7.1

HIGH PEAK BOROUGH COUNCIL DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE

Date 18th January 2016 Application No:

HPK/2015/0508

Location Dinting Road, Dinting, Glossop Proposal Outline application for proposed erection of up to 11 dwellings

with all matters reserved except for access with associated infrastructure

Applicant Nichols 3N Limited Agent Peter Brett Associates LLP Parish/ward Hadfield South Ward Date registered 18th September

2015 If you have a question about this report please contact: Karen Taylor, karen.taylor@highpeak.gov.uk 01298 28400 extension 4996

1. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION

Refuse

2. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND ITS SURROUNDINGS 2.1 The application site is approximately 0.49ha comprising of a triangular piece of land. It lies outside the built up area boundary and within the open countryside as designated within the High Peak Saved Local Plan 2008. The site lies within Flood Zone 1. Immediately to the east is a footpath with the Manchester to Hadfield Railway lying just beyond this. To the south and west of the site is a designated wildlife area, HP186 Dinting Lodge Grassland. To the west is a designated Public Right of Way (with the Carpenters Factory further to its West). 2.2 The site is currently used as a cark park serving the adjacent Dinting Railway Station. It takes the form of an area of hard standing which lies immediately to the South of Dinting Road and takes access from it. The southern and eastern edges of the site fall away steeply, as when the car park was initially developed, the land was levelled by the importation of material. It is an open site with little natural screening.

3. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL 3.1 The application is in outline form and is submitted for up to 11 dwellings shown on an indicative layout with only access being sought at this stage. Matters of layout, scale, appearance and landscaping are reserved for subsequent approval. 3.2 The proposed access to the site will be taken from the existing access to the north west of the site. A carriageway width of 4.5metres and corner

7.2

radii of 6m will be provided and a 2 metre footway on either side of the access. Visibility splays will be 2.4m x 64.6m to the west and 2.4m x 66.3m to the east of the site. The submitted transport statement indicatively advises that 3 parking spaces including a garage will be provided for each dwelling, but the total number will be determined at reserved matters stage. 3.3 The planning statement advises that the proposal is for up to 11 dwellings to be accommodated at the site, of which precise details of the dwelling mix and house type dealt with through any subsequent reserved matters application. It advises that the site can comfortably accommodate a mixture of high quality family homes and the indicative layout shows a mixture of detached properties. The indicative layout plan shows three types of detached houses and the level changes across the site. The section across the plan indicates that the design of the dwellings would be 2 / 3 storey houses. There are no details of proposed materials. 3.4 The landscape and visual appraisal and an indicative landscape strategy plan advises that existing trees along the eastern side of the site will be retained within the development, but that there may be some loss to accommodate the layout. It proposes that new tree and hedgerow planting will be carried out including native species. The appraisal concludes the proposal would not cause any undue harm to neighbouring settlements or views, subject to incorporating a sensitive design approach and landscape strategy. 3.4 The application is accompanied by the following supporting documents:

• Planning, Design and Access Statement • Ground Conditions – Phase 1 Report • Transport Statement • Noise Impact Assessment • Surface Water Drainage Strategy • Landscape and Visual Appraisal

3.5 The application, the details attached to it including the plans, comments made by residents and the responses of the consultees can be found on the Council’s website at: http://planning.highpeak.gov.uk/portal/servlets/ApplicationSearchServlet?PKID=198305

4. RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY HPK/2001/0579 Proposed Car Park and

Park and Ride Scheme. Approved 2003.

HPK/2006/0707 Variation Of Condition 6 On HPK/2001/0579 To Allow The Change Of Use For The Running Of Weekly Car Boot Sales

Refused 2006.

7.3

From April To October. HPK/2006/0937 Change of Use of Car

Park for Use for Car Boot Sales.

Refused 2007 and dismissed on appeal.

HPK/2010/0118 Outline application for 24 units of affordable housing.

Refused May 2010.

HPK/2010/0667 Resubmission of HPK/2010/0118 for outline permission for 24 units of affordable housing.

Refused February 2011.

5. PLANNING POLICIES RELEVANT TO THE DECISION

Adopted High Peak Local Plan (Saved Policies) 2008 GD4 - Character Form and Design GD5 - Amenity GD6 - Landscaping GD12 - Unstable Land, Landfill and Contaminated Sites OC1 – Countryside Development OC4 – Landscape character and Design OC8 – Sites of Nature Conservation Importance OC10 – Trees and Woodlands BC10 – Archaeological and Other Heritage Features H1 – New Housing Provision H11 - Layout and Design of Residential Development H12 – Public Local Open Space CF3 – School and College Facilities TR1 – Transport Implications of New Development TR4 - Traffic Management TR5 - Access, parking and design TR11 – Footpaths, Bridleways and Byways TR14 – The Protection and Construction of Trails Supplementary Planning Guidance

• Residential Design • Landscape Character • Housing Needs Survey • Planning Obligations

