COMMITTEE REPORT

Application Ref.
/ 15/04473/OUT
Applicant
/ Marrons Planning
Reason for Referral to Committee
/ Major Application
Case Officer / David Jeffery
Presenting Officer / David Jeffery
Southam Town Council / Southam Town Council
Ward Member / Councillor Chris Williams
Site Address / Land between Daventry Road and Welsh Road East
Proposal / ·  Outline application for 535 Houses including 187 affordable houses (35%)
·  Sport Pitches
·  Pavilion
·  Convenience shop
·  Highway alterations to facilitate the development
Description of Constraints / ·  The application site is located to the east of Southam
·  The site comprises a large single agricultural field
·  Hedgerows to the boundaries
·  A public right of way runs across the southern boundary of the site
·  Neighbouring approval for live work units
·  Near to approved temporary travellers accommodation
Summary of Recommendation / ·  APPROVE SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS AND S106

Development Plan

Paragraph 215 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) advises that “due weight should be given to relevant policies in existing plans according to their degree of consistency with this framework”.

Relevant Policies in the Development Plan for this application, including for the supply of housing, are:

High Consistency with Framework

·  EF14 – Listed Buildings

·  EF12 / EF13 - Conservation Areas

Consistent with Framework

·  PR1 – Landscape and Settlement Character

·  DEV1 – Layout and Design

·  DEV 4 – Access

·  DEV10 – Crime Prevention

Some Consistency with Framework

·  DEV2 – Landscaping

Some Consistency but Framework less restrictive

·  COM 9 – Walking and Cycling

·  PR7 – Flood Defence

·  EF6/EF7 - Nature Conservation and Geology

·  EF10 – Trees, Woodland, and Hedgerows

·  DEV3 – Amenity Open Space

·  DEV6 – Services

·  DEV7 – Drainage

·  DEV8 - Energy Conservation

·  COM4/COM5 – Open Space

·  COM13 – Affordable Housing

·  COM14 – Mix of Dwelling Types

·  COM15 – Accessible Housing

·  EF9 – Trees, woodlands and Hedgerows

·  EF11 – Archaeological Sites

Not consistent with Framework

·  DEV 5 – Car parking

·  STR1 – Settlement Hierarchy

·  STR2 – New Housing Provision

·  DEV 5 – Car parking

·  COM1 – Local Choice

·  EF 3 – Areas of Restraint

·  CTY1 – Control over Development

Other Material Considerations

Central Government Guidance

·  NPPF National Planning Policy Framework 2012

·  Planning Policy Guidance 2014

Supplementary Planning Documents & Guidance

• Meeting Housing Needs 2008

• Car and Cycle Parking Standards 2007

• Provision of Open Space 2005

• Stratford on Avon District Design Guide 2002

• PPG17 Open Space, Sport and Recreation Assessment and Playing Pitch Strategy (Arup, April 2011 and September 2014 update)

• Corporate Strategy 2011-2015

·  Planning and Community Safety - Design and Crime Reduction 2006: Planning Advice Note

·  Planning Obligations

Other Documents

Submission Core Strategy & Main Modifications

This document was submitted to the Secretary of State on 29 September 2014, with the examination in public (EIP) in January 2015. The Inspector’s interim report was published on 19 March 2015 and recommended further work in respect of housing need, amongst other elements. This work has now been undertaken and the EIP took place during January 2016.

Paragraph 216 of the NPPF allows for weight to be given to relevant policies in emerging plans, unless other material considerations indicate otherwise, and only subject to the stage of preparation of the plan, the extent of unresolved objections and the degree of consistency of the relevant emerging policies to the NPPF policies.

On 31st March, the Council published a schedule of Main Modifications to the Submission Core Strategy 2014. The Schedule of Main Modifications has been prepared by the Council taking account of the Inspector's preliminary indications as to the main modifications that he considers are required in order to make the plan legal, sound and capable of adoption. As a result of this, it is the view of officers that greater weight can now be given to the policies of the emerging Core Strategy.

