east staffordshire local plan hearing statement 17 · molson coors site appraised in the...
TRANSCRIPT
East Staffordshire Local Plan
Hearing Statement 17
Burton upon Trent
Tuesday 19th
May 2015
a. Bargates/Molson Coors, High Street (361/383) including: i) definition of sites(s), ii masterplan requirements, and iii) deliverability.
i) Definition of Sites
ai1. The Local Plan allocates two sites (SHLAA Sites 361 and 383) located
immediately adjacent to each other at the northern end of the High Street in Burton
upon Trent. The combination of Bargates and Molson Coors and their proximity to
each other is the most important redevelopment opportunity that Burton upon Trent
has. The Bargates site was appraised in the Interim Sustainability Appraisal and the
Molson Coors site appraised in the Sustainability Appraisal Report. This unique and
prominent location has the potential to reinvigorate the High Street and provide
opportunities for the enjoyment of the Washlands. For this reason it is important for
the Borough Council to single out these sites within the Local Plan and promote
redevelopment through Strategic Policy SP11. Both sites are complex in terms of the
context within which they sit and because the location is an important gateway, it is
important to ensure that any proposals coming forward get it right.
Local Plan policies map
ai2. The first site is the Molson Coors headquarters comprising a number of
buildings and a dedicated car park for employees. The building located to the north
is modern in design and construction and was originally built as a hotel – but was
never occupied as such. The traditional and impressive brick buildings are original
brewery buildings and Grade 2 listed. They occupy a dominant position on the High
Street and at the edge of Burton’s town centre retail area. There are other structures
within the site including a former water tower. The extent of the Local Plan allocation
is reflected on the policies map and accords with the SHLAA proforma submitted by
ARUP on behalf of Molson Coors in 2013. SHLAA Reference 383 is found in Core
Document C110. The site continues to be occupied by Molson Coors.
Molson Coors SHLAA site 383
ai3. The second site, Bargates, is completely owned by the Borough Council. Its
location is north of the Molson Coors site near the junction of High Street and
Horninglow Road and overlooking the River Trent where it is bridged by the historic
Burton Bridge, a main gateway into the town centre. Bargates was previously the
Riverside Centre shopping area with a bowling alley which was concrete and cutting
edge in design at the time of its construction. The extent of the Local Plan allocation
is reflected on the policies map and accords with the SHLAA proforma 361 which is
found in Core Document C110.
Bargates SHLAA site 361
ai4. The Borough Council also own the land currently used as the Meadowside
Car Park. The redevelopment of Bargates would include the Meadowside car park
and its inclusion formed part of the site area in the Borough Council’s Supplementary
Planning Document (2010), Core Document D.18. It is therefore suggested that the
Bargates allocation is amended as a main modification.
ai5. For clarification it is one allocation comprising two sites that could be
delivered separately. Policy SP4 identifies that 350 dwellings could be delivered
across the allocation. The Borough Council had the larger site in mind when arriving
at this figure, therefore it is not necessary to adjust Policy SP4 to accommodate the
implications of a revised boundary.
ai6. The Borough Council is amenable to considering both sites as two separate
allocations however a single policy would still apply.
ii) Masterplan requirements
aii1. The Bargates site already benefits from feasibility studies, options appraisals
and consultation which was carried out in 2010. Following this a Preferred Option for
the development of the site was identified. A design brief (Doc D.19) and
Supplementary Planning Document (Doc D.18) have been produced for the site
based on the Preferred Option, which shows a mixed use development, led by
housing and including retail, office and leisure elements. The SPD covers an area
larger than the allocation in the emerging Local Plan by incorporating the car park for
the Meadowside leisure centre, see response to i).
aii2. Set out in the Strategic Policy SP11 is the intention to prepare a development
brief which will provide overarching guidelines and principles for bringing forward
development on the two sites. The preparation of the development brief could be a
collaborative approach with Molson Coors. Any development brief would have to be
responsive in ensuring that proposals meet market expectations at any given time.
Key masterplan/development brief parameters are set out in Strategic Policy 11.
aii3. The Borough Council worked with Molson Coors and their consultants on draft
Strategic Policy 11 prior to the publication of the Pre-Submission Plan. It was
important to have a policy which was flexible and not too prescriptive given the
complexity of the two sites and the area as a whole. However the policy also needed
to provide a basic framework within which proposals could come forward – to provide
a steer on the key drivers that would determine the development of the sites such as
design, layout and historic context together with permeability, mix of uses and
parking. Policy SP11 would form the basis of the development brief.
aii4. It was decided that the two sites, given their proximity to one another, should
be accommodated in one policy. Reflecting on the representations made by Molson
Coors and should they have a separate policy for their High Street site, from a
Borough Council perspective having two policies to cover both sites would lead to a
huge amount of repetition. Given their proximity the key drivers will be the same for
both sites. The Borough Council also wish to keep policies in the plan to a minimum
and highlight that most strategic sites do not have a corresponding policy. The High
Street sites are different because of their importance.
aii5. The Borough Council considers that given the importance of the regeneration
of the High Street area, a comprehensive approach to the whole lot e.g. both sites
together would be the best outcome for Burton upon Trent. That said, and
recognising that both sites have different owners and different timescales for delivery
the policy sets out that a phased approach to delivering the entire area is also
achievable.
aii6. Whilst both sites have landowners willing to redevelop, the Molson Coors site
is occupied and its disposal forms part of a longer term strategy whereas the
Bargates site is available for development now. It was felt that a development brief
approach could coordinate regeneration by providing a framework within which
development could come forward. The Borough Council does not want to see such
an important gateway to be unplanned, piecemeal and uncoordinated.
aii7. The first bullet point of the draft policy states that proposals for the
development of the area will generally be supported provided they `represent a
comprehensive approach for the whole area or demonstrate a phased approach
which would not undermine the delivery of the whole site’.
aii8. The Borough Council’s previous development brief and Supplementary
Planning Document provide a good starting point for the preparation of a new
development brief. However a new brief will need to extend its scope to include the
Molson Coors site. In terms of constraints, context and character the basis of the
brief will be the same. A development brief will therefore coordinate development for
the two sites but at a high level rather than in a prescriptive way, underpinned by
SP11 and supported by the work already undertaken.
iii) Deliverability
aiii1. To demonstrate deliverability this section sets out some of the background to
the redevelopment of High Street and provides a timeline of key milestones. There
has been a good working relationship with Molson Coors over the years with
productive discussions at a high level between East Staffordshire Borough Council
and Molson Coors occurring regularly.
aiii2. In 2011 Molson Coors announced a multi year re-development of its brewery
infrastructure at a cost of £75million. The purpose of the redevelopment has been to
introduce more efficient and effective ways of operating the business. The
redevelopment of Molson Coors’s brewery infrastructure, which amounts to
approximately 100 hectares within the heart of Burton upon Trent and a number of
other sites located in Burton’s employment areas, was recognised as having the
potential to release surplus brewery land.
aiii3. The Borough Council were first approached in January 2013 by Molson Coors
and their consultants ARUP. These early discussions dealt with the redevelopment
of the brewery and in particular the rationalisation of the brewery onto a single site.
The Borough Council has been involved in determining a number of applications to
assist with redevelopment proposals on brewery land including an energy centre and
a yeast handling and beer filtration facility including storage vessels. The new
buildings and technology will help Molson Coors to achieve its target of reducing
energy use by 25 per cent and cut 20 per cent of its greenhouse gas use by 2020.
aiii4. The company’s long term business restructuring plan includes the closure of
the High Street site with the redistribution of employees and activities to their Station
Street site. The Station Street site is sustainably located on the edge of the town
centre and within a five minute walk to Burton upon Trent railway station. The
Borough Council’s planning officers have had a tour of the Station Street site to look
at and discuss a number of future changes to the site which would create capacity
for office development and car parking, including the demolition of substantial current
underutilised buildings. Such rationalisation equates to making more effective the
use of land in Molson Coors ownership.
aiii5. ARUP submitted to the Borough Council on behalf of Molson Coors a SHLAA
representation which was published as an update in September 2013 at the same
time that the Pre-Submission plan was published for consultation. The Borough
Council however assessed the site as part of the Sustainability Appraisal that
supported the Pre-Submission plan in the knowledge that Molson Coors were
actively seeking to dispose of the site at some point during the plan period.
aiii6. The Borough Council’s aspirations to redevelop the Bargates site began in
2005. The last remaining businesses moved out of the Riverside Centre in 2008. In
part Tesco ownership, the company were interested in delivering a Tesco Extra store
on Bargates and the adjacent Council owned Meadowside car park. However an
application in 2009 was rejected by the Borough Council as the scheme did not
imaginatively fit in with the context of the historic location.
aiii7. This led the Borough Council to prepare and consult upon a Bargates
Development Brief in 2009 (Doc. D19) followed by a Bargates SPD in 2010
(Doc.D18). These documents set out clearly the type of development which could
come forward at this site and how a masterplan could be developed. In 2010 the sale
of the land to the Borough Council for £4million was agreed between Tesco and the
Borough Council and in 2012 ownership transferred to the Borough Council. Tesco
had an application for an alternative large Tesco store approved on Hawkins Lane in
2011.
aiii8. Following the acquisition of the Tesco owned portion of the site, the Borough
Council demolished the redundant shopping centre and bowling alley in preparation
for future development. Following demolition the site has been capped with grass as
a temporary measure.
aiii9. In the vicinity of the two sites is the High Street which has a variety of
commercial uses including shops and restaurants and small business premises.
Horninglow Street and Bridge Street have a number of historic properties and uses
including the Burton Bridge Brewery/public house, offices and the Three Queens
hotel.
iii10. In 2014 enhancement works to the High Street were undertaken by the
Borough Council. At a cost of over £680,000 the Borough Council has group
repaired commercial and residential properties on the High Street. The objective of
which has been the:
Delivery of high quality aesthetic improvement to the external façade of the
buildings within the scheme, creating an attractive gateway into the town
centre.
Delivery of a programme of highway improvements and improvements to the
street scene along the scheme area.
aiii11. The scheme includes a total of 34 properties from 72-102 High Street. It is
anticipated that improvements to the High Street will increase the desirability of the
area to potential investors. Marketing of the site has been underway for a couple
years and there has recently been some interest in bringing the site forward.
aiii12. In addition to the investment in the regeneration of High Street properties, a
portion of the £1.5m Local Growth Funding which has been secured by ESBC for
2015/16 is allocated to the Bargates site. The funding will be used to carry out
infrastructure works including the construction of roads and provision of services.
aiii13. The Borough Council intends to prepare and submit an outline planning
application for access and highways improvements to the Bargates site in the
Summer/Autumn 2015.
aiii14. The Borough Council would therefore conclude that they are doing everything
that they can to bring forward Bargates. Whilst it has been derelict for some time
ownership only passed to the Council in recent years which has allowed for the
demolition of the outdated concrete structures. Investing in the High Street will
benefit both the Bargates and the Molson Coors High Street site and Local Growth
Funding will assist in making the site more marketable. Molson Coors have been
instrumental in promoting their site through the SHLAA process and assisting with
the development of Strategic Policy 11 which seeks to deliver both sites. Coors
continue to deliver against their long term restructure plan and the Borough Council
have been given every indication that the High Street site will be surplus to
requirement.
aiii15. It is therefore considered appropriate that both sites are allocated for a mix of
uses including housing which can contribute to the regeneration of Burton upon
Trent and contribute to meeting the Borough’s housing need. The two sites are
considered together in Strategic Policy SP11 with an overall quantum of 350 units to
be delivered across both sites. It is the Borough Council’s view that this creates
flexibility across the two sites for delivering that quantum of housing either as one or
two proposals. If it is necessary to split the two sites into two separate allocations
this flexibility will be lost and a specific quantum for each site to deliver will be
identified.
b. Molson Coors Middle Yard, Hawkins lane (29/378)
b1. Middle Yard (SHLAA site 378) is located on the corner of Horninglow Street
and Hawkins Lane. The site was appraised in the Sustainability Appraisal Report.
The site is opposite the main Coors brewery site and linked by a bridge that is only
available to Coors brewery vehicles. The site has been described by Molson Coors
consultants to Borough Council officers as the commercial equivalent of a `loft’. It’s a
place where the brewery store things and the use of land is not particularly efficient.
SHLAA Site 378
Local Plan Policies Map
b2. Key stakeholder meetings were undertaken with English Heritage in February
2013 with further meetings on March 28th and May 23rd with Staffordshire County
Council highways.
b3. In February 2014 Molson Coors and consultants Knight Frank met with the
Borough Council to discuss the removal of the bridge which links the site to the main
Horninglow/Union Street brewery site. The bridge is an important element of
infrastructure for the brewery. However a structural survey had demonstrated that
approximately £600,000 is required to maintain the bridge and extend its life into the
future. Without maintenance it was likely that the bridge’s useful life was limited to
only a couple of years.
b4. An alternative approach to bridge maintenance was bridge demolition which
would render the site at Hawkins Lane less useful. Discussions focussed on the
potential to re-develop the site for residential use, move operations to the main
Molson Coors site which would require new accesses for large articulated vehicles to
enter and leave the site via Horninglow and Union Street. Early discussions on site
viability clarified the likely normal and abnormal costs associated with bringing
forward redevelopment on this site. The Borough Council were in a position to offer
advice on the application type and validation requirements depending on scope and
scale of proposals.
b5. These discussions led ARUP to submit on behalf of Molson Coors the Middle
Yard site for inclusion in the 2013 SHLAA. The Borough Council assessed this site
and published it in September 2013. Due to its size the site was also assessed in the
Borough Council’s Sustainability Appraisal which accompanied and supported the
Pre-Submission Local Plan. The site was allocated for housing in the Pre-
Submission plan.
b6. At a meeting in April 2014 a concept masterplan was presented with an
indicative timetable discussed for the submission for residential and access planning
applications. At a meeting on the 29th May there was further discussion on the
masterplan, and further design comments forwarded by the Borough Council via
email on the 5th June 2014. At a meeting on the 26th June there was further
discussion on the evolving masterplan and requirements of the planning application,
including S106 obligations. The issues requiring special attention include the
following:
Recognition of adjacent employment uses and a requirement to provide a
green buffer to the north
Recognition of existing residential properties to the west and adjacent to the
site on Hawkins Lane;
Requirement to respond to Listed Buildings located to the East and South of
the site;
Provision of a utilities easement (sewer) to the north of the site;
Permeability of the site to pedestrians and cyclists; and
Provision of green linkages.
b7. Following a number of meetings to discuss the masterplan the issues listed
above were addressed appropriately and to the satisfaction of Borough Council
officers.
b8. On the 17th September a strategy was agreed regarding public consultation.
It was also suggested that an informal presentation to the Borough Council’s
Planning Applications Committee was undertaken to receive early feedback and
prior to the submission of an application and was provisionally timetabled for October
2013. Further discussions were held on the emerging layout and wider application
requirements.
b9. An email dated 6th October from Knight Frank set out the following: ‘We are
currently investigating the cost of demolishing the bridge and this will determine
whether the application is pursued at this present time, until these costs have been
finalised Molson Coors are reluctant to present to Planning Committee’.
b10. Molson Coors informed the Borough Council that they were looking again at
the operation of their sites to be sure that the right planning strategy was being
advanced
b11. Throughout joint discussions the deliverability of the site has been a key driver
in the negotiations between the Council and the applicant. Knight Frank has always
maintained that the site could not deliver s.106 requirements due to the abnormal
cost of the bridge demolition. The Council is happy to accept this providing evidence
is presented to support this claim. It is acknowledged that the site is brownfield and
there may be some remediation associated with it. One contribution issue is the size
of the potential education contribution likely to be required which Knight Frank insists
cannot be afforded. Until viability evidence is presented demonstrating this statement
the Borough Council would expect this contribution to be met by the development.
Affordable housing is also likely to be zero but again needs to be substantiated.
b12. Many of the discussions to date have focused on the design and layout of the
site, along with the potential impacts of the scheme on adjoining heritage assets. All
of these issues have been satisfactorily resolved between the Council and the
applicant, and we are confident that the site can be delivered and any constraints
adequately mitigated.
b13. The final and only area that requires resolution relates to the section 106
agreement, and the Council will continue negotiations with the developer to ensure
that a viable scheme can be bought forward taking into account the constraints and
viability of the site.
b14. The Borough Council has been expecting a hybrid application comprising full
for access and demolition of the bridge and outline for the residential component,
since the autumn 2014. The Borough Council has been confident that this site will
come forward and deliverability confidence has contributed to the decision to allocate
the site based upon discussions held and advice received from the landowner. The
Local Plan seeks to allocate 300 dwellings and the pre-application discussions with
Knight Frank seek to deliver approximately 270 dwellings based upon the indicative
layout.
c. Derby Road (88/343/359/360/381) including: i extent of site and development content. ii viability, iii deliverability.
i) Extent of site and development content
ci1. Derby Road is a major route and key gateway into Burton upon Trent. It
extends from the A38 at Clay Mills junction, towards the centre of Burton upon Trent
where Derby Road becomes Derby Street and continues to the western side of the
Town’s urban area up to Borough Road. A masterplan for the Derby Road Corridor
Doc. D17 sees future commercial and industrial development occurring towards the
northern end of Derby Road, close to the Claymills junction of the A38, and a
preference for residential developments further south of the site, as Derby Road
approaches the centre of Burton. The location consists of a variety of SHLAA sites
(88, 343, 359, 360 and 381). The allocation as a whole was subject to the
Sustainability Appraisal in the Sustainability Appraisal Report.
ci2. The Local Plan Derby Road site focuses on the stretch of road located
between the roundabout at the Pirelli stadium and the roundabout at Derby Turns.
This southern part of the corridor is characterised by a mix of residential properties, a
range of employment and retail uses and vacant land.
ci3. The proposed allocation denoted on the policies map outlines an indicative
area of redevelopment along the corridor. The allocation encompasses numerous
parcels of land, which are in various private ownerships.
Extract from Submitted Policies Map (Inset Map 1)
ci4. The proposed allocation is literally a blob to encompass both sides of the
corridor. Looking again at the site, north of the road is residential along the entire
length with no further prospect of redevelopment. The areas of opportunity are
located to the south of the road between the road and the railway line. A Main
modification is proposed to the allocation boundary to make it clear the exact extent
of the allocation. The revised boundary more accurately reflects the opportunities in
the corridor south of the road.
Main Modification proposed
ii) Viability
cii1. Evidence to support viability is set out in the Doc. C14, Local Plan and
Community Infrastructure Levy Viability Study 2014.
cii2. Urban brownfield sites with full policy requirements are not always viable
when the residual value is compared to the viability threshold. This is confirmed by
the experience of planning officers where development coming forward on brownfield
sites doesn’t achieve the full affordable housing quantums or as is the case with
Pirelli there are no s.106 obligations at all. As policy requirements decrease, viability
is seen to increase to the point where sites are considered to be viable and able to
be developed.
cii3. Viability is therefore not an issue which can’t be mitigated through s.106
loading. It is also the case that the viability assessment undertaken by the Council to
support the Local Plan is undertaken at a point in time. When the housing market
improves brownfield sites with a full s.106 loading will be viable. Given that the Derby
Road allocation is a long term aspiration of the Borough Council’s it is more likely
that there will be market uplift when these sites come forward.
iii) Deliverability
ciii1. To demonstrate deliverability this section sets out some of the background to
the redevelopment of the Derby Road corridor and provides a timeline of key
milestones.
ciii2. A masterplan was produced in 2010, to guide the future development of the
area. The site currently has a mixture of residential, retail, warehouse and industrial
uses, interspersed arbitrarily across the extent of the area. The masterplan captured
a Council aspiration that has been ongoing for some time.
ciii3. The majority of people heading to Burton upon Trent who leave the A38 at the
Claymills junction will travel down Derby Road. The road has developed
haphazardly over a number of years, with a mixture of residential, employment, retail
and industrial uses interspersed along its entire length. Little care or attention has
been given to the impact development has had on the overall appearance of Derby
Road, or the image it presents to visitors to, or investors in Burton. The Council
recognised that something needed to be done to address the issues facing Derby
Road. In 2012, East Staffordshire Borough Council committed Growth Point funding
to deliver the first phase of landscaping works along the first 1 kilometre of the Road,
The project has delivered the desired outcome, which was an enhanced physical
appearance of this key route in to Burton on Trent. It now provides a positive first
impression of Burton and by funding and delivering the works, the Council has
shown its commitment to regeneration and development, which will give private
investors and businesses the confidence to invest in the area in the future. The
Council continue to be committed to regenerating the remaining Derby Road
corridor.
ciii4. The Local Plan proposed allocation of the Pirelli site also seeks to bring
forward change within the corridor. The operational factory for Pirelli Tyre UK Limited
extends for circa 15 hectares. The outline application was determined in November
2013 and the reserved matters application determined in February 2015. The
proposed development comprises the following:
Residential: up to 300 residential properties composed of apartments and
two to five bedroomed houses;
Commercial: mixed use employment including offices, B1/B2/B8 (light –
general industrial/storage and distribution) industrial units, a hotel, public
house and restaurant; and
Pirelli: creation of new circulation road and parking areas.
ciii5. The residential component is located towards the rear of the site and fronting
the canal with the commercial component located at the front of the site and fronting
Derby Road. The opportunity to redevelop this site follows investment by Pirelli to
create more modern and efficient facilities leading to land surplus to requirement.
The Head Office of Pirelli Tyres Ltd will continue to operate from the existing office
block and the MIRS factory (Modular Integrated Robotic System) both of which
remain unaffected by the works, although the site will now benefit from a new car
park and vehicular access as part of the proposal.
ciii6. A demolition team has removed the disused buildings on Princess Way land
adjacent to the Canal and the unused high bay warehouse on Derby Road. This
demolition work was completed towards the end of 2014. It is anticipated that the
proposal will regenerate the area both economically and aesthetically. Strategic
policy SP4 allocates the residential portion of the proposals.
ciii7. The Derby Road corridor improvements undertaken to date extend from the
A38 to the Pirelli roundabout. The proposed allocation identified in Strategic Policy
SP4 seeks to focus future improvement work on the stretch of Derby Road that
extends towards the town. This area has always been a transitional area between
residential areas towards the town and more commercial areas towards A38.
ciii8. As much of the land which forms the Derby Road allocation is in multiple
private ownership, East Staffordshire Borough Council’s involvement historically has
been to identify and engage with landowners, to facilitate development of these sites.
Meetings have been ongoing with key landowners to determine development
potential and to understand constraints and timescales for proposals.
ciii9. In some instances the development of the Derby Road site is being
undertaken without assistance or facilitation. In other instances the Borough Council
has engaged with land owners to identify intentions for development, facilitated
negotiations to support the formulation of land parcels, and offer advice and support
on relocation options.
ciii10. For example in 2011/12 the council began preliminary investigations into the
possible use of Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) powers to bring forward land
upon which a derelict building was sited, into council ownership. It was not
necessary to progress with the CPO as the predominant land owner engaged with
the Council, and subsequently carried out the demolition of redundant buildings on
the site. In this instance, the Council facilitated discussions between land owners,
and the predominant landowner continues to consider options for development of the
site. ESBC continues to monitor progress and will intervene to offer support to bring
the sites forward as required.
ciii11. The proposed allocation is a long term strategy for the Borough Council which
accords with the Local Plan end date of 2031. It is recognised that the proposed
allocation responds to opportunities that are brownfield which are more difficult to
bring forwards. The area would require preparatory regenerative work before any
new development goes ahead such as remediation and decontamination. Much of
the area is also occupied by active businesses. The Borough Council will continue to
engage with landowners to facilitate development and as economic conditions
improve sites within the Derby Road site will come forward. It is recognised that it will
take time but the site can be delivered towards the end of the plan period. The
housing trajectory does not anticipate that this site will come forwards quickly.
d. Branston Locks - if not approved as resolved
d1. Branston Locks (SHLAA site 44a) has been in the SHLAA since 2009. The
site was appraised in the Interim Sustainability Appraisal in 2012.
SHLAA site 44a
Local Plan policies map - Inset 1
d2. Since the initial submission of the site into the SHLAA there have been a
significant number of meetings, relating to the wider principles of the development
and the master-planning of the site. An application for outline planning permission
with all matters reserved for a mixed use development comprising the erection of up
to 2500 dwellings (Class C3), up to 92,900sqm (1,000,000 sq ft) of employment
floor-space, a local centre and primary school was submitted on the 29th November
2012.
d3. The application was considered by the Council from this date and regular
meetings were held to discuss application progress, to resolve any outstanding
matters and to provide feedback on the statutory consultation with stakeholders.
d4. The application was reported to the Borough Council’s Planning Applications
Committee initially on the 21st October 2013 with a recommendation to permit. This
report advised members of issues surrounding the scheme, and advised that there
are no objections to the proposal from statutory consultees. At the meeting on the
21st October members considered the site at length and requested that the
application be deferred to enable additional consideration / clarification be supplied
in relation to the following areas Education, Highways, Landscape, Affordable
Housing, Land Supply Figures and Flooding.
d5. The additional information / clarification was supplied to members by way of
an update report at the meeting on the 25th November 2014. Following the further
report members resolved to permit the proposal subject to conditions, and the
completion of an associated s.106 agreement.
d6. During the interim period between the two meetings an addendum under
regulation 22 of the Environmental Impact Assessment Regulations was received,
and formal re-consultation with all consultees and neighbours in relation to the
scheme was undertaken. This again resulted in no objections being received from
statutory consultees, however a number of objections from neighbours were
received and in light of this it was considered prudent to return the application to
Planning Applications Committee, and this was undertaken on the 20th January
2014. Members again agreed to permit the application, and also delegated
responsibility to officers to negotiate and agree the detailed wording of both the
conditions and the legal agreement with the applicants.
d7. Further to this final resolution the Local Planning Authority were required to
refer the application to the Secretary of State, this was sent on the 28th January
2014, and also delivered by hand on the 11th February 2014. A response to this
referral was received on the 5th March from DCLG confirming that the Secretary of
State has decided not to call the application in.
d8. Following this, negotiations have been ongoing with the applicant to complete
the s.106 agreement, and also the decision notice. Final discussions on the decision
notice were concluded on the 16th October 2014 in correspondence between the
case officer and the agent for the application. With regards to the Section 106
agreement the outstanding issues relate to education, highways and affordable
housing. Discussions are ongoing with Staffordshire County Council and the
Councils Housing Strategy Manager, and it is hoped that these matters can be
resolved in the short term.
d9. The developers have also secured central government funding for
infrastructure through the Large Sites Infrastructure Programme.
d10. The Borough Council do not have any concerns about the deliverability of this
site. It is also known that the developer is keen to bring forward Reserved Matters
applications as soon as possible with a view to delivering housing on site in the next
couple of years.
e. Tutbury Road, Harehedge Lane (40/41/376) – if not approved
The site is covered by two SHLAA sites (site 40a and site 41a). The two sites were reappraised in 2014 to reflect planning permission following appeal on part of the site.
SHLAA site 40a
SHLAA site 41a1
1 The area hatched in blue has permission following appeal with construction now underway.
Local Plan policies map
d11. In the Preferred Option Local Plan and supported by a Sustainability Appraisal
land at Glenville Farm was allocated for 300 houses. The site was felt to be a logical
extension to Burton upon Trent. The land is greenfield with pastoral farming, it rises
gently and is bounded on three sides by development. Ownership of the land is
Staffordshire County Council who has already consented themselves a catholic
primary school on part of the site. The school officially opened for the new school
year in September 2014.
d12. Following consultation on the Preferred Option plan the Borough Council
made the decision to re-calculate its objectively assessed need in relation to housing
which resulted in a much higher housing figure. In arriving at a new figure it was
clear that more sites would be needed. The decision was taken by a group of senior
members and senior officers to increase the number of sites in the Pre Submission
Local Plan and also to look at ways to increase those sites already consulted upon to
see if further capacity existed.
d13. In 2013 officers from the Planning Services team met with the landowner and
agent at Glenville Farm to walk the site. The purpose of this was to identify further
capacity. It was clear that the site could be increased using the existing built
development and topography as key context markers. Of particular importance was
to ensure that any proposed extension to the Glenville Farm site did not visually
encroach on the village of Rolleston on Dove. The decision taken by officers was to
extend Glenville Farm, thus allowing the capacity of the site to increase from 300 to
500 houses. This decision was agreed at the time by senior members and senior
officers.
d14. What became apparent following consultation was that the extended area of
Glenville Farm crossed the parish boundary into Rolleston on Dove parish.
d15. Rolleston on Dove is one of 15 parishes preparing neighbourhood plans
within the Borough. They received frontrunner status in 2011 and were the first
parish to reach examination in October 2013.
d16. Outline application with all matters reserved except access, for a mixed use
development including up to 500 dwellings (use class C3); local centre providing up
to 500 sq metres of floor space (use class A1), or public house (use class A3)
together with associated car parking and servicing, specialist care housing (use
Class C2); public open space; structural landscaping and provision of drainage; and
internal highway network to include the provision of access junctions to the A511
Tutbury Road and Rolleston Road with public realm works to Tutbury Road to
replace the existing traffic lights with a roundabout and realignment of Harehedge
Lane and formation of two mini-roundabouts together with the construction of an off-
street car park was submitted to the Local Planning Authority.
d17. The application was considered by the Planning Applications Committee of
the Borough Council on the 8th September 2014.
d18. Whilst detailed design and layout is reserved for later approval, the Design
and Access Statement which accompanies the application sets out an appropriate
approach to the development of the site in urban design terms, and gives sufficient
assurance that a high quality environment appropriate to its context can be secured
in accordance with the provisions of the East Staffordshire Design Guide. The site is
sufficiently spacious to allow development without unacceptably affecting the
amenities enjoyed by the occupiers of existing dwellings.
d19. The highway impact of the scheme has been assessed by the Highways
Agency and Staffordshire County Council (Highways) and subject to recommended
mitigation measures it is concluded that traffic generated by the proposal can be
accommodated by the existing highway network. The proposed improvements to the
surrounding highway network would further reduce the impact of the proposal on the
town’s highway network.
d20. The flooding, drainage, contamination and mineral issues raised by the
proposal can all be resolved by the imposition of suitably worded conditions. Subject
to the mitigation measures suggested by the ecological appraisal, it is not considered
that the proposals will unacceptably harm protected species or their habitat. Any
minor impacts upon ecology are considered to be outweighed by the social and
economic benefits that developing the site for residential and commercial purposes
would deliver.
d21. The impacts of the proposal on existing social infrastructure including
education and recreational facilities can be mitigated with a contribution towards
education and the provision of or contribution towards sports pitches. A significant
amount of open space is also proposed on site. These can all be secured via
Section 106 obligations.
d22. Whilst there will be clearly be some negative impacts from the scheme
especially in relation to the loss of countryside, the scheme will also provide
substantial benefits. These include the provision of market and affordable housing,
significant public open space and green infrastructure, and employment
opportunities. These factors weighed heavily in support of the application, and on
balance the benefits of the scheme outweighed any specific concerns that are raised
in relation to the proposal.
d23. It was the officer view that overall, the scheme, when considered against the
three pillars of sustainable development, as identified within the NPPF, will have a
positive economic impact, mitigate any social impact and due to the quality of the
landform and new development have minimal environmental impact and therefore
there was a presumption in favour of granting permission. Following debate at
Planning Committee members resolved to refuse the application on the following
grounds: -
In short, the first reason for refusal alleges that the proposal is premature
because of the “impending public inquiry into” the Local Plan and also
because of “the fact that the Secretary of State is still currently considering the
Rolleston on Dove Neighbourhood Plan.” Reference is made to paragraphs
17, 183-185 and 216 and sections 1, 6 and 7 of the NPPF.
The second reason for refusal relates to landscape and visual issues. It refers
to saved policy BE1 of the East Staffordshire Local Plan, paragraph 109 of the
NPPF and alleges that the proposal will have a detrimental effect upon the
open aspect of the landscape between the site and Rolleston on Dove. A
breach of policy BE1 and of paragraph 17 and section 11 of the NPPF are
relied upon.
d24. Members refused the application contrary to officer advice. Legal advice was
subsequently sought by the Borough Council to determine if the reasons for refusal
could withstand an appeal.
d25. It was agreed that officers could open up a dialogue with the applicant to seek
to address Member concerns with a view to a re submission. This was validated on
12th March 2015 and the application is identical but with a few tweaks to address
Member concerns. The application will follow the usual processes and be
determined by Committee in April or May.
d26. In conclusion the Borough Council has worked with the land owner
Staffordshire County Council to bring forward the Harehedge Lane site. The
determined application met the emerging Local Plan requirements for 500 houses in
accordance with Strategic Policy SP4 and additional requirements set out in
Strategic Policy 7. The Borough Council therefore do not have any concerns in
relation to the deliverability of this site or outstanding matters that cannot be
overcome during the processing of the current application. The timetable for
determination is likely to be the May Planning Committee or June at the latest.