High Peak Local Plan Submission Version, April 2014 Policy S1 Sustainable Development Principles Policy S1a Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development Policy S2 Settlement Hierarchy Policy S3 Strategic Housing Development Policy S5 Glossopdale Sub-area Strategy

7.4

Policy EQ1 Climate Change Policy EQ2 Landscape Character Policy EQ3 Countryside and Green Belt Development Policy EQ4 Biodiversity Policy EQ5 Design and Place Making Policy EQ6 Built and Historic Environment Policy EQ8 Trees, Woodlands and hedgerows Policy EQ9 Pollution Control and Unstable Land Policy EQ10 Flood Risk Management Policy H1 Location of Housing Development Policy H2 Phasing of Housing Development Policy H4 New Housing Development Policy H5 Affordable Housing Policy CF3 Local Infrastructure Provision Policy CF4 Open Space, Sports and Recreation Facilities Policy CF6 Accessibility and Transport Policy CF7 Planning Obligations and Community Infrastructure Levy National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 2012 Achieving Sustainable Development Section 4 Promoting sustainable transport Section 6 Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes Section 7 Requiring good design Section 8 Promoting healthy communities Section 10 Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change Section 11 Conservation and enhancing the Natural environment Section 12 Conserving and enhancing the historic Environment

6. CONSULTATIONS CARRIED OUT Site notice Expiry date for comments: 1st November 2015 Press notice Expiry date for comments: 22nd October 2015 Neighbours Expiry date for comments: 19th October 2015 Neighbours 12 Letters of objection and comments have been received raising the following concerns:

• Highway safety / traffic congestion / will result in cars parked on the road.

• Concern over the loss of the car park due to the number of vehicles parked there daily.

• The loss of the car park will result in rail users walking further to the station / it will introduce safety issues.

• Further loss of open space along Dinting. • Loss of Glossop green spaces / impact visually on area / urbanisation. • Concerns over prominent site and lack of screening. • Impact on infrastructure / local resource / schools.

7.5

• Forms part of the strategic gap and should not be built on. • No provision of affordable housing for the area. • Impact on wildlife.

Consultee

Comment Officer response

Tree Officer The site is largely devoid of trees, however the application should address the trees to the south east of the site. These seem quite mature and the proposals may impact on the root systems. They are not shown on the plans. They are intending planting trees on the sloping ground to the west of the site and to maintain the areas as wildflower grass land.

7.31 -7.32

HPBC Planning Policy

The land has been proposed as part of the strategic gap between Glossop and Hadfield in the Emerging High Peak Local Plan. The Local Plan has been subject to examination and the Council is currently preparing for consultation on the Main Modifications to the Plan as suggested by the Inspector. The issue of the strategic gap was discussed at examination however the Inspector has not suggested that any further changes are necessary to it in order to make the plan sound, so more weight can be given to the emerging policy. A modification to the strategic gap boundary is proposed to reflect the recent planning approval by Loxley Homes but it this site remains within the strategic gap boundary. Given the advanced stage of the Plan and in accordance with paragraph 216 of the NPPF, weight can now be attributed to some of the policies which have received no or limited objections. Other material considerations include the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG). Housing mix Policy H4 in the emerging Local Plan requires that new residential development addresses the housing need of local people, particularly by providing affordable housing in line with policy H5 and providing a range of market and affordable housing types and

7.6-7.13 7.20 – 7.24

7.6

sizes. The policy refers to evidence in the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (April 2014)which on page 154 states

“However, the following percentage targets are suggested for High Peak, with the intention of rebalancing the stock away from small terraced properties and 3-bed accommodation, towards 2-bed dwellings and good quality accommodation designed specifically for the growing elderly population: - Property Sizes: 10% 1-bed; 45% 2-bed; 35% 3-bed and 10% 4-bed+ Dwellings - Property Type: 30% semi-detached; 25% detached; 15% terraced; 10% flat/maisonette; 20% bungalow/specialist elderly accommodation “

The conclusion from the Planning Policy Officer is that due to a lack of a 5 year supply there would be a presumption in favour of sustainable development although there are other material considerations which can, and should be taken into account, including the emerging Local Plan policy to include the site in the strategic gap.

Environmental Health

The Phase 1 desk study report submitted recommends that further intrusive investigation of the site is undertaken. Conditions are recommended for an investigation and risk assessment, remediation and reporting of unexpected contamination. An acoustic report has been submitted to support the application and is accepted. The report recommends that a scheme of acoustic remediation is drawn up in line with BS8233:2014 and implemented. A condition is recommended for the submission of a noise insulation scheme. The construction / demolition stage of development could lead to an increase of noise and dust experienced at sensitive

7.28-7.30 7.26

7.7

premises and subsequent loss of amenity. Conditions are recommended relating to piling, hours of work, dust and noise.

Senior Horticulture Officer

No contributions are required for any play or open space provision on site but we would ask for off site contribution for both play and open space. The play contribution would be targeted towards the new play area which we are looking to provide in that area. The off site open space contribution would go towards the new allotment site off Dinting Lane, towards infrastructure at the site. The Council’s formula for calculating incorporates the number of proposed bedrooms, as this information is not provided on the application the contributions are unable to be worked out.

7.46

DCC Planning Policy

The proposed development falls within the normal area of Dinting CE Voluntary Aided Primary School and Glossopdale Community College. The development of 11 dwellings would generate 2 primary, 2 secondary pupils and 1 post 16 pupil. Dinting CE Voluntary Aided Primary School has a capacity for 119 pupils. It currently has 115 pupils on roll and this is projected to increase to 158 within the next 5 years. This would put the school over capacity by 39 pupil places. A contribution is requested for 2 places of £22,798.02 to ensure sufficient and appropriate accommodation is available at Dinting CE Voluntary Aided Primary School. This will contribute to Classroom Project A at the school. At secondary level, Glossopdale Community College has a capacity for 2,081 pupils. It currently has 1,086 on roll and this is projected to fall to 1,077 within the next 5 years. Therefore there is no requirement for a contribution. A contribution is requested for the provision of additional waste management capacity at Glossop Household Waste Recycling Centre

7.45

7.8

of £156.75. Informatives are recommended as attached to planning permission (if granted) for access to broadband services and designing new homes to Lifetime Home Standards.

DCC Archaeologist

The proposal area is relatively small with no known archaeological remains on the site or in its close vicinity. The site has also been subject to levelling and landscaping in the context of formation of a level car parking area which is likely to have removed any residual archaeological potential. Therefore the site is of minimal potential and it is recommended that there is no requirement for archaeological work under the policies at NPPF chapter 12.

DCC Flood Risk Management Team

A surface water drainage strategy has been proposed to inform the detailed drainage design. It is proposed to limit the surface water runoff off site subject to further investigation of ground conditions and feasibility SuDS. The proposed point of discharge of surface water, Glossop Brook is currently assessed under the Water Frame Directive 2000) as of moderate ecological status. No activities or works should deteriorate the status of this watercourse. The ecological condition of any receiving watercourse can potentially be protected by the implementation of a SuDS scheme with an appropriate number of treatment stages that are appropriately maintained. At this stage below ground tanks or oversized pipes would not be considered by DCC or the Environment Agency to be classed as sustainable drainage features. The detailed drainage design should demonstrate that priority is given to SuDS as per the NPPF, paragraph 103. Therefore conditions are recommended relating to surface drainage for the site.

DCC Footpaths

Glossop Footpath No. 65 abuts the site at its western boundary . No objection to the proposal as it does not appear to affect the

7.9

route. A number of informatives are proposed to ensure the route remains open, unobstructed and on its legal alignment at all times.

DCC Landscape Architect

DCC would not comment on developments of this scale due to capacity. The Landscape Architect has referred to a response sent for the planning application for development at Dinting Road (HPK/2013/0324) which may be of relevance to this application.

DCC Highways

The Highway Authority note that there is currently no charge for use of the car park, the extant use of the site is considered to be that of the formal car park for which planning consent was granted that, according to the submitted Transport Statement, is often used by significantly more than 50 vehicles. The Transport Statement does not address removal of this extant use and identify the potential consequences of its loss. Reference is made to the recently consented application for 93no dwellings on a site on the opposite side of Dinting Road that will result in the creation of a new highway junction and, no doubt, an increase in pedestrian activity in this vicinity therefore, in the interests of safety, the Highway Authority would seek to ensure that the likelihood of on-street parking is reduced. Access to the site is proposed to be taken from the same location as that serving the existing car park. The submitted details state the existing level of vehicular use and conclude that the proposed development would have no traffic impact over and above this. On the basis of the figure stated above it is unlikely that a development of 11no. residential dwellings would result in an intensification in use. The original Consent for the car park requires exit visibility splays of 4.5m x 90m to be maintained clear of any obstructions above 0.6m for the life of the development whereas the Transport Statement makes reference to achievable splays of 2.4m x 64.6m and 2.4m x 66.3m to the west and east of the site respectively. To meet current

7.36-7.43

7.10

design guidance, based on the 40mph speed limit and taking into account gradient, exit visibility splays from a junction serving residential development should desirably be 2.4m x 84m (2.4m x 72m absolute minimum) and 2.4m x 148m (2.4m x 98m minimum) to the west and east respectively with all areas in advance being clear of any obstructions and constructed using footway materials. Bearing in mind the extent of exit visibility secured to serve the car park, it’s assumed that satisfactory exit visibility can be delivered and this should be demonstrated on the accurate topographical base plan. The submitted details demonstrate an access road layout with a corridor width in excess of 7.5m, when taking into consideration the nature and use of Dinting Lane, the Highway Authority recommend the carriageway width should be 5.5m minimum in order to enable vehicles travelling in opposite directions to comfortably pass. Any subsequent Reserved Matters/ Full application should include a turning facility demonstrated as suitable for use by a Large Refuse Vehicle by means of swept paths and off-street parking. In addition, unless mitigated otherwise, it’s suggested that space is made available within the site for parking for those currently using the site. An earlier application included a provision of 13no. such spaces and, although not a direct replacement for the spaces lost, this would go some way towards offsetting the consequences of the development. As a part of any future submission, the applicant may wish to explore provision of an area within the site set aside for parking or an over-engineered road layout (increased width) to accommodate roadside parking whist reducing the likelihood of obstruction. Conditions and informatives are recommended in the interests of highway safety.

7.11

Network Rail Network Rail have objected to the application

as the site has been used by commuters as the unofficial Dinting Railway Station car park for a number of years, and it is unclear where the fifty or so vehicles which it accommodates would relocate to if the site were to be developed. The Transport Statement provided by the applicant fails to address this. With additional housing proposed elsewhere in the area there is likely to be an increase in demand for parking spaces near to Dinting station. Revised Comments Additional information was submitted by the applicant to Network Rail. Network Rail describes the car park as ‘unofficial’ as it has not been constructed to the DfT Code of Practice, and does not form part of the railway estate. Network Rail’s concern stems from the basis that removal of the car park (which HPBC originally saw fit to grant approval for the establishment of) will lead to redistribution of vehicles (parking requirement) which will create nuisance for our operations (clear access to track access points) and the enjoyment of the area by our tenants in the former station house properties. Network rail contest that the transport statement is silent on this subject, and on how alternative provision will be provided is relevant in order to mitigate the risk of nuisance parking. It would be irresponsible as the Network operator, and landlord of the adjacent properties, not to raise these objections.

7.36-7.43

Northern Rail This land provides car parking for rail users at Dinting Station and should this development go ahead there would be significant impact for local residents and station users who would be unable to park their vehicles.

7.36-7.43

Transport for Greater

TfGM are not aware of the detailed planning history of the site; however it appears that it

7.36-7.43

7.12

Manchester (TfGM)

was an undeveloped greenfield site until 2001 when an application was made for use of the site as car parking for a park and ride scheme for Dinting station and this was granted permission in 2003. Given that the site has existing use rights for car parking for a park and ride scheme TfGM are unclear as to why this is described as informal or unofficial. TfGM doesn’t have any data relating to the use of this park and ride scheme but clearly if it is being used, redeveloping the site for residential use will displace the car parking currently using the site. It would be considered reasonable for the applicant’s Transport Statement to assess this impact of the development and if necessary demonstrate how it will be mitigated. The Local Highway Authority will need to consider if the residual cumulative impacts of the development are severe (in line with NPPF paragraph 32).

Derbyshire Wildlife Trust

The Trust is not aware of any nature conservation interest on the site. A Local Wildlife Site (HP186) present on the western boundary, however a Public Right of Way (PRoW) lies between the LWS and site. Although the site is adjacent to a Local Wildlife Site – Dinting Lodge Grassland – HP186, DWT can confirm that there is little of ecological value on the existing hardstanding which comprises the bulk of the application site, excluding a small buffer of tall ruderal grassland around its margins. The site is a car park with a small vegetated triangle of land to the southern tip with scattered young trees. Recommendations previously made, are still considered current to this application, which include:

• The boundary with the LWS should be securely fenced with high visibility temporary fencing during the whole period of construction including any vegetation clearance and enabling works.

• The use of locally native species in

7.33-7.35

7.13

planting or where appropriate horticultural varieties of plants and shrubs which support nectar sources and/or fruit.

• Bird and bat boxes on trees and/or incorporated into buildings.

• Retention of the existing hedgerow and the footpath would act as a buffer to the LWS habitats but that greater benefit might be provided by having greenspace adjacent to the footpath in order to increase both amenity and provide additional habitat structure.

• Tree felling should occur outside the bird breeding season (March – August inclusive).

• Should any evidence of digging by large mammals – such as badger – be observed at any future stage, such issues should be investigated in full and any associated construction activity halted until such time as appropriate advice is sought and implemented from a suitably qualified ecologist.

• There are only a small number of trees onsite and they are of small stature and not suitable for roosting bats – a large multi-stemmed goat willow although large did not have stems of sufficient size or signs of decay which would support suitable rot holes for roosting bats. Bats are highly likely to utilise the boundary of the trees, hedgerows and the railway line as foraging features. The bulk of the car park is not likely to be considered a highly valuable feeding resource which requires specific mitigation within the proposals.

• Lighting should be directional and positioned away from the trees, hedgerow and railway; this will ensure any foraging activity from fauna are not impacted.

7.14

7. POLICY AND MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS AND PLANNING

BALANCE

(A) Planning policies 7.1 The determination of a planning application is to be made pursuant to section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, which is to be read in conjunction with section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 7.2 Section 38(6) requires the Local Planning Authority to determine planning applications in accordance with the development plan, unless there are material circumstances which 'indicate otherwise'. Section 70(2) provides that in determining applications the Local Planning Authority "shall have regard to the provisions of the Development Plan, so far as material to the application and to any other material considerations." The Development Plan currently consists of the High Peak Saved Local Plan Policies 2008. 7.3 With respect to emerging policy, the new draft Local Plan for the borough has been submitted to the Secretary of State (August 2014) and has recently undergone public examination. The inspector is currently preparing his report which may make recommendations on main modifications to make the plan sound. As such given the advanced stage of the Plan and in accordance with paragraph 216 of the NPPF, weight can now be attributed to some of the policies which have received no or limited objections. Other material considerations include the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG). 7.4 The Council cannot currently demonstrate a 5 year supply of housing land. Accordingly the relevant adopted housing policy, Policy H1 is out of date and therefore paragraph 14 of NPPF applies. 7.5 Paragraph 14 of the NPPF explains that at the heart of the Framework is the presumption in favour of sustainable development, for decision makers this means that when considering development proposals which accord with the development plan, they should be approved without delay, but where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, grant planning permission unless any adverse impacts would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole. Principle of development 7.6 At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is the presumption in favour of sustainable development, which is reflected in Policies S1 – Sustainable Development Principles and S1a – Presumption in favour of Sustainable Development of the emerging Local Plan. Paragraph 7 of the NPPF identifies the three dimensions to sustainable development; economic, social and environmental.

7.15

7.7 The Core Principles of the Framework are set out in paragraph 17 and among other criteria seek to proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver the homes, business and industrial units, infrastructure and thriving local places that the country needs. High quality design should be sought and secured and a good standard of amenity provided for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings. 7.8 Section 6 of the Framework relates specifically to the need to deliver a wide choice of high quality homes. Paragraph 49 advises that Local Planning Authorities should consider housing applications in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. 7.9 Within the adopted Local Plan, the site lies within the open countryside. Policy OC1 – Countryside Development of the Local Plan, which is consistent with paragraph 109 of the NPPF, permits development which is an integral part of the rural economy and which can only be carried out in the countryside provided that individually or cumulatively it would not detract from or have a significant impact on the character and distinctiveness of the countryside. As the Council cannot currently demonstrate a 5 year housing supply and policy H1 is out of date, OC1 cannot be used as a policy to restrict housing within an area of countryside. The NPPF has to take precedent in the determination of an application. 7.10 There are several distinct settlements which make up Glossopdale, each with its own community. Maintaining these separate settlements is important in landscape and community terms. Between Glossop and Hadfield, where there is no green belt, the definition of a strategic gap is necessary to maintain in the long term the separation between the two settlements. The site forms land proposed as part of the strategic gap between Glossop and Hadfield in the Emerging High Peak Local Plan. Emerging Policy S5 – Glossopdale Sub-area strategy will seek to promote and maintain the distinct identiy of its settlements by maintaining a strategic gap between Glossop and Hadfield. 7.11 Emerging Policy H4 requires all new residential development to meet the requirements of local people by providing affordable housing within the overall provision of new residential development set out in policy H5; also to provide a range of market and affordable housing types and sizes, whilst the mix should contribute positively to the promotion of a sustainable and inclusive community taking account the characteristics of the existing housing stock in the surrounding locality. 7.12 The development of this site is outside the development boundary, and its current use as a car park, maintains its openness within the landscape. Although directly adjacent to the railway station for sustainable transport links, it is considered to be within a remote access distance to local services and shops.

7.16

7.13 As set out in Paragraph 14 of the Framework, it is relevant to consider whether allowing this residential development would cause any significant and demonstrable adverse impact, which would outweigh the benefits of delivering new housing to the borough. Scale / Appearance / Landscaping / Layout 7.14 Section 11 ‘Conserving and enhancing the natural environment’ of the NPPF, confirms that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by protecting and enhancing valuable landscapes. Paragraph 109 states that 'the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by … protecting and enhancing valued landscapes'. 7.15 The NPPF highlights that good design is a key aspect of sustainable development, is indivisible from good planning and should contribute positively to making places better for people. Paragraph 58 requires development to function well and add to the overall quality of the area for the lifetime of the development. It should respond to local character and history and reflect the identity of local surroundings and materials whilst reinforcing local distinctiveness. 7.16 Saved Policy OC1 of the Local Plan seeks to protect the countryside from unwarranted development and relates to the character and appearance of the countryside. Saved Policy OC4 'Landscape, Character and Design' requires that new development must contribute to and not erode landscape character and sense of place by employing appropriate design principles. 7.17 Policy GD4 seeks to ensure that new development does not harm the visual qualities of the locality and wider landscape, taking into account matters such as siting, layout, density, height, design, materials and any associated engineering works. Policy H11 states that residential development should incorporate good design that reflects it’s setting and local distinctiveness, promote safe and accessible living environments which include a mix of housing types and protect residential amenity. The adopted Supplementary Planning Document on Residential Design 2005, also provides guidance on the approach to new residential development and the factors which contribute toward local distinctiveness. 7.18 Emerging Local Plan policies S1 and EQ5 expect new development to contribute to a sense of place by taking account of the distinct character, townscape and setting of the area and securing high quality and locally distinctive design and amenity. These policies are afforded moderate and significant weight respectively. 7.19 The site lies within the Settled Valley Pastures Landscape Character Area, as defined by the adopted Landscape Character Assessment Supplementary Planning Document. As such the area is characterised as a pastoral landscape with permanent improved pasture where fields are small and irregular enclosed by hedgerows, occasional dry stone walls and tree

7.17

belts and groups around settlements. The site has been levelled off over time for the use as the car park but the rural appearance in and around the boundaries characterises it with the landscape character type. 7.20 The application site, albeit a brownfield site and situated adjacent to Dinting Railway Station, lies away from the neighbouring settlement boundaries of Hadfield and Glossop. It occupies a central position within an area of countryside which is vulnerable due to its narrowness and plays an important part in preventing the coalescence of the adjacent settlements. The site is identified as a strategic gap in the Emerging Local Plan where the key aim is to maintain the separation between the two settlements of Hadfield and Glossop by conserving landscape characteristics and open space between built up areas. A modification to the strategic gap boundary is proposed as shown on map 26 of the Emerging Local Plan Policies map to reflect the recent planning approval on the north of Dinting Road. As such the proposal site remains as an important land designation to maintain the separation and openness along Dinting Road and between the settlements of Hadfield and Glossop. 7.21 The application is in outline form and only seeks the reserved matters of access. The other matters including appearance, landscaping, layout and scale would be subsequently reserved for a further application. Therefore only indicative information has been submitted. The indicative site layout shows 11 detached dwellings of three different types each with a garage and parking spaces. The appearance due to the topography of the site shows the dwellings being two and three storey houses. The indicative layout proposed is considered to sit at odds with the context of the site and it would lack any frontage detail and the prominence of the site and levels would result in an incongruous isolated estate of dwellings. These would be viewed with large rear and gable sides with no sense of place or relationship within the surrounding landscape. 7.22 An indicative landscaping proposal also accompanies the application indicating hard and soft landscaping. Although landscaping is reserved for subsequent approval it is not considered that the indicative detail as shown would mitigate or outweigh the impacts of harm on the landscape. Housing development on this site would be visually prominent due both to its elevated position and remoteness from neighbouring settlements. The site is viewed across the landscape in particular from views across the valley and the indicative scale and layout would result in housing dominating the landscape in an area which maintains its openness. It would appear as an incongruous form of development and detract from the character and appearance of the countryside to the detriment of the local environment and landscape characteristics. In addition it would further erode the area of open countryside which currently separates Hadfield and Glossop. 7.23 The applicant at this stage has not provided details of the housing mix across the site. The indicative layout and scale suggest that the residential development would be large market detached dwellings. Residential developments should include a mix of dwelling size, type and affordability,

7.18

which offer a choice of housing and life style. This is set out in Saved Local Plan Policy H11 which is supported by Emerging Policy H4 which requires that new residential development addresses the housing needs of local people with emphasis on providing affordable a range of market and affordable housing types and sizes. This is also referred to within the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA, April 2014). The development would not provide any affordable housing and as such the housing mix is not considered to be appropriate for the local area. 7.24 The development is therefore considered to be contrary to policies GD4, OC1, OC4, and H11 of the High Peak Saved Local Plan Policies, policies S1, S5, H4, EQ2 and EQ5 of the Emerging Local Plan along with guidance contained in Paragraph 17 and the Design Chapter of the Framework all of which seek to ensure that the overall scale, density, massing, landscaping and layout are in character with the area and that new development integrates into the natural, built and historic environment. Amenity 7.25 Paragraph 17 of the NPPF requires a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings. Policy GD5 of the saved local plan provides support for development provided that it will not create unacceptable loss of privacy or general amenity as a result of overlooking, loss of light or overbearing. Emerging policy EQ5 also stipulates that development should achieve a satisfactory relationship to adjacent development and does not cause unacceptable effects by reason of visual intrusion, overlooking, shadowing, overbearing or other adverse impacts on local character and amenity. This policy is currently given significant weight. 7.26 The topography of the site results in changes of levels. There are no existing residential properties that the development would impact on in terms of amenity. The indicative plans show the development sitting within the existing levels of the site with properties sited directly opposite to each other. As the railway is adjacent to the site the Environmental Health Officer is satisfied in regards to noise and disturbance, which can be dealt with by condition. However, the application is submitted in outline form, with all such matters reserved for a future application. 7.27 Whilst the detailed layout of the site is unknown at this stage, the development comprises up to 11 dwellings. It is considered that there would be sufficient space to accommodate this level of development whilst safeguarding the residential amenity of future residents. In any event, any future reserved matters application would be subject to the Council’s detailed amenity standards as required by Policies H11 and GD5 of the Saved Local Plan and Emerging Local Plan Policy EQ5 in this regard and in accordance with paragraph 17 of the NPPF.

