Committee Date: 11/12/2014 Application Number: 2014/06961/PA Accepted: 08/10/2014 Application Type: Full Planning Target Date: 28/01/2015 Ward: Bournville Land at corner of Longfellow Road and Popes Lane, Kings Norton, Birmingham, B30 1BH Erection of 44 x 1, 2 and 3 bedroom dwellings comprising 21 flats and 23 houses with associated access, car parking and landscaping Applicant: Agent: Westleigh Development Ltd c/o Agent rg+p Limited 130 New Walk, Leicester, LE1 7JA Recommendation Approve Subject To A Section 106 Legal Agreement 1. Proposal 1.1. The application proposes the erection of 44 dwellings on a cleared site previously occupied by three storey maisonette blocks on the corner of Longfellow Road and Popes Lane. All proposed dwellings would be for affordable rent via a housing association. 1.2. The 44 units proposed on the site comprise a mix of 21, one bedroom apartments, 18, two bedroom houses and 5, three bedroom houses. Both the houses and apartment building would form a perimeter block fronting both Longfellow Road and Popes Lane, with part of the apartment building facing south onto a shared amenity area and the Cross-City railway line beyond. Houses would generally be arranged in small runs of terraces onto Longfellow Road, with larger, three bedroom units at the ends of runs. A three storey apartment building would be centrally located along Longfellow Road at the end of its junction with Hood Grove and directly facing an existing three storey maisonette block at the end of Hood Grove. The apartment block would have a gated rear parking courtyard, which would also serve House plot 35, adjacent to the access gates and a grassed rear amenity area. Turning onto Popes Lane, the scheme would consist of pairs of semi-detached houses. 1.3. Proposed materials are a mixture of red brick, cream render and grey roof tiles, with brick solider course detailing on frontage window headers and cills and a central dentil course type brick banding detail. Porches would be simple with projecting gable features bookending the ends of runs of houses and the apartment block. 1.4. All bedroom sizes for each flat and house type would be in excess of guidelines within Places for Living. The one bedroom flats would be circa 45 sq m, two bedroom houses 68 sq m or 75 sq m, and three bedroom houses at 83 sq m. The shared rear amenity space for the flats at circa 470 sq m, would equate to 22.4 sq m per flat, under the 30 sq m suggested within Places for Living. In terms of individual Page 1 of 10
garden sizes, 8 of the 18 proposed two bed houses would be under the 52 sq m of rear garden space stipulated for two bedroom homes, with 1 of the 5 proposed three bedroom houses under the 70 sq m of rear garden space stipulated for family houses within Places for Living. 49 (111%) frontage and rear courtyard car parking spaces would be provided for residents. 1.5. The applicant has offered to enter into a Section 106 agreement to ensure that all 44 units on the site are affordable. No other obligations, such as public open space or education contributions have been offered and a financial appraisal has been provided to illustrate the viability issues with delivery of the scheme. Site area 0.6 hectares, density 73 dwellings per hectare. 1.6. In support of the application the agent has provided a design and access statement, transport assessment, ecological survey, noise assessment and ground investigation report. Due to the size of the site an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Screening Opinion has been issued which determined that the proposal would not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore an EIA would not be required. Proposed site plan Proposed streetscene (NB still awaiting an amended plan for this) 2. Site & Surroundings 2.1. The application site is located within a residential area consisting predominantly of post war municipal housing stock between two and three storeys in height. The site has been vacant since clearance of the three storey maisonette blocks in the late 1990s (1998/05244/PA) and left to grass. Historically the site has been fenced off, but more recently this has been breached, leaving the site in an untidy state. There is a large sewer and associated easement running partly along the Longfellow Road frontage and along the eastern and southern edges of the site. 2.2. To the east is an infill development of new two storey, semi-detached housing, with the railway embankment for the Cross-City Line situated at a significantly higher level along the southern boundary of the site. There is a fall of approximately 2.5 to 3 metres from the front of the site adjacent to Longfellow Road down towards the rear boundary. Site location Street view 3. Planning History 3.1. -14/01/1999-1998/05244/PA- Demolition of existing maisonette blocks- No prior approval required. -12/02/2007-2006/06950/PA- Residential development of 46 dwellings to include 1 & 2 bedroom apartments and 2, 3 and 4 bedroom houses, associated access and parking- withdrawn. -08/05/2008- Erection of 46 dwellings and associated works- Approved subject to conditions and Legal Agreement. Page 2 of 10
