This file was created by Oracle Reports. Please view this document in Page Layout mode.

ITEM 4

APPLICATION NO:M/FP/2491/05/P

DESCRIPTION:Demolition of existing buildings & residential development comprising 275 houses with associated roads, car parking and landscaping

LOCATION:Middlesbrough College (Marton Campus). Marton Road

APPLICANT:Taylor Woodrow Developments

SUBMITTED BY:Mr I Lyle

REPORT:

LOCATION

01.The Marton Campus of Middlesbrough College, on the eastern side of Marton Road.

PLAN STATUS

02.The following policies and proposals of the Middlesbrough Local Plan (1999) are material to this application:

Policy E1 – General Development Policy

Policy E10 – Secondary Open Space: Protection from Development

Policy E27 – Protection of Trees and Woodlands

Policy E30 – Built Form and Urban Design

Policy HO6 – Unallocated Residential Development, Locational Guidelines

Policy HO8 – New Residential Development, Design and Layout

Policy HO10 – Affordable Housing

Policy HO15 – Provision of Community Facilities in New Development

Policy HO17 – Housing Provision for People with Disabilities

Appendix 19 – Housing Design and Layout

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

03.None relevant

PROPOSAL

04.This application was deferred pending a site visit at the meeting on 6th January 2006. Members will visit the application site on 3 March 2006.

05.This report concerns one of six applications reported on this agenda today that relates to either the proposed relocation of Middlesbrough College to a new single site campus in Middlehaven, or to the proposed development of 3 of the College’s 4 existing campuses.

06.The site the subject of this application is the Marton Campus of Middlesbrough College. The site has an area of 7.35 hectares (18.1 acres). It is bounded by Marton Road to the west with existing housing on the western side, by Brackenhoe School West (now closed) and James Cook Hospital to the north, by playing fields belonging partly to the Council and partly to the College to the east, and by Prissick Base to the south. The site is generally flat.

07.Existing buildings on the site comprise a range of 1970's style two- and three- storey teaching blocks along with a number of residential properties, e.g. caretaker's house and nursery.

08.It is proposed to clear the existing College buildings from the site and provide a residential development comprising 275 dwelling houses. In more detail, the application comprises:

  • 275 dwellings in a mix of two- and three- storeys, and three- and four- bedroom houses;
  • 4 bungalows built to mobility standard;
  • Vehicular access and egress would be gained from the existing points on Marton Road, and incorporating an in-out arrangement proposed as a one-way "loop" arrangement around a proposed central landscaped park within the site;
  • An egress route only would be available through the existing Brackenhoe School West site, with an exit point onto Marton Road;
  • Access would be provided to the existing playing fields on the eastern side of the site for maintenance purposes;
  • A proposed site layout based on a series of avenues extending north-west to south-east through the site;
  • A sizeable area of proposed amenity open space would be provided within the area formed by the proposed loop road, and this would incorporate a number of existing trees;
  • A proposed layout based on a crescent of houses at the eastern end which also encloses the space and forms a focal point; and
  • A proposed strip of open space some 20 metres wide, and forming part of the highway verge, would also remain alongside Marton Road (outside the development site).

09.A number of supporting documents and items of supplementary information are provided with the application including:-

  • Design Statement and Planning Application drawings;
  • Transport Assessment;
  • Flood Risk Assessment;
  • Ground Condition Report;
  • Planning, Housing Land, Open Space, Issues report;
  • Tree Survey Report;
  • Landscape proposals; and
  • Statement of Community Involvement.

CONSULTATIONS

10.The application has been the subject of the usual neighbour notification exercise and has been advertised in the press (16 December 2005) and by means of a site notice. A number of objections have been received as a result of the neighbour notification exercise and these are summarised in Appendix 1 attached to this report. These are also dealt with in further depth at paragraphs 49 and 50 of this report.

11.Transportation Section has no objections subject to appropriate conditions being attached to any approval. They have made various comments on the supporting Transport Assessment and these are set out in the Analysis below. They have also confirmed that the findings of the Flood Risk Assessment are acceptable, and that the appropriate conditions to deal with its recommendations should be attached to any permission granted.

12.Community Protection Service has no objections subject to appropriate conditions governing site investigation and noise attenuation.

