacant Victoria Road 10 Tweedale Arms 11 Vacant Albert RD Not suitable, too small, bad location. Not suitable. Peripheral location. Not within primary retail area Too small Peripheral location. Not within primary retail area 12 Learn Direct 13 Gungate Development Site Not suitable. Bad location. Not primary shopping location peripheral No Reserved Matters have been submitted to enable even a start on the project. The end users are looking to be trading within the current calendar year. Therefore there is no likelihood of this being able to occur given the current progression of the scheme 14 Vertigo Not available. 15 Vacant First floor. Grade 2 listed. Too small. 16 Swaggers Not suitable, too small. Listed Grade 2. 17 Former Mr Simms sweet shop 19 White House 22 Former Jailhouse Rock pub Additional sites considered at the LPA request photos of these at end of text A. 47-47 Church Street Already let. 1st and 2nd floors. Not suitable. Office building. Grade 2 listed. Too big for one unit not big enough for 3 units lacks ground floor presence not within primary shopping area. Too big for one unit not big enough for 3 units, Not suitable. Bad location. Not in primary shopping location Part of 1960’s precinct not desirable for use overall building does not meet applicants aspirations in respect to appearance and the type and quality of neighbouring retailers is incompatible with proposed end users image requirements B. The Moat House,Lichfield Street C. 1 Middle Entry D. 17 Middle Entry E. Red Rose Garage, Lichfield Street F. 17 Lichfield Street G. 19 Lichfield Street H. 21 Lichfield Street I. Middle Unit and upper floors, Offa House, Orchard Street Too big, not in primary shopping area does meet clients criteria no obvious signs of being available or on the Market. Grade Two* Listed Set too far back from the road to offer street presence unsuitable for linked trips and passing trade due to peripheral location within the town Too small overall building does not meet applicants aspirations in respect to appearance and the type and quality of neighbouring retailers is incompatible with proposed users Building does not meet applicants aspirations in respect to appearance of neighbouring retailers who are not A3 uses not in primary shopping area does meet clients criteria no obvious signs of being available or on the Market. Only recently closed understood to have alternative user lined up. unsuitable not in primary shopping area does meet clients criteria no obvious signs of being available or on the Market. Grade Two Listed Building unsuitable not in primary shopping area does meet clients criteria no obvious signs of being available or on the Market. Grade Two Listed Building unsuitable not in primary shopping area does meet clients criteria no obvious signs of being available or on the Market. Grade Two Listed Building Access constraints location unsuitable not in primary shopping area does meet clients criteria no obvious signs of being available or on the Market. J. Brewery House (Annex to the Castle Hotel), Holloway K. Upper floor of the Coop Building, Church Street L. Registry Office (Arts Centre), Church Street M. St Edithas Church Hall, College Lane N. 10 Colehill O. 26a – 29 Market Street P. Former Hortons, West Street Access constraints location unsuitable not in primary shopping area does meet clients criteria Grade Two Listed Building no obvious signs of being available or on the Market. No obvious signs of being available or on the Market. unsuitable for applicants requirements not in primary shopping area No ground floor presence no obvious signs of being available or on the Market. unsuitable for applicants requirements not in primary shopping area Unsuitable location Not primary shopping area. Existing building lacks suitable street frontage as windows are too high up surrounding properties do not create the image the end users desire, no obvious signs of being available or on the Market. Currently in use by The Tamworth Pantomime Company Youth Academy Unavailable recently purchased Not primary shopping location understood upper floors are to be residential with offices below. Unavailable, trading. Has no signs of being available or on the Market. Unsuitable location not within shopping area surrounded by residential dwellings concern in respect to hours of operation restrictions given residential area site lacks profile. No street presence unsuitable for linked trips and passing trade due to peripheral location within the town Q. Kwik Fit, Upper Gungate R. Blockbuster, Mill Lane S. Phoenix Taverner, Aldergate Tamworth Sites: 1. 