PTE/13/6 Development Management Committee 23 January 2013

Town and Country Planning General Regulations 1992 - Regulation 3: Teignbridge District: Construction of a cycle/walk way bridge over the railway line, on a revised alignment to that already approved, for t he proposed Exe Estuary National Cycle Network No 2, between The Turf Lock Hotel and Church Road, Powderham at Railway Level Crossing, Powderham, Exeter Applicant: Devon County Council Application No: 12/03552/DCR3 Date Application received by County Council: 15 No vember 2012 Report of the Head of Planning, Transportation and Environment Recommendation: It is recommended that the propose d bridge design be approved subject to the planning conditions set out in Appen dix II to this Report. 1. Summary 1.1 This Report relates to a planning application for the revised alignment and design of

the cycle/walkway bridge at the Powderham railway level crossing which forms part of the Exe Estuary National Cycle Network Route No 2 (NCN2) between the Turf Locks Hotel and St Clements Church Powderham.

1.2 The primary consideration in the determination of the revised design of the bridge is

its visual impact. 2. Background 2.1 The Turf Locks Hotel to Powderham section of the NCN Route No. 2 was originally

considered by the Development Management Committee on 11 March 2009 when it resolved that determination of the application be deferred to enable all Members of the Committee to visit the site (Minute *275 relates).

2.2 The site visit was duly undertaken on the morning of 1 April 2009 and a full report

was then considered by the Committee on 15 April 2009. Members required, inter alia, that the development be carried out in accordance the approved plans, "except that the final finish and appearance of the bridge shall be in accordance with revised plans to be submitted and approved in consultation with the Chairman, local County Councillor, the Chairman of Powderham Parish Meeting and representatives for the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds, Natural England, English Heritage and Network Rail." (Minute *284 relates).

2.3 This part of the Minute is reflected in Condition 3 of the permission (Ref

08/04550/DCR3) which states:

"Before construction of the proposed railway bridge commences, revised details of the finish and appearance of the bridge shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with these approved details, or as otherwise agreed in writing by the

Please note that the following recommendation is subject to consideration and determination by the Committee before taking effect.

County Planning Authority. The railway bridge shall be fully constructed prior to the opening of the cycleway."

2.4 Details pursuant to Condition 3 showing revised design details for the bridge were

considered by the Committee at its meeting on 20 July 2011 (Minute *115 relates). 2.5 The planning application the subject of this Report contains further design details for

bridge only. These have been drawn up as a result of land negotiations and consultation with local representatives. The approved plans relating to the Turf Locks Hotel to Powderham section of the NCN route No. 2 remain unchanged.

3. The Proposal 3.1 It is anticipated that the completed cycle/walkway will provide a recreational facility

for local residents, day visitors, staying visitors, commuters and educational groups. It would provide for both casual/recreational cyclists and cycle commuters/enthusiasts, bird watchers, anglers, recreational walkers or dog walkers, wheelchair and mobility scooter users.

3.2 An existing Public Right of Way (PROW) connects Estuary Road to Turf Lock,

running along an existing farm track on the west side of the railway line, then crossing the line at a level crossing and continuing on the east side of the line along the top of the environmental flood bank. This PROW will be diverted across the proposed Powderham Bridge and the pedestrian level crossing will be closed to public use and maintained solely for use by the landowner to access the land. The diversion of the PROW is shown on at Appendix III to this report.

3.3 The original bridge design approved by Committee on 20 June 2011 included curved

approach ramps which in the westward side looped around the existing small copse of trees, and on the east side of the railway line, similarly curved to meet the new foot and cycle path at the base of the floodbank. The ramps had horizontal hardwood slats fixed to the outside of the parapet posts. The lower part of the ramp sides were solid, while the upper section had gaps between the horizontal wooden slats to allow glimpsed views for people while providing screening of dogs. The section across the railway had horizontal wooden cladding with no gaps in order to meet Network Rail safety requirements.

3.4 The proposed revised bridge design maintains the 32 metre main railway span at the

point at which is crosses the railway line. However, the previously curved route of the approach ramps has been changed to straight ramps. On the western side of the railway line the ramp would now follow the line of the existing footpath and railway line, while on the eastern side the ramp it would follow the line of the flood bank. The length of the ramps on both the west and eastern sides of the railway line are 116.5m (1:12 with 11 level landings). The approach ramps have been designed to the minimal length possible while enabling safe access for wheelchair users and less mobile people.