13.Streetscene Services Service comments that as a refuse collection vehicle can weigh in excess of 26 tonnes it would not enter private courtyards or accesses due to possible third party claims for damage. The Council operates a wheeled bin refuse collection service and residents are required to bring their own wheeled bin to the adopted road kerbside on refuse collection day and return it after emptying. The maximum recommended pushing distance for this type of domestic wheeled bin is 15 metres from its storage area to the refuse collection vehicle. Most residents prefer to store their refuse at the rear of their property but there does not appear to be a rear access to allow this for the terraced properties. Detailed comment is also provided as to a number of plots where the residents would need to bring their refuse to the front of their properties as the collection vehicle would not enter the small rear accesses, and where bin stores at the front of the properties would be required. It is assumed that the main access roads would be adopted.

14.Landscape Section has no problems with the landscape proposals so long as the proposed tree protection is followed.

15.Middlesbrough Police Crime Design Advisor has provided advice to the applicant on the Secured by Design Initiative and on issues of lighting, boundary treatment and landscaping.

16.Sport England has records for a number of sports facilities at this site, i.e. 3 full sized football pitches with ancillary changing accommodation, 3 sports halls, and a health and fitness suite. The sports halls and fitness suite would be lost to the proposed development. New indoor sports facilities are however proposed as part of the College's proposed single-site campus at Middlehaven. The football pitches to the east are to be retained by the College as part of their sports facilities but the loss of the changing facilities could be material to the usability of the playing pitches. The applicant seeks to address this matter by making a financial contribution towards the development of improved changing facilities.

17.The Environment Agency has no objections to the supporting Flood Risk Assessment but recommends that a number of planning conditions be imposed if planning permission is granted. This includes the requirement to provide water run-off storage capacity on the site.

18.Northumbrian Water provides comments on issues of water supply, new discharges of foul and surface water and connections to the public sewers.

19.Northern Gas Networks has no objections, and information is provided as to the location of existing gas mains within the area.

20.Marton Community Council has serious misgivings about this application:

  • Fear that, with 275 houses, this will lead to an unacceptable increase in traffic on Marton Road, leading to further delays on Ladgate Lane and Stokesley Road in the morning rush hour;
  • Traffic exiting the site wishing to turn right and travel towards Middlesbrough will experience considerable difficulties at peak times, unless assisted by traffic lights – the general feeling is that we don't want any more lights along this corridor!

In summary, the Community Council opposes this application but may be persuaded to reconsider their position if and when a significant improvement in traffic flow on Marton Road is achieved.

ANALYSIS

21.This is an application to demolish the existing College buildings at Marton Campus and to redevelop the site for residential development comprising 275 dwelling houses along with associated access roads, car parking and landscaping. As such, this proposal needs to be considered in the context, firstly, of the current national and local planning policies and guidance, and then in the context of more site-specific factors. The applicant has submitted a Planning, Housing Land, and Open Space Issues Report as part of this application, and its analyses and conclusions are assessed throughout this analysis. Finally, the Marton Campus site has, like the Kirby and Longlands Campuses, been the subject of a Development Brief that is a further material considered in this analysis.

National and Regional Planning Policies

22.The current national and regional planning framework is set out in the Overview report at Item 1 of this agenda, but the following points are worthy of particular note in this case.

23.Planning Policy Guidance Note 3 – Housing (PPG3), at paragraphs 57 and 58 advises that local planning authorities should avoid the inefficient use of land and should encourage housing development which makes more efficient use of land (between 30 and 50 dwellings per hectare), seeking more intensive development at places with good public transport accessibility. The current proposals for this site are acceptable in this context.

24.Regional Planning Guidance for the North East (RPG1) provides the current statutory planning guidance at regional level, and it is recognised that this proposal is in accordance with Paragraph 4.61, which states that the policy objectives of RPG1 are "to ensure that there should be a greater choice of housing in sustainable locations, and that the best use is made of the existing stock, and suitable previously-developed land and buildings in urban areas in providing this choice".

25.Regional Spatial Strategy for the North East - Submission Draft (RSS) is a material consideration while not yet forming part of the statutory development plan for the area. It forms the link between National and Local Policy guidance and reflects the policies included in PPG3. The emphases placed on the principles of sustainability and the development of brownfield, rather than greenfield, sites are embodied in these proposals.

26.Tees Valley Structure Plan, at Policy H4 provides that increased residential densities will be sought on appropriate sites within and on the edge of built-up areas. Sites could include those adjacent or close to existing or proposed rail stations; and close to other major transport nodes such as bus stations or main bus routes. Care will also be needed to ensure that increased densities are appropriate to the scale and character of the site and its surroundings and that there will not be any detriment to local and residential amenity. The densities proposed in this application, i.e. approximately 37 dwellings per hectare are well within the guideline figures in PPG3, whilst it is considered that the development is appropriate to the scale and character of the site and its surroundings and thus complies with Structure Plan Policy H4.