4 units in Ankerside Shopping Centre Unavailable trading as Blockbuster no signs of being available or on the Market. Location and presence unsuitable for applicants requirements not in primary shopping area Unavailable trading as Blockbuster no signs of being available or on the Market. Not primary Shopping area so undesirable Unavailable trading as NCC UK Ltd no signs of being available or on the Market. Location and Street presence unsuitable for applicants requirements There are 3 vacant units that are available inside Ankerside Shopping Centre [1 has been let recently]. The vacant units are not suitable for A3 use as the shopping centre closes at 6:00pm Monday to Saturday and 4:00pm on Sunday. 2. Above Shipley’s Amusement Centre This unit is not suitable for an A3 use as it is too small and it is on the first floor. As the vacant unit is on the first floor, it would preclude the development of a café or restaurant. The building does not lend itself to an A3 use. Previous use was a gym [sui generis]. 3. Former Coventry Building Society. This building has been let and is therefore not available. In addition, this unit is too small for the desired use. 4. Vacant corner unit, George Street. Not suitable for the desired A3 use as the unit is too small. Previous use was A1 therefore a change of use would be required. 5. Former tourist information centre, Market Street. Not suitable for the desired A3 use as the unit is too small. Previous use was A1 therefore a change of use would be required. Further ongoing expenditure is also considered to be an issue with the costs and levels of maintenance required to what is a Grade 2 listed building. 6. Vacant unit, Market Street This unit is already let and is currently being refurbished. 7. Former Jayman Estate Agents, Victoria Road. Not suitable for the desired A3 use as the unit is too small. This unit is currently under offer. Previous use was A2 therefore a change of use would be required. 8. Vacant unit, Colehill Not suitable for an A3 use as the vacant unit is on the first floor. The previous use was A2 therefore a change of use would be required. 9. Vacant unit, Victoria Road Not suitable for the desired use as the unit is too small. The character and location of this unit does not lend itself to an A3 use. There was no ‘to let’ sign displayed implying that the unit has already been let. 10. Tweedale Arms, Albert Road Not suitable for the desired use due to location and style of the building. The pub is currently not vacant. The character of the immediate area is not suited to a Nandos, Pizza Express & Starbucks as this unit is too small. 12. Learn direct, Aldergate Not suitable for desired A3 use as the unit does not lend itself to a restaurant/café. The surrounding predominant uses are takeaways, e.g. Pizza Hut, Chinese Takeaways. The character of the immediate area is not suited to a Nandos, Pizza Express or Starbucks as this unit is out of the town centre. 14. Vertigo, Colehill This unit contains a bar/pub is not available to let. The character of the immediate area is not suited to a Nandos, Pizza Express or Starbucks as this unit is out of the town centre. 15. Vacant unit, Colehill. Not suitable for the desired A3 use as the vacant unit is on the first floor and is too small. Further ongoing expenditure is also considered to be an issue with the costs and levels of maintenance required to what is a Grade 2 listed building. 16. Swaggers, Lichfield Street Not suitable for the desired A3 use as the unit is too small and further ongoing expenditure is also considered to be an issue with the costs and levels of maintenance required to what is a Grade 2 listed building. 17. Former Mr Simms sweet shop, George Street. This unit has already been let. 18. White House, Ground Floor Vacant, Lichfield Street. Not suitable for the desired A3 use as the unit is in an undesirable location. Further ongoing expenditure is also considered to be an issue with the costs and levels of maintenance required to what is a Grade 2 listed building 19. White House, Corporation Street. Not suitable for the desired A3 use, too small. Lack of ground floor for all three end users. Further ongoing expenditure is also considered to be an issue with the costs and levels of maintenance required to what is a Grade 2 listed building. The previous use was A2 therefore a change of use would be required. 