I therefore consider that the requirements of Policies:-

CS.1 – Sustainable Development

CS.4 – Water Environment and Flood Risk

CS.5 – Landscape

CS.6 - Natural Environment

CS.7 - Green Infrastructure

CS.9 - Design and Distinctiveness

CS.21 – Economic Development

CS.24 – Healthy Communities

CS.25 – Transport & Communication

CS.26 – Developer Contributions

are recognised as material planning considerations and given significant weight in the determination of the planning application.

The other key relevant policies which have moderate weight are:-

CS.15 – Distribution of Development

CS.17 – Affordable Housing

CS.18 – Housing Mix and Type

AS.10 – Countryside and villages

SOU.3 – Land Between Daventry Road and Welsh Road East

Policy CS.16 – Housing Development remains having limited weight

The 2012 Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) Review

The SHLAA has only looked at suitability for housing, using obvious site constraints (“potential show-stoppers”). It does not follow that what it shows as a ‘suitable’ site is necessarily an ‘appropriate’ site. The SHLAA 2012 does not assess appropriateness against the emerging Core Strategy.

In officers’ opinion the conclusions reached by the SHLAA should be given limited weight and the appropriateness of the site should be assessed against relevant development plan policies and all relevant material considerations.

Landscape Sensitivity Study 2012

This document forms part of the evidence base underpinning the preparation of the Core Strategy. Part B of the document covers land parcels/sensitivity assessments for the main towns and villages.

Southam Town Plan 2016

In 2006 the Town Council reviewed and updated their Plan it aims to address the needs of the community by:

·  Preserving and enhancing the environment of the town

·  Preserving and enhancing the level and quality of shops and services provided, and;

·  Ensuring that there is adequate housing of the right type to meet the needs of future generations.

Other Legislation

·  Human Rights Act 1998

·  Town & Country Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas) Act 1990

·  Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 (any site in a rural location)

·  The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010

·  Community and Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Legislation

·  Localism Act 2011

Summary of Relevant History

None

Applicant’s Supporting Documents

The planning application has been supported by the following documentation;

·  Application Form

·  Air Quality Assessment

·  Arboricultural assessment

·  Climate Change and Sustainability Statement

·  Ecological Assessment

·  Flood Risk Assessment

·  Geo Environmental Report

·  Geo-physical Survey Report

·  Heritage Desk Based Assessment

·  Landscape and Visual Appraisal

·  Landscape Strategy

·  Noise Assessment Report

·  Planning Statement

·  Retail Assessment

·  Service Supply Statement

·  Soils and Agriculture use

·  Transport Statement

·  Waste minimisation statement

·  Design and Access Statement

·  Biodiversity Impact Assessment

Ward Member - Councillor Chris Williams

Objects to the proposals. Has concerns for the following reasons:

·  Urbanization of the site

·  Size of development in a rural location

Will listen to debate before commenting further

Councillor – Tony Bromwich

Objects to the proposal for the following reasons:

·  Unsustainable proposal

·  Development will cause additional strain on health and education

·  It has to be taken into account that Southam is a hub for surrounding villages

·  Increased traffic issues

·  Lack of public transport in Southam

·  Development represents an approximate 25% increase on housing numbers to the town

·  It is questionable that the site meets the criteria for development of this size under the NPPF

Southam Town Council

Object to the application for the following planning reasons:

There is no justification for the inclusion of a further 500 dwellings (SOU3 Proposal) on the east side of the bypass. The existing settlements are already disconnected and isolated from the main town, an additional adjacent development even further away would create an isolated satellite community. Stratford District Council's Core Strategy

There are no suitable safe pedestrian access routes from this satellite development to the town centre that do not require negotiating busy dangerous roads. Therefore, it is inevitable that most journeys to the town centre will be by car and would be contradictory to the sustainability requirements of the NPPF. The walking distance to Southam College and St James School is 1.8km which is significantly above the 1km distance required by the NPPF.

The public transport services are inadequate for residential areas beyond the bypass or on the fringes of the town.