3.5 The ramps would have 1.6m parapets which, along with proposed planting beneath

will disguise the stepped ramps when viewed from the east or west. This parapet height then rises on a bowstring alignment to 2.75 metres at the centre of the railway span then back down again to 1.6m at the opposite main span support. The height of the structure has been kept as low as possible while allowing the clearance required for future overhead electrification of the railway as requested by Network Rail.

3.6 The main structure of the bridge will be grey steel, with box profile steel supports, diagonal trusses and horizontal hardwood cladding to the main span and outside of the access ramps. On the ramps the lower section (to a height of 500mm) will be solid wood panels with no gaps - in order to screen dogs and reduce visual disturbance to wildlife. Above this, there will be horizontal gaps to allow glimpsed views of the surrounding landscape to users and provide noise and visual screening to reduce disturbance to wildlife. The inside surface of the main span will be solid hardwood tongue and groove with no gaps, for safety reasons and to meet Network rail specifications. The external surface of the bridge span will reveal the vertical and diagonal steel structure which imitates traditional Victorian railway bridge structures.

4. Consultations 4.1 Teignbridge District Council – no objections, subject to the undertaking of significant

replacement tree planting using container grown trees. 4.2 Environment Agency – no objection, commenting that relevant issues will be dealt

with under the Flood Defence Consent. 4.3 Natural England – In summary:

• Natura 2000 site – no objection, advising that the proposal, if undertaken in strict accordance with the details submitted, is not likely to have a significant effect on the interest features for which Exe Estuary has been classified. [see Para 7.3]

• Comments that although this application is in close proximity to the Exe Estuary Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), given the nature and scale of this proposal, it is satisfied that there is not likely to be an adverse effect on this site as a result of the proposal being carried out in strict accordance with the details of the application as submitted. It therefore advises that this SSSI does not represent a constraint in determining this application.

4.4 RSPB – no objections raised on the basis that no additional impacts had been

identified over the existing consented design. 4.5 English Heritage – comments that the application should be determined in

accordance with national and local policy guidance, and on the basis of your specialist conservation advice.

4.6 CPRE – no comments received. 4.7 South West Water – no objection. 4.8 Network Rail – no objection in principal, although legal condition relating to the use of

Network Rail Land were set out and it was noted that a license agreement was needed before works take place at this site.

4.9 South West Coast Path Association – states that the principle of a footbridge at this

location is one that is supported by the Association, given the potential hazards for walkers using the pedestrian level crossing over a high-speed rail line, particularly for those carrying a heavy pack. The only possible concern would relate to the impact on the environment, since the Association is anxious that the visual and environmental corridor of the route is maintained at the highest possible level. Given these factors, the Association has no objection to the proposal, which should on balance be of benefit to users of the Coast Path and the estuary-side paths, while not acceptably harming the landscape.

4.10 Sustrans – offered strong support for the revised planning application for the railway

bridge at Powderham. The design is appropriate for the purpose and setting of the bridge. It is essential that this replacement for the level public footpath crossing is built as soon as possible to provide safety to the large number of cyclists and walkers wishing to use this route as part of the Exe Estuary Trail and National Cycle Network Route 2.

5. Advertisement/Representations 5.1 The application was advertised by means of notices on and near the site, a notice in

the press and notification of neighbours, including that who made representation on the previous application. As a result of these procedures 8 letters of objection and 46 letters of support have been received.

5.2 The letters of objection from local residents relate to:

• Visual impact due to the scale of the bridge and length of the ramps. • Visual impact on the setting of the village due to the design of the bridge (the

materials and massing of it). • Safety concerns relating to the length and straight form of the ramps which

respondents are concerned will encourage cycling speed and collisions. • Desire to see vertical slats rather than horizontal. • Concern at the cost and prioritisation of the scheme in time of austerity. • Concern that the Flood Risk Assessment is not accurate. • Safety concerns due to the enclosed nature of the bridge reducing natural

surveillance and offering screening for antisocial activities. • Lack of lighting of the bridge and safety implications. • The length of time it will take for the trees planted to mature sufficiently to provide

screening. • Matured trees screening views of the estuary from Powderham. • Preference for alternative locations along the railway line. • Impact on Powderham village from users parking near by.

5.3 The letters of support from local residents relate to:

• Enthusiasm at the prospect of completing the NCN Route No. 2. • Provision of a safe crossing point and route on the western side of the estuary

providing an alternative to cyclists using the dangerous A379. • Economic benefits of the completed route, in particular from attracting tourists. • Health benefits of the completed route encouraging new and more frequent

users. • Reducing local car use (with associated traffic and carbon impacts) by providing

an attractive and completed cycle route. • Minimal visual impact of the bridge in the local landscape. • Attractive design. • Minimal environmental impact of the design. • Accessibility of the facility to parents with young children, bikes and prams. • Provision of an accessible route for all users.

5.4 It should be noted that overwhelmingly, the comments in support focussed on safety

and desire to see the route completed. Many also commented that the design was good quality and environmental impacts appear to have been fully considered.

6. Planning Policy Considerations 6.1 In considering this application, the County Council as County Planning Authority is

required to have regard to the provisions of the Development Plan. Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires that where regard is to be had to the Development Plan, the determination shall be in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations, which can include emerging policies, indicate otherwise. In this case, the relevant Development Plan policies are summarised in Appendix I to this Report and are discussed in Section 7 below.

7. Comments/Issues 7.1 Members are reminded that a planning consent is already in place for the cycle and

footpath between Turf Locks Hotel and Powderham village including a bridge over the level crossing. The current application is for an alternative bridge design only, thus the principle of constructing a bridge has already been accepted and the matter for consideration is solely that of design.

7.2 It is considered that the material considerations in the determination of this

application are:

• the visual impact of the bridge over the railway (in particular upon the Castle - Grade I Listed, the church - Grade II* Listed and the Registered landscape) as well as the Area of great Landscape Value (AGLV) designation;

• impact on the environment relating to the RAMSAR site, Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and Special Protection Area (SPA) designations the application area includes;

• improvements to public safety by removing from use the existing level crossing

Environmental designations 7.3 The impact on the environment relating to the RAMSAR site, Site of Special Scientific

Interest (SSSI) and Special Protection Area (SPA) designations by the application area have been considered by Natural England. This concluded that, if undertaken in strict accordance with the details submitted, is not likely to have a significant effect on the interest features for which Exe Estuary has been classified under Natural 2000 [see Para 4.2],. Furthermore there is unlikely to be an adverse effect on this site, which is part of a SSSI.

Ecology and Biodiversity

7.4 A Habitats Regulations Assessment has already been carried out for the Exe Estuary

Trail as a whole. Some mitigation works are already under way for the Turf Locks Hotel to Powderham section of the NCN route No. 2. Further mitigation is not required other than that which is proposed in the application details submitted. A planning condition is recommended to ensure that the mitigation measures set out in the updated Environmental Statement 2012 are implemented.

Safety

7.5 The provision of a bridge at Powderham would complete the last remaining section of

the Exe Estuary Cycle route. Without a bridge, there is no safe means of crossing the railway in the volumes that would be expected to use this section of the NCN Route No. 2. The improvement to public safety offered by the bridge in replacement of the existing level crossing is undeniable. There was a recent fatality at this site and the potential for fatal accidents in the future is very real given the increasing numbers of users of the NCN Route No. 2 and the short amount of time pedestrians have to cross the line on foot once a train is seen or heard to be approaching.

Visual impact

7.6 The visual impact of the bridge over the railway is the key material consideration

relating to the revised bridge design. This relates to its potential to impact upon the Castle (which is Grade I Listed), Powderham Church (which is Grade II* Listed), the Registered landscape and the Area of Great Landscape Value (AGLV) designation. For these reasons, the design is being brought to the Committee for consideration.

7.7 In terms of the scale of the development, relative to its surroundings, the railway

bridge will provide only a minor aerial impact due to its plan width and the fact that it crosses existing railway infrastructure. It is not considered to significantly harm the view of the estuary.

7.8 In elevation, the cycle/footway bridge represents a distinct incursion into the skyline

due to its level of elevation and the length of the access ramps. This aspect of the route will be visible from Estuary Road, Powderham. However, the design has been developed as a blend of simple modern form using natural materials (e.g. wooden panelling) and traditional design features (e.g. the diagonal T-section truss steel frames). The height of the structure has been kept to an absolute minimum which also reduces the impact on the skyline as far as possible.

7.9 Some Powderham residents have objected to the proposal citing concerns relating to

the visual impact of the bridge on the landscape and views from the village. However, apart from the access paths, the only other public viewpoint is some 250 metres away where there are limited views from the road in the vicinity of Powderham Church. There is one house in this location which would have a distant view interrupted by an oblique view of the ramps and bridge. There are also a number of dwellings some 650 metres away in Powderham Village though at that distance it is considered that the proposed footbridge and ramps will have negligible impact on estuary views.

7.10 The presence of the bridge may be considered to disrupt the sense of open-ness of

the local landscape, and the loss of trees within the oak clump is regrettable. However, given the condition of these trees (evident from the submitted tree survey report), the loss is not significant and the proposed planting will help offset the loss and ensure the future presence of a tree clump as a characteristic feature of this open, historic landscape. A condition is proposed to maintain the planting for a period of five years and the Applicant has agreed to maintain that planting scheme in the longer term so that its function as a landscape impact mitigation measure is maintained. Such a measure is also consistent with landscape guidelines within Devon’s landscape character assessment evidence base. Over time, the proposed planting would integrate the bridge and its associated ramps into the open landscape setting, resulting in no residual significant adverse permanent effects.

7.11 The Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment has been developed to take account

of the local landscape character and in consultation with the County Council’s Landscape Officer. It is considered that the location of the bridge near the existing oak clump, along with the proposed planting and choice of colour and materials for the bridge, will help to integrate the structure into the wider landscape setting, limit its wider visual impact and respect the historic landscape character of the landscape by strengthening the tree clump in this location. Therefore, it is considered that the proposals appear to have been informed by and are sympathetic to the landscape character and compliant with relevant landscape policy, including the National Planning Policy Framework, Devon Structure Plan Policies ST1 (Sustainable Development), CO1 (Landscape Character and Local Distinctiveness) and C04 (Areas of Great Landscape Value).

8. Reasons for Recommendation/Alternative Options C onsidered 8.1 A planning consent is already in place for a bridge and the current application is for

an alternative design. Thus, the principle of constructing a bridge has already been accepted and the matter before the local planning authority is solely a matter of design.

8.2 It is considered that there are no additional impacts of this proposed bridge design

compared to that which has already been approved. The temporary effects of the impact on the landscape of the loss of some of the trees are not significant enough to outweigh the considerable benefits the scheme would bring to people’s enjoyment of the landscape, environmental, economic and health benefits anticipated from the completion of the strategic footpath and cycle route.

Dave Black

Head of Planning, Transportation and Environment Electoral Division: Exminster & Kenton Local Government Act 1972 List of Background Papers Contact for enquiries: Kate Cantwell Tel No: 01392 383894 Room No: ABG Lucombe House Background Paper Date File Ref Casework File November 2012 12/03552/DCR3 kc090113dma sc/cr/cycle walkway bridge turf lock church road powderham 06 hq 150113

Appendix I To PTE/13/6

Planning Policy Considerations National Planning Policy Framework Draft Regional Spatial Strategy for the South West 2006 2026: Policies SD1 (The Ecological Footprint); SD3 (The Environment and Natural Resources); Development Policy E (High Quality Design); ENV1 (Protecting and Enhancing the Region's Natural and Historic Environment); ENV4 (Nature Conservation); and ENV5 (Historic Environment). Regional Planning Guidance for the South West (RPG1 0) September 2001: Policies EN1 (Landscape and Biodiversity); EN3 (The Historic Environment); and Quality in the Built Environment). Devon Structure Plan 2001 – 2016: Policies CO1(Landscape Character and Local Distinctiveness); CO10 (Protection of Nature Conservation Sites and Species); CO4 (Areas of Great Landscape Value); CO6 (Quality of New Development); CO7 (Historic Settlements and Buildings); CO9 (Biodiversity and Earth Science Diversity); and ST1 (Sustainable Development). Teignbridge Local Plan 1989 – 2001: Policies ENV1 (Landscape and Nature Conservation); ENV2 (Coastal Preservation Areas); ENV3 (Areas of Great Landscape Value); ENV4 (Countryside); ENV5 (Protect and Enhance the Landscape); T5 (Road Safety); T27 (Needs of disabled people in Transport Facility Development); T28 (Facilities for Cyclists); C5 (Environmental Enhancement Schemes); C8 (Retention of Landscape Features); C10 (Landscaping Scheme); C17 (Impact on Special Environmental Designations); C23 (Management Schemes); C26 (Visitor/Habitat Management); and C31 (Setting of Listed Buildings).

Appendix II To PTE/13/6

Schedule of Conditions – Teignbridge District Council Application No. 08/045 50/DCR3 Devon County Council Ref. DCC/2751/2008 Condition 1 The development shall commence within three years of the date of this

permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Condition 2 Except where varied by Condition 4 and 7 below, development shall be

carried out in strict accordance with the details shown on the approved plans numbered Location Plan Q04005-12A, Planning General Arrangement BM(4909)P-01B, Design and Access Statement, Construction Traffic Management Plan, Updated Environmental Statement, ES Fig 1 ZVI, ES Fig 2.01 – 2.09 Photomontages, ES Fig 2.10 – 2.14 Photos 4-15, ES Fig 3 Landscape Proposals, Revised FRA 06 November 2008, Archaeological Assessment October 2008BM 254-101P Alternative Alignment, Photomontages 3.17.1 – 3.17.6, 3.19 statement of Community Involvement, Tree Survey Report 11 September 2012, Construction Environment Management Plan 3.3, Draft SWMP, Proposed Diversion of Public Right of Way Q04005/121, Timber Post and rail Fence Q04005/124, Stock Proof Fence Q04005/126, Landscape Proposals TUE80783D/Figure 3.

Reason: To enable the County Planning Authority to control the development in order

to minimise its impact upon the area. Condition 3 No development shall take place until the applicant has secured the

implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted by the applicant and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The programme shall include evaluation trenching and/or test pitting as a first stage, with more detailed mitigation in the event of the evaluation work identifying significant archaeology. The development shall be carried out at all times in strict accordance with the approved scheme, or such other details as may be subsequently agreed in writing by the County Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure that an appropriate record is made of archaeological evidence that

may be affected by the development. Condition 4 Before development commences a scheme detailing the monitoring of bird

activity shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The scheme shall include details of the methods of data collection to be used, the type of data to be collected and the frequency of monitoring. The development shall be carried out in accordance with these approved details, or as otherwise agreed in writing by the County Planning Authority.

Reason: To provide data on bird activity and ascertain whether there is any effect from

the development. Condition 5 Development shall be carried out in accordance with the mitigation measures

set out in the updated Environmental Statement dated October 2012.

Reason: To ensure that all ecological impacts are appropriately avoided, mitigated or

compensated. Condition 6 The landscaping proposals detailed on Plan 80783D Figure 3 shall be fully

implemented in the first planting season after completion of the development and maintained for a period of five years. Any tree or shrub, or any replacement of it, that is removed, uprooted, destroyed or dies within five years of the date of planting shall be replaced with the same or similar species in the same location.

Reason: To ensure that the planting fulfils the objectives set out on Plan 80783D

Figure 3 Landscape Proposals and to protect the character and appearance of the local landscape.

Condition 7 The Corsican Pine detailed in Plan 80783D Figure 3 Landscape Proposals

shall be replaced by (3 litre) container grown Scots Pine. Reason: To protect the character and appearance of the local landscape. Condition 8 Within 3 months of the date of this decision notice, a scheme detailing all

clearance works and pre-commencement ecological investigations is to be submitted for approval in writing by the County Planning Authority. The scheme shall include:

(a) the intended timing of clearance works and construction activities,

demonstrating how these works will avoid any harm or disturbance to nesting birds, the over wintering bird interest of the Exe Estuary SSSI/SPA and to other protected species;

(b) any necessary pre-construction ecological surveys or checks; (c) arrangements for any ecological supervision of the

clearance/construction activities; (d) measures to be taken to ensure that all contractors are properly

briefed on ecological issues and the sensitivity of the wildlife issues around the estuary;

(e) any appropriate exclusion measures to avoid inadvertent harm to areas or features of wildlife interest directly adjoining the development site.

All such works and construction activities will be undertaken in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason: To minimise disturbance to wildfowl and to protect the living conditions of

nearby residents. Condition 9 Before development commences a revised construction management plan

including the following details shall be submitted to the County Planning Authority for approval.

(a) maximum size of vehicles to be used; (b) methods of traffic control at the site; (c) hours of construction work; and (d) hours of deliveries

Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason: To minimise disturbance to wildfowl and to protect the living conditions of

nearby residents. Condition 10 Before development commences, the Applicant shall notify the County

Planning Authority of the date of planned commencement of construction activities on site.

Reason: To minimise disturbance to wildfowl and to protect the living conditions of

nearby residents.

Appendix III To PTE/13/6