22. Former Jailhouse Rock Pub, Lichfield Street. Not suitable for desired A3 use, %7KH0RDW+RXVH/LFKILHOG 6WUHHW '0LGGOH(QWU\ $&KXUFK6WUHHW &0LGGOH(QWU\ )*+ /LFKILHOG 6WUHHW -%UHZHU\+RXVH$QQH[WR WKH&DVWOH+RWHO (5HG5RVH*DUDJH/LFKILHOG 6WUHHW ,2IID+RXVH2UFKDUG 6WUHHW 06W(GLWKDV &KXUFK+DOO &ROOHJH/DQH .8SSHUIORRURIWKH&RRS %XLOGLQJ&KXUFK6WUHHW 1&ROHKLOO /5HJLVWU\2IILFH$UWV&HQWUH &KXUFK6WUHHW 4.ZLN )LW8SSHU *XQJDWH 2D± 0DUNHW6WUHHW 5%ORFNEXVWHU0LOO/DQH 3)RUPHU+RUWRQV:HVW 6WUHHW 63KRHQL[7DYHUQHU$OGHUJDWH Application Number: 0037/2012 Development: Alteration to existing access to allow maintenance vehicles to enter Tameside Nature Reserve Location: Tameside Nature Reserve, Peelers Way, Tamworth Target Date: 15 March 2012 1. Proposal 1.1 The application proposes the creation of a new vehicular access to the eastern side of Tameside Nature Reserve in order to allow periodic maintenance of the area in the form of mowing and hedge trimming which is not currently possible. The position of the access has been tailored to utilise an existing dropped curb and the gate will be sited in a slightly setback position from existing pedestrian access gate that is to be relocated beside the proposed access. The works will require the removal of vegetation and a small amount of fencing to provide an area with sufficient clearance for vehicles entering the site to pull clear of the highway. 1.2 The intended boundary treatment will be timber post and rail fencing; the existing pedestrian kissing gate will be retained and installed alongside the timber 5-bar gate proposed whilst the surface treatment to the access is intended to be kept as grass given the infrequent use proposed. Planning permission is required for the proposal as the works comprise the formation of a vehicular access to a classified road. 2. Site and Surroundings 2.1 Tameside Nature Reserve is positioned between Peelers Way and Fazeley Road to the south of the A5 and is bisected by the River Tame. The area to the western side of the river is relatively flat and displays an open expansive character. The area to the eastern side of the river displays greater vegetative cover and is understood to be currently inaccessible with a maintenance vehicle. 3. Key Issues • • The effect of the access on the character and appearance of the area The effect of the proposed access on highway safety 4. Conclusion 4.1 The application proposes the creation of a vehicular access to the eastern side of Tameside Nature Reserve in order to permit periodic maintenance of the area. It is considered the proposal is justified in terms of the requirement for the access, that the works proposed will conserve the character and appearance of the area and, given the intensity of use of the access and the measures to be put in place to discourage public use, the proposal will not present a risk to highway safety. Consequently the development is considered to comply with Staffordshire and Stoke Structure Plan 1996-2011 Policies D2 & T13 and Tamworth Local Plan 2001-2011 Policies ENV9 and ENV19. Recommendation Approve subject to conditions 0037/2012 N PIO REEDMACE INE CELAND CAM NDIN CELA E MACE REED M Drain REED ACE Drain D LAN CE INE Overflow Kettle Brook me River Ta Pond y ntr ve l na Ca ROAD Drain PEELERS WAY Co PARK FARM BARN BRID GE ALLENSMEAD BROADSMEATH BROADSMEATH GREATMEAD in Dra Coventry Canal BROADSMEATH Rive me r Ta LOWERPARK RK PA FA RM STONEPIT © Crown copyright and database rights 2011. Ordnance Survey 100018267 RO AD 5. Relevant Site History 5.1 No relevant site history 6. Statutory Consultation Responses 6.1 Staffordshire County Council - Highways Authority 6.1.1 Raised initial concerns with regard to the effect of the access on Highway Safety and requested further information. 6.1.2 The Highways Authority on receiving the requested information now state no objection in principle to the access subject to the reassurances received on the intensity of use and the area between the gate and the back of the footway being surfaced in a bound material. 7. Public Representations Received 7.1 No public representations received 8. Planning Considerations 8.1 The key issues in the determination of this application are considered to be: 1) The effect of the access on the character and appearance of the area 2) The effect of the access on highway safety 8.2 Character and Appearance 8.2.1 The formation of the proposed vehicular access will result in the creation of a small area to the front of the intended 5-bar gate to allow vehicles to pull clear of the highway which will be bordered by t imber post and rail fencing and some replacement planting. The creation of the area is not considered to appear inappropriate in the setting and the removal of some vegetation is not judged to have an adverse long term effect on the area and as such is not in conflict with Local Plan Policy ENV9 which seeks to discourage tree and hedgerow removal. 