The proportion of Southam residents living and working in the town is already low at 33% (2001 census). With the addition of SOU1 and SOU2 and the proposed inclusion of SOU3 the population would further increase by around 40% to somewhere approaching 10,000. This high level of growth in such a short period of time means that inevitably the proportion of residents working in Southam will be further reduced and therefore this satellite development will be a dormitory for commuters working in faraway work places.

The capacity of local health care infrastructure is inadequate to meet the planned residential increase.

The diversity of Southam's retail sector is currently very restricted as there is a lack of variety of shops in the town centre. It is our opinion that the creation of a general store of 500 Sqm significantly exceeds the needs of 500 houses and therefore undermines the services in the town centre, as inevitably many of the households already cut-off on the east side of the bypass would switch to this large store.

It is our understanding that Warwickshire County Council has decided that there is no requirement for an additional primary school on this site, therefore it's clear that residents of this satellite development will drive their children to primary schools considering it's not safe for children to make a long walk along busy dangerous roads. This is a further reason why the proposed development is not sustainable.

Southam town already has a significant deficit of public open spaces, recently worsened by the loss of the Mayfield Road open space due to the Coventry Road new development. The existing proposed new developments for the town will further exacerbate this shortage. Southam Town Council believes it is vital that any further developments of scale, such as SOU3 must come by design with significant additional public open space for the wellbeing of residents and for safe informal use, as evidenced at the Recreational Ground on Park Lane.

The proposed implementation trajectory for SOU3 is unrealistic because there is still no house builder on board. The number of projected achievable completions for phase 2 is an insignificant contribution to the five-year land supply when compared to other more favourable sites in the District, which include available brownfield sites.

Correspondence between the Town Council and the applicant has been requested to be treated as a further representation to this application (31/03/2016).

It contained the following requests in the event that planning permission be granted:

·  Fully Funded CCTV for Subway for minimum 50 years

·  A Town Centre Community Space/Town Hall to be built, possibly former police station or former HSBC Building

·  Amenity space like Merestone Park on the Development

·  No need for addition sports pitches

·  Cycle links from the development to each school in the town

·  A fully funded School bus for minimum 50 years from new development to all schools

·  Additional parking for minimum 75 cars at Southam College

·  Additional parking and major fully funded extension to leisure centre in Southam

·  A pedestrian/cycle bridge over the bypass, as subway is regularly impassable and a pedestrian crossing would be unsafe and disrupt the traffic flow

·  Funds to help improve the town centre

·  Fully funded maintenance of the Daventry Road Roundabout for 50 years

·  Flashing speed signs on all arterial routes in and out the town

Napton Parish Council

Object to the application for the following reasons:

·  Would amount to a serious erosion of green gap between Napton and Southam,

·  Would increase the potential for Napton to become a suburb of Southam

·  The development will increase traffic through Napton and further increase existing problems with speeding traffic in the village

·  The development would put considerable strain on secondary school places in Southam with implications for school age children in Napton

Third Party Responses

119 letters have been received 118 of which raise objection to the proposal and 1 of which is a letter of support. The objectors raise the following concerns:

Traffic issues

-  Reliance on cars

-  People would drive to school

-  Walking distances are too far.

-  Access roads to Southam Primary and Southam College are already congested.

-  Environmental impacts of extra traffic would be negative

-  The proposed pedestrian crossing on the bypass makes little sense as it would impede traffic flow and would not be safe

-  Poor public transport links

-  Requirement for extra parking

-  Local Roads are not suitable for extra traffic

-  Welsh Road is already dangerous

-  Traffic at the roundabout on Daventry Road would exceed its capacity

-  Pedestrian links to the town are inadequate and unsafe

-  Development would overlap with construction of HS2 causing gridlock

Infrastructure

-  Application does not propose a primary school

-  Local primary and secondary schools and college not big enough to cope with extra children needing to use it – already at capacity

-  Will place additional strain on healthcare services such as doctors and dentists.

-  Healthcare services will require upgrade

-  Distance to shops/facilities will mean that the car will be used more for journeys.

-  Inadequate shopping provision in town

-  Development in villages which surround Southam has already increased strain on Southam’s services and facilities.

Landscape

-  Would result in urban sprawl