7.19

Contaminated Land 7.28 Section 11 of the NPPF seeks to prevent unacceptable risks from pollution and land stability to ensure new development is appropriate for its location. Similarly Emerging Local Plan Policy EQ9 seeks to protect people and the environment from unsafe and polluted environments, requiring mitigation if necessary. This policy is currently afforded significant weight. 7.29 The site has been previously subject to levelling works and the Environmental Health Officer is satisfied that the development of the site for residential use would be acceptable with appropriate site investigation and remediation if required. These matters would be addressed by appropriate conditions to protect the amenity of existing neighbouring residents and proposed occupiers. 7.30 The proposals are considered to comply with section 11 of the NPPF, and emerging local plan policy EQ9 in this regard. Trees 7.31 Policy OC10 of the adopted Local Plan identifies that new development should not result in the loss of, or materially injure the health of woodlands, groups of trees or significant individual trees. The area contains a number of trees which surround the site along Dinting Road which are visually important and provide other benefits, such as biodiversity. 7.32 The site itself has limited trees but there are a number to the south east side. The arboricultural officer advises that these are mature and that the proposals may impact on the root systems. The applicant disagrees that there would be any impact on those trees. The retention and protection of those trees on site can be addressed by condition. Although an indicative layout for landscaping is provided within the landscape assessment, the precise layout of the development and future landscaping scheme are matters reserved for subsequent approval. Biodiversity and Ecology 7.33 Section 11 of the NPPF outlines that Local Planning Authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity. Paragraph 109 seeks to minimise impacts and provide net gains in biodiversity where possible. Emerging policy EQ4 echoes this advice, advising that biodiversity and ecological resources should be conserved. This policy is given moderate weight. 7.34 Derbyshire Wildlife Trust are not aware of any nature conservation interests on the site. The local wildlife site (HP186) is present on the western boundary but the public right of way lies between. A number of recommendations for the site and conditions have been requested which can be appropriately secured via condition and dealt with at the reserved matters stage.

7.20

7.35 It is therefore considered that the proposals will not adversely affect any ecological or biodiversity interests and the conditions and advice set out in the comments received from Derbyshire Wildlife Trust will be employed and attached to any consent granted. The proposals are thus considered to comply with the provisions of section 11 of the NPPF and emerging local plan policy EQ4 in this regard. Access and Highway matters 7.36 The NPPF promotes sustainable transport and recommends that local planning authorities should seek to encourage and facilitate where possible sustainable patterns of transport using practical alternatives to private motor vehicles so that people have a real choice about how they travel. 7.37 Policy TR5 of the adopted Local Plan seeks to ensure that new development is served by safe and appropriate access for pedestrians, cyclists, public transport users and the private car, taking into account details such as parking, access, manoeuvring, servicing. The site is located within a sustainable location within easy access of public transport, walking and cycling routes. 7.38 The site was granted permission for the use of a car park in 2003. The car park is used on an informal basis for commuters using the Dinting railway station. Previously a charging regime was enforced at the site but was subsequently removed due to very limited take up and fear of crime. The applicant has confirmed that the landowner does not charge people to park at the site because usage is too low. However, the Transport Statement as submitted identifies that the existing use of the site as a car park has in excess of 50 vehicles which regularly park there. 7.39 The Highway Authority considers that although there is no charge for the car park, the extant use is that of a formal car park. The Highway Authority would be seeking to ensure that any likelihood of on-street parking is reduced and has recommended that mitigation is considered for the displaced vehicles from the car park. Network Rail and Northern Rail have responded with objections to the application in that the loss of the car park will lead to redistribution of vehicles which will create a nuisance for railway operations and although informal would result in a conflict of the highway network. There is no formal agreement as such with Network Rail for it to be used as a car park for commuters. 7.40 On balance in considering that the site is not a public car park and could cease to be used at any point by the landowner, it would be difficult to refuse the application alone on the basis that potentially vehicles could be displaced. The cumulative impacts of the development would not be considered to be severe, which is set out with the NPPF, paragraph 32. Furthermore if the car park should cease then a condition which was placed on the original approval from 2003, states that the site shall be restored to its former condition as an agricultural field/pasture. This would be the

7.21

responsibility of the landowner and any subsequent breach would be the subject of enforcement. 7.41 The proposed access will be served from the existing point at Dinting Road with modifications. The Highway Authority is satisfied with the proposed access providing the recommended visibility splays and footway are provided in the interests of highway safety. These matters could be dealt with by condition. 7.42 The matters of internal layout of the site and car parking provision would be dealt with at the reserved matters stage. The applicant would need to demonstrate that sufficient parking is provided and provision for service vehicles throughout the site can be accommodated. 7.43 It is therefore considered that there would be no adverse impact on the local road network and the proposals therefore comply with the provisions of section 4 of the NPPF, policy TR5 of the adopted Local Plan 2008 and emerging local plan policy CF6 in this regard. Affordable Housing / S106 7.44 There is an identified need for affordable housing in the Borough and the Council’s Policy set out in H9 of the Local Plan and in the Obligations and Housing Needs SPD is that for developments of sites of 0.5ha or development of 15 units or over, 30% of a scheme should be affordable housing. The application does therefore fall under the provision to provide affordable housing with the proposal being for up to 11 dwellings and a site area of 0.49ha. 7.45 There is a requirement for an education contribution is required for the provision of two primary school pupil places at Dinting CE Voluntary Aided Primary School as set out by Derbyshire County Council. The applicant has confirmed that the request is proportionate and would be willing to meet this contribution through a S106 legal agreement. 7.46 As the mix of housing is unknown at this time and the applicant will not agree the final dwelling mix until a reserved matters application is submitted the Council is unable to confirm the figure for off site open space and play space contribution using the adopted formula. The applicants have agreed to provide an open space and play space contribution based on a fixed contribution on a per dwelling basis as opposed to the Council’s formula based on per bedroom basis. This would not be acceptable as the provision for contributions needs to meet the requirements of the Planning Obligations SPD and Local Plan Policies in this regard.

(B) Planning balance

7.47 The National Planning Policy Framework provides for a presumption in favour of sustainable development. At the present time the Council does not have a 5 year land supply and thus the relevant housing policies are out of

7.22

date. In this case, the Framework advises that permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits. The ‘presumption’ in favour of sustainable development entails weighing the benefits of the scheme against those impacts. 7.48 The site lies within countryside and land designated as a strategic gap between Hadfield and Glossop. The site is adjacent to public transport links but is remote to local shops and services. The scheme would deliver a modest amount of social and economic benefits including contributing towards the shortfall in the five year housing supply. The development would also provide modest economic benefits through the creation new jobs during the construction phase and additional spending power in the local economy from future residents. With regards to highway safety it is not considered that the cumulative effects of the development and loss of the car park would cause severe harm to the existing highway network, although it is acknowledged there would be a loss to the public who currently use the site as a commuter parking area for the station. 7.49 However the proposals would not contribute to the provision of a suitable mix of housing for local needs and the provision of any affordable housing for the area. Furthermore the provision for contributions of off site open space and play space is not agreed. 7.50 The indicative layout and siting when viewed in its context with the surrounding landscape would have a significant adverse impact on the character and distinctiveness of the countryside and detrimental impact to maintaining the strategic gap between Hadfield and Glossop. As such the development would result in significant and demonstrable harm that would outweigh the benefits of the scheme. 7.51 The proposal is therefore considered to be a unsustainable form of development under the terms of the NPPF, and would not comply with Policies OC1, OC4, GD4, H11 of the High Peak Saved Local Plan 2008 and Policies S1, S1a, S5, H1 and H4 of the emerging local plan which seek provide sustainable residential development. 8. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that the Committee refuses the application on the grounds listed below;

1. The proposed development in principle would result in an undesirable expansion and encroachment, outside of the built up area boundary into the open countryside and strategic gap between Glossop and Hadfield. As such the development would erode the visual appearance and character of the open countryside and strategic gap contrary to the provisions of Policies GD4, OC1, OC4 of the Saved High Peak Local Plan Policies 2008 and Policies S5 and EQ2 of the Emerging High

7.23

Peak Local Plan and Paragraphs 17 and 109 of the National Planning Policy Framework which seek to protect the character of an area and its valued landscape characteristics.

2. The indicative scale, layout and housing mix is a poorly designed and contrived form of development. The proposals would be detrimental to the visual qualities of the local landscape, local distinctiveness and would not positively contribute to the promotion of sustainable and inclusive communities by providing a mix of housing for the needs of local people. The proposal would be contrary to policies GD4, H11 and OC4 of the High Peak Saved Local Plan Policies 2008 and H4 of the Emerging High Peak Local Plan.

3. There is no mechanism in place to secure the required education, off-site play space and outdoor sport provision contributions which are necessary to support the proposed development. The proposal is thus contrary to Policies CF3 and H12 of the adopted High Peak Local Plan 2008, Planning Obligations SPD 2005 and Emerging High Peak Local Plan Policy CF7 and advice contained within the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.

The recommendation is made following careful consideration of all the issues raised through the application process and thorough discussion with the applicants. In accordance with Paragraphs 186 and 187 of the NPPF the Case Officer has sought solutions where possible to secure a development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. In the event of any changes being needed to the wording of the Committee’s decision (such as to delete, vary or add conditions/informatives/planning obligations or reasons for approval/refusal) prior to the decision being issued, the Head of Regulatory Services has delegated authority to do so in consultation with the Chairman of the Planning Applications Committee, provided that the changes do not exceed the substantive nature of the Committee’s decision.

7.24

Site Plan