8.2.2 One minor concern of note exists with regard to construction waste, refuse or other debris being fly tipped in the vacant area to the front of the gate. Unfortunately however, the officer cannot envisage a means of both retaining uninterrupted access straight from the highway for highway safety reasons whilst also restricting access to fly tipping vehicles. Given the justification for the access in order to facilitate maintenance of the wider nature reserve, on balance such an issue is not considered to be sufficient to warrant refusal and is raised as a minor potential negative which may result from the proposal. It should also be noted that discussions with the applicant were undertaken relating to potential alternative locations for the access, the main viable position being from an area where a disused asbestos tip currently exists. The applicant considered that due to contamination issues this option was not considered suitable. 8.2.3 Consequently the proposal is judged to be in compliance with Staffordshire and Stoke Structure Plan 1996-2011 Policy D2 and Tamworth Local Plan Policies ENV9 and ENV19. 8.3 Highway Safety 8.3.1 The Highways Authority raised initial concerns with regard to the effect of the access on Highway Safety reporting that the application contained insufficient information on the maintenance regime proposed; the types of vehicles intended to use the access and the arrangements for visitors accessing the reserve. 8.3.2 The applicant and agent have since provided additional information with regard to the above matters. They confirm the access will be used for maintenance vehicles only and that there will be no public vehicular access to any part of the reserve. It is also confirmed that the vehicles using the access will be a tractor with a mowing attachment, initially in the first grass cutting season and subsequently, once every two years. It is the applicant’s intention to leave the meadow to nature as much as possible. The applicant has confirmed the new access gate will be restricted to the general public by a padlock with the key held by the applicant and signage will be erected stating ‘no parking’ to discourage public use. Pedestrian access will continue to be through the relocated kissing gate. The agent also confirms the tractor will not require a dedicated turning area as after mowing the area, the tractor will be able to exit the site in a forward gear. 8.3.3 The Highways Authority have since indicated that in light of the additional information submitted, they have no objections to the proposed access provided it is used relatively infrequently as stated in the supporting information. They do request however, that the vehicular crossover between the gate and the footpath is surfaced in a bound material as opposed to being left to grass as proposed. This is required in order to minimise debris being deposited on the highway after vehicles have exited the site. Officers consider a condition would secure the provision a bound material. Subject to the condition imposed, it is judged the proposal is in compliance with Staffordshire and Stoke Structure Plan 1996-2011 Policy T13 relating to amongst other matters, highway safety. 9. Conclusion 9.1 The application proposes the creation of a vehicular access to the eastern side of Tameside Nature Reserve in order to permit periodic maintenance of the area. It is considered the proposal is justified in terms of the requirement for the access, that the works proposed will conserve the character and appearance of the area and, given the intensity of use of the access and the measures to be put in place to discourage public use, the proposal will not present a risk to highway safety. Consequently the development is considered to comply with Staffordshire and Stoke Structure Plan 1996-2011 Policies D2 & T13 and Tamworth Local Plan 2001-2011 Policies ENV9 and ENV19. Conditions / Reasons 1. The development shall be started within three years of the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004). 2. The development hereby approved shall only be carried out in accordance with the application form and the drawings received on the 01 February 2012 unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To define the approval. 3. The vehicular crossover between the rearmost section of the footpath and the gate hereby permitted shall be surfaced in a bound material. Reason: In order to minimise the transfer of debris from within the site onto the highway in the interests of highway safety in accordance with Staffordshire and Stoke Structure Plan 1996-2011 Policy T13.