Local Plan Policies

27.This proposal must be assessed in terms of various policies in the Middlesbrough Local Plan, which range from the general principles of Policy E1 (“General Development Policy”) and Policy E30 (“Built Form and Urban Design”) to the more specific policies regarding the protection of existing trees and woodlands (Policy E27), and the standards and criteria for the detailed design and layout of specific housing developments (Policy HO8 and Appendix 19). The specific policies and guidelines will be discussed later in this part of the analysis, but first of all we must consider the particular issues of principle that have arisen in this case. The formal status of the application site requires that the overriding principles of the proposed housing development must be assessed against two specific policies in the Local Plan. These are Local Plan Policy E10 concerning “Secondary Open Space: Protection from Development” and Policy HO6 regarding “Unallocated Residential Development, Locational Guidelines”.

28.Firstly, Local Plan Policy E10 provides protection for various sites throughout the area of the Local Plan that are valued as secondary open space. These areas are designated on the Proposals Map and include institutions in their own grounds, such as hospitals and educational buildings, cemeteries, and otherwise various amenity spaces. Both the Kirby campus and, in this case, the Marton Campus are identified as one of these areas of secondary open space, and therefore Policy E10 requires due consideration in this part of the assessment. The policy does not exclude the possibility of development entirely, as it states that “planning permission for development on secondary open space, as identified on the proposals map, will be granted where it would not result in the loss of an area of significant value: i) as a recreational, visual or amenity resource; or ii) for nature conservation, including the contribution that it has to make to the wildlife network. In all cases where development is acceptable the predominantly green character of the open space should still be retained”.

29.Therefore, the main test regarding the proposed development of the Marton Campus concerns whether or not “such spaces make an important contribution to visual amenity in this densely developed urban area, are often of wildlife and nature conservation value, and have potential for amenity or sports use. Accordingly such spaces should generally be protected from development, unless their open space value to the community can be protected or enhanced by very limited development”. The applicants have responded to this policy in their “Planning, Housing Land and Open Space Issues Report” submitted in support of this application. This report looks at the functions, use, and townscape value of the existing open spaces on the Marton Campus site, noting that the existing educational buildings and their associated car parks occupy a major proportion of the site as institutional buildings in their own grounds.

30.Within the Marton Campus this comprises the western frontage of the site onto Marton Road, which is presently used as informal open space for staff and students, together with the wide highway verge outwith this main site frontage, and the mature hedgerows and belts of trees that also define the southern and eastern site boundaries. The application site has been identified by the Development Brief as the basic developable area within the larger site campus, which thereby excludes the existing playing fields on the eastern side, and the adjoining area protected as part of both a Green Wedge (Policy E2) and Primary Open Space (Policy E7). The report concludes that the area of secondary open space does not currently provide any sports pitches or recreational facilities, nor has the area been identified as being of any nature conservation or wildlife interest. Furthermore, as an area of open space it remains in private use as no formal public access is available. With regard to its role as a visual or amenity resource, the report suggests that the open space does form a green setting for the College buildings, but that the visual or amenity value of these western areas of open space is limited by the peripheral planting and the screening effect of the existing trees on this frontage.

31.The report concludes that the complete loss of this secondary open space would be contrary to Policy E10 but that in this case an area of open space would not only be retained within the proposed housing layout but would be made available for public use, unlike the present private College spaces. This proposed area of open space would provide an important form of on-site mitigation that would ensure that the visual or amenity contribution to the open character along Marton Road would, to a significant extent, be retained. Additional areas of landscaping would add further to this townscape contribution on this main road frontage. On this basis, the proposed housing development and retained open space are considered to be appropriate in terms of this open space policy, whilst also taking other material considerations regarding the overall regeneration and environmental benefits of the proposed housing scheme into account. Nevertheless, it is recognised that the proposed development would not accord with the approved development plan in these terms, and would therefore involve a departure from the Local Plan.

32.The second issue of principle in this assessment revolves around Policy HO6, which concerns sites that are not allocated for housing development in the Local Plan, but which therefore must be assessed as “windfall” sites. The Marton Campus site is not allocated for housing purposes (which would contradict the designation as secondary open space) and therefore requires testing against this policy as a windfall site. This criteria-based policy therefore provides a set of locational guidelines against which individual proposals must be tested. The policy states that “proposals for residential development on land within the defined limit to development will be approved provided that general development policy criteria are met (Policy E1), and in particular: