Page 1 of 13

Committee Date: 21/08/2014 Application Number: 2014/04245/PA

Accepted: 16/06/2014 Application Type: Full Planning

Target Date: 15/09/2014

Ward: Weoley

Bournville Care Village, Bristol Road South, Bournville, Birmingham, B31 2AJ

Erection of 35 independent living units (C2) associated with Phase III of the Bournville Care Village, including car parking and landscaping Applicant: Bournville Village Trust

350 Bournville Lane, Bournville, Birmingham, B30 1QY Agent: P J Planning

5 St Pauls Terrace, 82 Northwood Street, Birmingham, B3 1TH

Recommendation Approve Subject To Conditions 1. Proposal 1.1. The proposal is for the erection of 35 no. independent living units for people with

learning difficulties, to form part of the wider extra care village on this site.

1.2. The accommodation would be provided in mostly two-storey buildings, with an irregular ‘U-shaped’ footprint enclosing a central landscaped courtyard to the rear. There is a predominantly level plateau at this north-east corner of the care village site, but the levels fall at a steep gradient to the south and south-east boundaries and the application site encompasses this storey-high change in level. As such, the building would step down, with the creation of a lower ground floor level (and no 1st floor) at its southern end.

1.3. In addition to the 35 individual apartments, there would be some centrally located

shared facilities within the block, including a communal lounge, kitchen/dining area, toilets and staff facilities. The units themselves would be a mix of 1 and 2 beds, each with a bathroom and open plan kitchen/dining/lounge. Each unit would have its own front door, opening onto either a covered walkway at ground/lower ground floor or a communal corridor at the upper level.

1.4. Bedroom sizes comply with the recommendations in Places for Living with the

exception of 2 units where 12.6sqm cannot be achieved (12 and 12.15sqm). Furniture layouts have been provided.

1.5. The building would be of brick construction, with elements of laminate timber

cladding at 1st floor, and traditional tiled roofs. The cladding would be utilised to form solar shading where required. The same brick would also be used in the construction of garden walls and communal areas.

Page 2 of 13

1.6. The ground floor apartments would be provided with screened patio areas to give private defensible space and a degree of separation from the circulation routes around the development. The upper floor apartments would have balconies.

1.7. The development would be set within a landscaped area, including a courtyard at

the centre of the block that would be accessible from individual units and the communal lounge. This would be formally laid out to incorporate a patio and seating for residents. In addition, there are substantial, less formal grassed/planted spaces (in excess of 1,200sqm) with substantial tree screens across the north and east boundaries.

1.8. The proposed development would utilise the main vehicular access to the care village from Bristol Road South and internal route that extends from this (circling around the central village green approved as part of phase 1). 7 no. car parking spaces would be provided for staff/visitors (including one for people with disabilities), adjacent to the building’s main entrance, along with cycle parking provision. There would be no parking required for the occupants of the apartments due to the nature of their illness.

1.9. The intended client group requires a specialist care and support service, which

would be provided through Bournville Village Trust. Each individual would have their own tenancy (set up with the support of the Trust) and would be assessed through the Mencap Housing Pathways team to ensure that they are able to manage this type of independent living arrangement with support. The level/nature of support is dependent on the individual, but would be an average of approximately 50 hours per week.

1.10. Site area: 0.6 hectares.

1.11. The application was supported by the following information – Design and Access Statement, Landscape Master Plan, Flood Risk Assessment, Ecological Appraisal, Transport Statement, Recreational Space Appraisal, Arboricultural Survey, Archaeological Statement, Air Quality Assessment, and Noise Impact Assessment.

1.12. A screening opinion was carried out, which concluded that an Environmental Impact

Assessment was not required for this proposal. Site Plan Elevations

2. Site & Surroundings 2.1. The site forms part of the land formerly occupied by Bournville College of Further

Education and its associated playing field. The College relocated to Longbridge some time ago and the site has been cleared for redevelopment. Work is now well underway on Phase 1 of the new Bournville Care Village development (212 no. extra care apartments), of which this proposal would form part.

2.2. The main frontage to the care village site is to the north-west of Bristol Road South,

from which there are two vehicular access points. This application relates to an area on the north-east side of the ‘village’, where the boundaries adjoin the rear gardens of houses on Middle Park Road and Swarthmore Road.

Page 3 of 13

2.3. The surrounding area is predominantly residential in nature, with traditional semis and detached properties to the north and an estate of mainly 3 storey maisonettes to the west.

2.4. Mature trees mark the boundaries with existing residential properties. There is also a

substantial belt of trees on the Bristol Road South frontage. There is a significant fall in levels from the north-western corner to the southern tip (approximately 13m difference).

Site Location Map Street View

3. Planning History 3.1. 16th March 2009. 2008/06331/PA. Demolition of existing structures and

redevelopment to provide approximately 99 residential units (Use Class C3) and associated access arrangements - outline approval subject to a S106 agreement to secure public open space, affordable housing and a £200,000 contribution towards improvement of existing pitches in the Weoley Ward.

3.2. 23rd April 2012. 2012/00513/PA. Development of a care village comprising a 208

bed extra care facility, a dementia care home, a nursing home, and a health and well-being centre (C2/D1), with 224 car parking spaces, 51 cycle spaces, servicing and open spaces (outline application with consideration of access, layout and scale) – approved subject to a S106 agreement to secure a financial contribution of £200,000 towards improvement and maintenance of sports, recreational and community facilities within the Weoley Ward and/or adjoining Wards and provision of the on-site area of open space and retention of access to the general public.

3.3. 13th June 2012. 2012/01952/PA. Application to extend the time of extant planning

application 2008/06331/PA for the demolition of existing structures and redevelopment to provide approximately 99 residential units (use class C3) and associated access arrangements – approved subject to a S106 agreement to secure public open space, affordable housing and a £200,000 contribution towards improvement of existing pitches in the Weoley Ward.

3.4. 23rd November 2012. 2012/05877/PA. Development of extra care facility comprising

212 apartments with 135 car parking spaces, associated landscaping and service areas and village green – approved subject to a S106 agreement to secure a financial contribution of £200,000 towards improvement and maintenance of sports, recreational and community facilities within the Weoley Ward and/or adjoining Wards, provision of the on-site area of open space and retention of access to the general public, and provision of affordable housing.

3.5. 21st March 2013. 2013/00177/PA. Display of 6 no. temporary flagpole signs and 12

no. non-illuminated temporary advert hoardings – temporary approval. 3.6. 17th July 2013. 2013/03617/PA. Erection of sub-station – approved. 3.7. 31st October 2013. 2013/05870/PA. Development of 80 bed dementia care and

nursing home (Phase II) at Bournville Care Village, Bristol Road South – approved.

Page 4 of 13

4. Consultation/PP Responses

Consultations 4.1. Local Services – this is a further phase of this complex where S106 obligations have

already been addressed through the initial application. This type of development would not, in any case, generate any contributions in respect of public open space or children’s play.

4.2. Transportation – no objection.

4.3. Regulatory Services – no objection, subject to conditions in respect of ground investigation/assessment/remediation and noise from external plant, noise insulation and extraction/odour control equipment.

4.4. West Midlands Police – no objections. Have met with Architect – development could potentially achieve Secured by Design certification.

4.5. Environment Agency – no comments to make.

4.6. West Midlands Fire Service – there should be water hose access (from the fire service vehicle) to every point of the building within 45m. If this is not achievable then access to within 15m of the perimeter is acceptable. Dead ends should have a minimum width of 3.7m and permit free access/egress of fire service appliances. A turning circle or hammerhead should be provided at the end of any dead end greater than 20m in length.

4.7. Severn Trent – no objection subject to imposition of a drainage condition.

Public Participation

4.8. Adjacent occupiers, Councillors, M.P. and residents associations notified. Site and press notices posted.

4.9. One objection received as follows. Height has decreased since last application,

which also showed a secure, enclosed sensory garden at the rear of properties on Middle Park Road. Current proposal shows this replaced by publically accessible secluded ‘rat-runs’. Similar rear accesses/alleyways have been closed locally in recent years in order to reduce security risks for residents/property. This proposal adds security risk to adjacent properties.

4.10. Four letters of support for accommodation of this nature (with expressions of interest

for use of the facility).

4.11. Further response querying information available on website. 5. Policy Context 5.1. NPPF; UDP 2005; Draft Birmingham Development Plan; Places for Living; Places

for All; Nature Conservation Strategy; Specific Needs Residential Uses. 6. Planning Considerations

Page 5 of 13

Background 6.1. Your Committee approved an outline application in April 2012 for the redevelopment

of the former Bournville College site on Bristol Road South as a ‘care village’ (no. 2012/00513/PA). This proposal included a 208 bed extra care facility, a dementia care home, a nursing home and a health/well-being centre.

6.2. The first phase of this development – the extra care apartments and adjacent village

green – was approved by your Committee in November 2012 (application no. 2012/05877/PA) and is currently under construction. The second phase was approved in October last year (under 2013/05870/PA).

6.3. This second phase proposal deviated from the indicative scheme approved at the

outline stage, in that it provided a combined nursing home and dementia care facility. The latter was originally intended to be provided as a separate unit (as phase 3) on the land the subject of this current application. This change was in response to the intended operator’s requirements. No development was shown on the current application site at this time.

6.4. The current application is for 35 independent living units. The proposal developed as

a result of discussions between the applicant, the City Council and Mencap, which demonstrated a need to provide housing for people with learning difficulties that had some shared facilities but were essentially independent with their own front door.

Policy

6.5. NPPF includes a presumption in favour of sustainable development, requiring

consideration of economic, social and environmental matters. It encourages the re-use of previously developed land, requires that full advantage should be taken of sustainable locations (with access to public transport, walking and cycling) and refers to the promotion of a wide choice of high quality homes, and the need for high quality design.

6.6. The UDP encourages the redevelopment of previously developed sites.

6.7. Policies 3.14 A-E of the UDP relate to the design of new development, the key principles for consideration being:

- impact on local character, - scale and design of new buildings and spaces (to respect the surrounding area), - the need for free, easy and safe movement, and importance of links, - the encouragement of mixed uses in centres and areas where they can

contribute towards meeting an identified local need, - creation of safe, pleasant and legible places, - the requirement for integral landscaping, - retention of trees and new tree planting.

6.8. Policy 3.16A emphasises the importance of landscaping and provides a commitment

to tree protection.

6.9. Policy 3.52A relates to proposals that would lead to a loss of open space, stating that it will only be permitted in exceptional circumstances. Account will be taken of the availability of public open space nearby, its quality, and how well it meets local needs. Where exceptional circumstances are demonstrated, an appropriate recreational community benefit of equal value will be sought.

Page 6 of 13

6.10. Policy 3.57 takes the same principle forward in respect of development of playing

fields. This will not normally be allowed, particularly in areas which fall significantly below the standard of 1.2 hectares playing field provision per 1000 population. Where exceptional circumstances are accepted, development will be subject to provision of equivalent long-term recreational community benefit.

6.11. Policies 8.28 and 8.29 relate to residential care homes. Consideration is to be given

to impact on residential amenity, cumulative impact, impact on the safety and free-flow of traffic in the adjoining highway, adequacy of access/parking provision, and provision of outdoor amenity space.

6.12. ‘Places for Living’ encourages good quality accommodation in attractive

environments. It contains a series of urban design principles and makes reference to minimum design and amenity standards. Particular emphasis is given to assessing context and responding positively to local character.

6.13. ‘Places for All’ also emphasises the importance of good design, high quality

environments, again with an emphasis on context.

6.14. Specific Needs Residential Uses SPG includes guidance on assessing proposals for residential care and nursing homes and reflects the considerations contained in policies 8.28 and 8.29 of the UDP.

6.15. Public Open Space in New Residential Developments SPD seeks to ensure

adequate public open space, children’s play and sports facilities are provided to serve all new residential development in the City, and expands upon the UDP policies referred to above.

Principle of Development

6.16. The application site is previously developed land located in a predominantly residential area, with good links to public transport and local services. The principle of the redevelopment of this site as a care village was established through the aforementioned outline approval.

6.17. Whilst the current scheme does not reflect the original proposal for this part of the site, the proposed use is of a nature consistent with that of the wider development. As such, the proposal for semi-independent living is considered acceptable in principle.

6.18. Phases 2 and 3 of the care village development are sited partly on an area formerly

occupied by a playing field associated with the college use. The loss of this facility was accepted at the outline stage and £200,000 compensation was secured through a S106 agreement at that time. This payment was subsequently submitted to the City Council, as required, upon commencement of the first phase of development on 17th June 2013.

Transportation

6.19. A Transport Statement and Travel Plan formed part of the application submission.

The proposed development would utilise the main access from Bristol Road South and internal route that extends from this (circling around the central village green approved as part of phase 1). 7 no. car parking spaces would be provided for staff/visitors (including one for people with disabilities), adjacent to the unit’s main

Page 7 of 13

entrance, along with cycle parking provision. The nature of the illnesses affecting individuals living within this accommodation would be such that there would no additional requirement for parking spaces.

6.20. Your Transportation Officer raises no objection to the proposals. The likely level of traffic generated would not be significant and any impact on the operation of the highway network would be negligible.

6.21. West Midlands Fire Service has provided detailed advice in respect of their

requirements for access. In response, the applicant has submitted additional information to demonstrate that these requirements can be met.

Design and Landscaping

6.22. Extensive design advice was provided during pre-application discussions and this is

reflected in the current submission

6.23. The outline application set out principles for layout, massing, scale, landscape and access. A Master Plan Design Guide was produced to ensure that a consistent, coherent and high quality development is achieved across all areas of the care village. The outline scheme showed a dementia care unit on this part of the site – a predominantly single storey development, with a 3 storey entrance building. However, the design of the current proposal reflects the proposed alternative use, with two-storey units of a domestic scale. Conditions were attached to the outline approval, which imposed height restrictions on buildings across the site. In this area, a maximum of 3 storeys was set out.

6.24. The proposal adheres to the principles established at the outline stage and responds

positively to the site constraints and context. The development would have an acceptable relationship to the existing houses that back onto the site, with substantial landscaped buffers adjacent to the north and east boundaries.