-22/06/2011- Extension to time limit for application 2008/00288/PA for the erection of 46 dwellings & associated works- Approved subject to conditions and Legal Agreement. 4. Consultation/PP Responses 4.1. Transportation Development- No objections to amended layout. 4.2. Regulatory Services- Awaiting comments. 4.3. WM Police- Rear access alleyways and the courtyard access should be gated to provide secure access to rear areas. 4.4. WM Fire Service- Vehicle access is required to within 45m of all points within each dwelling. 4.5. Severn Trent Water- No objections subject to details of foul and surface water drainage. 4.6. Network Rail- No objections subject to conditions regarding a risk assessment for safe working adjacent to the operational railway (including details of any potential compaction or piling machinery), a 1.8m high trespass proof steel palisade fence, acoustic fencing measures, details of surface and foul drainage and details of levels and excavations to be carried out. 4.7. Statutory site notices, application advertised in press, surrounding occupiers, residents associations, MP and ward councillors notified- 3 comments received. -Councillor Huxtable- Has requested a Section 106 obligation towards the upgrade of the tunnel along Popes Lane, with better lighting and potentially artwork, an upgraded pedestrian/cycle route on Popes Lane which links up with Middleton Hall Road and improvements to Public Open Space at Masefield Square including play equipment in the playground. -Kings Norton Local Nature Reserve Management Committee- Concern that a further 44 properties would add to issues of litter and fly-tipping on the Local Nature Reserve and the railway embankment. Additional footfall, litter and vehicular activity through the reserve would have implications for wildlife. -A resident on Overbury Road has stated that they would like details of how to apply for one of the properties. Their details have been passed onto the developer. 5. Policy Context 5.1. Adopted UDP (2005); draft Birmingham Development Plan (2013); Places for Living (2001); NPPF; NPPG. 6. Planning Considerations 6.1. Policy National Within the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) paragraph 17 supports sustainable economic development to deliver new homes and encourages the use of brownfield land. Paragraph 19 states that significant weight is placed on economic Page 3 of 10
growth within the planning system, with paragraph 50 highlighting that residential development should reflect local demand and create mixed and balanced communities. On design, paragraph 56 attaches great importance to the design of the built environment as this is a key aspect of sustainable development. Paragraph 60 notes that policies and decisions should not impose architectural styles or tastes, should not stifle innovation or originality, but should reinforce local distinctiveness. 6.2. On environmental concerns, the NPPF is unequivocal in its view that local planning authorities should focus on whether the development itself is an acceptable use of the land, and the impact of the proposed use (paragraph 122), with paragraph 123 stating that developments should mitigate and reduce other adverse impacts on health and quality of life, including through the use of conditions. 6.3. Local The adopted UDP seeks in paragraph 5.12 to maximise the replacement rate of housing on cleared sites subject to the provision of high quality accommodation within a high quality environment. One of the ways this will be achieved is through a variety of housing to meet the full range of needs throughout the City. The UDP requires that that new housing developments should provide an appropriate environment (paragraphs 5.20-5.20A), a suitable housing density and mix (paragraph 5.40) and encourages a full range of housing types and sizes including affordable housing (35%). Paragraphs 3.14D and 3.14E of the UDP identify that new housing development should be designed in accordance with good urban design principles. 6.4. Within the emerging Birmingham Development Plan policy TP27 states that the location of new housing should be accessible to jobs, shops and services by other modes of transport, be sympathetic to historic, cultural and natural assets and not conflict with other development policies in relation to employment land, green belt and open space. Policy TP29 identifies that densities of at least 50 dwellings per hectare will be expected in local centres and corridors well served by public transport with 40 dwellings per hectare elsewhere. 6.5. Places for Living supports the creation of safe places, with clear definition between public and private spaces, active frontages, convenient routes, balance the needs of cars and pedestrians and provide schemes which reflect local context. 6.6. Use/density Given that the previous use of the cleared site was for residential purposes, the site has previously has consent for a 46 dwelling new residential development and the majority of surrounding buildings are in residential use, the use of the whole site for 23 houses and 21 flats is considered appropriate. The proposed scheme is considered to achieve a satisfactory density of houses, whilst providing rear garden space, shared amenity space and suitable separation space between properties. 6.7. Layout, design and impact on surrounding properties The layout of the proposed scheme addresses each street frontage, providing a development which would be well overlooked and in keeping with its surroundings. The location of windows and entrances would provide good natural surveillance and the corner turning dwellings would successfully front both Longfellow Road and Popes Lane. Rear garden space would be separated from frontage areas, creating distinct private spaces for potential residents. Where new built form meets existing houses it has been positioned as such to be well in excess of separation distances within Places for Living, with plot 44 in line with the side elevation and secondary landing window of 62b Longfellow Road. The rear faces of dwellings face towards Page 4 of 10
the Cross-City rail line, with face-to-face frontages of two storey buildings on Longfellow Road approximately 23m away from existing dwellings. With the above in mind the scheme is not considered to have an adverse impact on the amenity of existing residential properties 6.8. Proposed dwellings would be of brick construction with tiled roofs and some dwellings would have elements of render. The designs draw upon characteristics of existing houses in the area, incorporating features such as projecting gables. The two storey height of houses and three storey central flat blocks reflects the predominant height of existing houses and maisonette blocks within the surrounding area. Bedroom sizes proposed would all comply with guidelines stipulated in Places for Living, with all properties having a good outlook on to Popes Lane/ Longfellow Road, or rear garden/ amenity space and the Cross-City railway line beyond. The pair of corner turning houses (plots 5 and 6) have all habitable rooms as dual aspect to help address the 0.8m shortfall of part of their rear elevations facing the blank side walls of plots 4 and 7. Separation distances on the remainder of the site are in excess of guidelines within Places for Living. Although the 45 degree code is breached in relation to the rear second bedroom and ground floor kitchen of plot 13 due to the positioning of the apartment block, extending 8m further to the rear, this is considered acceptable in this instance to allow for a successful layout and due to the large 160 sq m rear garden that plot 13 would have. 6.9. In terms of other rear garden space, 8 of the 18 two bedroom houses (plots 3, 4, 7, 37-40 and 42) and 1 of the 5 three bedroom units (plot 35) would be under the 52 sq m and 70 sq m guidelines for rear garden space in Places for Living, although the majority would be only a couple of square metres under these requirements. Plots 3, and 7 do have small gardens, with plot 7 at circa 40 sq and plot 3 at 44 sq m. However, in this instance, such small rear gardens are considered acceptable given the two bed starter type nature of the properties and to deliver an appropriate layout. Small gardens were also a feature of the previous 2008 and 2011 residential approvals. A condition removing Permitted Development Rights for extensions and outbuildings on plots under 70 sq m would prevent loss of rear garden space. 6.10. My City Design and Landscape Officers have raised no objections to the scheme, which has been substantially amended during pre-application discussions and the course of the application in order to deliver a coherent overall layout. Conditions regarding boundary treatments, hard and soft landscaping, lighting, levels, materials, bin store design and details of any security gates to rear access paths would ensure a suitable completed development. 6.11. Planning Obligations 100% of all dwellings proposed on the site would be for the affordable rented market, well in excess of the 35% required in the UDP. 6.12. A financial contribution towards public open space or education provision cannot be provided as well as all units being Affordable. Local Services have stated that a contribution of 107,800 towards public open space and children's play facilities in the Bournville Ward would normally be required in line with UDP policies. Education have requested that a contribution would be required, but have not specified an exact amount. A financial appraisal has been submitted which shows that gap funding will be required in order to deliver this development. This is approximately 26,000 per social rented property across the development and is in combination with a loan taken out by Viridian Housing, which can only be secured on capped future rents to secure the debt. The applicants advise that it is not possible for further funding as well as all units being Affordable to be obtained for off-site open Page 5 of 10
space, education or any other planning gain such as works to the Popes Lane railway tunnel as requested by Councillor Huxtable. 6.13. I am satisfied that by delivering 100% of the site for affordable rented housing, the scheme would fulfil a significant planning obligation by delivering a much needed mix of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom properties for social housing on a site which has been vacant since the late 1990s. The imposition of further obligations would make the scheme unviable, therefore the offer of 100% affordable rented housing is considered appropriate in this instance. 6.14. Regulatory Services and Statutory Undertakers No objections have been raised by statutory undertakers to the development. Regulatory Services have yet to comment on the application, however a noise assessment and desktop contamination study have been provided. These reports, allied to the previous consent which had conditions on further contaminated land assessments and potential remediation if required, along with noise attenuation measures for habitable rooms facing towards the railway line. Such conditions applied to this consent are considered reasonable and necessary in this instance. 6.15. Transportation The application included a Transport Assessment and the level of car parking, at 111% is considered acceptable for a scheme consisting of predominantly 1 and 2 bedroom units (89% of all dwellings proposed), within a highly sustainable location approximately 800m away from Kings Norton railway station, on the No.19 bus route and 180m away from the No.27 bus route on Middleton Hall Road. Transportation Development have raised no objections to the latest revised layout which has addressed concerns about parking areas and dropped kerbs and is as per their suggestions with 7.2m maximums for dropped kerb areas. This revised layout, combined with suitable conditions concerning pedestrian visibility splays and a residential travel plan would deliver a development which would not have an adverse impact on highway safety or freeflow of traffic. 6.16. Network Rail The southern boundary of the site is formed entirely by an embankment which rises up to the Cross-City railway line between Kings Norton and Northfield railway stations. A number of conditions have been requested by Network Rail, specifically concerning a risk assessment for safe working adjacent to the operational railway, a 1.8m high trespass proof steel palisade fence, acoustic fencing measures, details of surface and foul drainage, and details of levels and excavations to be carried out. These matters are generally either private matters between developer and Network Rail, or addressed by conditions already applied. 6.17. Trees and ecology The use of the site historically for maisonette blocks and their subsequent clearance has enable a number of self-seeded shrubs to take route on the site. This combined with the location adjacent to the railway line, a designated wildlife corridor, means that there is some potential for wildlife to use the site. A condition regarding ecological enhancement measures would encourage wildlife, especially on the boundary adjacent to the railway line. The self-seeded nature of the shrubs on the site gives them little intrinsic value and their removal would not harm the amenity of the area. The ecological assessment provided noted no presence of protected species on the site or within the immediate area. 7. Conclusion Page 6 of 10
7.1. The redevelopment of the site for housing accords with both national and local policy. The development would provide sustainable properties, adding to the City s stock of affordable housing for which there is a significant need and would provide a degree of localised regeneration. The proposed mix of dwellings, layout and design are appropriate for the area and can be accommodated without any adverse impact on existing residents. 8. Recommendation 8.1. Approve subject to a Section 106 Legal Agreement. 8.2. 1. That consideration of Application No: 2014/06961/PA be deferred pending the completion of a planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act to secure the following:- i) 100% (44) of dwellings on the site are for affordable rent ii) Payment of a monitoring and administration fee associated with the legal agreement subject to a contribution of 1500. 8.3. 2. In the absence of the completion of a suitable planning obligation to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority on or before the 27th January 2015, planning permission be REFUSED for the following reasons: i) In the absence of a suitable planning obligation to secure affordable housing on the site, the proposed development conflicts with policy 5.37 of the Birmingham Unitary Development Plan 2005 8.4. 3. That the Director of Legal and Democratic Services be authorised to prepare, seal and complete the appropriate planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act. 8.5. 4. That in the event of the planning obligation being completed to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority on or before the 27th January 2015, favourable consideration will be given to the application subject to the conditions listed below: 1 Requires the prior submission of a contamination remediation scheme 2 Requires the prior submission of a contaminated land verification report 3 Requires the prior submission of a drainage scheme 4 Requires the prior submission of a scheme for ecological/biodiversity/enhancement measures 5 Requires the prior submission of sample materials 6 Requires the prior submission of noise insulation (variable) 7 Requires the prior submission of level details 8 Requires the prior submission of hard and/or soft landscape details Page 7 of 10
9 Requires the prior submission of hard surfacing materials 10 Requires the prior submission of boundary treatment details 11 Requires the prior submission of a lighting scheme 12 Requires the prior submission of details of refuse storage 13 Requires the prior submission of additional gate details 14 Requires pedestrian visibility splays to be provided 15 Requires the provision of cycle parking prior to occupation 16 Requires the prior submission of a residential travel plan 17 Removes PD rights for extensions 18 Requires the scheme to be in accordance with the listed approved plans 19 Limits the approval to 3 years (Full) Case Officer: Neal Allcock Page 8 of 10
Photo(s) Figure 1: Site from Popes Lane Figure 2: Longfellow Road with site on right hand side of image Page 9 of 10
Location Plan This map is reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Birmingham City Council. Licence No.100021326, 2010 Page 10 of 10