6.25. Specific Needs Residential Uses SPD requires that proposals should include

adequate amenity space to provide a satisfactory living environment for residents, with the amount and location of such space to relate to the number of residents and their particular needs.

6.26. A Landscape Master Plan has been submitted which shows the buildings set within

landscaped gardens. The accompanying Design and Access Statement outlines the design philosophy to be adopted, which highlights the therapeutic benefits of interaction with nature (a common theme throughout the wider development).

6.27. Your Tree Officer is satisfied that there should be no direct impact from the

development on retained trees. The two small trees to be removed (a category C ash and a category B silver birch) are not considered to be significant. The Landscape Master Plan indicates 19 no. replacement/additional trees. A condition is recommended in respect of tree protection.

6.28. Minor amendments have been made to the scheme since the application was

submitted in response to detailed points identified by your Design and Landscape Officers, including the introduction of a more prominent main entrance, improvements to the internal layout and links to the internal courtyard area, and enlarged planting beds. Your Design advisors raise no objections, subject to safeguarding conditions in respect of materials, landscaping/landscape management, earthworks, boundary treatments and levels.

Page 8 of 13

Sustainability 6.29. The development would be built to comply with the requirements of ‘Passivhaus’ (a

German sustainable design accreditation) – a standard which focuses on a ‘fabric first’ approach to low energy buildings. This approach reduces the need for space heating and cooling, whilst creating enhanced indoor air quality and comfort levels.

6.30. A ‘Passivhouse’ will typically achieve a 75% reduction in space heating

requirements compared to standard practice within the UK. The applicant has provided detailed information about the technical requirements associated with this approach. In simple terms, it involves:

• Very high levels of insulation; • High performance windows with insulated frames; • Airtight building fabric with mechanical ventilation with heat recovery; • ‘Thermal Bridge’ free design and construction; • Use of solar gain through south facing windows; and • Control of overheating through design and solar shading.

Ecology 6.31. An ecological appraisal has been submitted in support of the application. Following

site clearance, the majority of the site now comprises disturbed ground which is being colonised by ephemeral vegetation. Towards the north-eastern and north-western boundaries, there is a strip of rank grassland/tall ruderal vegetation, as well as young/semi-mature trees. A pond, dominated by reed sweet-grass and flag iris, is present in the eastern corner.

6.32. The habitats present are of limited ecological value. The trees and other vegetation around the north-east and north-west boundaries provide foraging habitat and a commuting corridor for bats, and the trees also provide suitable nesting habitat for common garden birds. The site’s suitability for other protected species (e.g. badger, great crested newt, reptiles) is assessed as poor.

6.33. The boundary trees would be retained as part of the current proposals. Your Ecologist advises that new external lighting should be sensitively designed and appropriately located to minimise adverse impacts on bats which may be foraging or commuting along the boundaries. A condition is recommend to require the details of any lighting scheme in order to ensure that any spillage should not extend excessively into the boundary tree lines.

6.34. A lighting scheme has now been submitted, identifying the extent of any illumination.

This demonstrates that it would be limited to only areas immediately adjacent to the proposed building and the car park (which is situated away from the boundaries). As such, I consider that such a condition is no longer necessary.

6.35. The ecological report sets out a number of recommendations for mitigation and

enhancement, including:- provision of insect boxes in suitable locations; provision of bat boxes and bird nest boxes on buildings/trees; sensitive car park lighting; measures to avoid badgers/other mammals becoming trapped during excavation; and landscape planting to include native and ‘wildlife-friendly’ species. Your

Page 9 of 13

Ecologist has no objection to these recommendations; their implementation should be secured by condition.

6.36. The existing pond would not be retained, but replacement aquatic habitat would be

provided as part of the landscaping proposals for the adjacent village green. Although the pond is assessed as having poor suitability for great crested newts, it may have some potential to support common amphibian species. This has not been addressed in the ecological appraisal and, as such, no precautionary measures have been recommended to minimise the potential for adverse impacts on these species during its removal. To address this issue, a condition is recommended to require a method statement for the pond removal.

Residential Amenity

6.37. Specific Needs Residential Uses SPD requires that proposals “should not cause demonstrable harm to the residential amenities of occupiers of nearby properties by reason of noise and disturbance nuisance”. The application is for a purpose-built facility, to form part of a wider development for an extra care village. There is substantial planting to boundaries with the closest residential properties and I would not anticipate any significant disturbance from a use of this nature. Your Environmental Protection Officer has raised no objection.

6.38. I note the concerns raised by a local resident in respect of potential public access to the rear of properties on Middle Park Road and the associated security risks. However, there would be no vehicular access to this (east) side of the site, and this area would be used only as amenity space for the occupiers of these units. The submitted Landscape Master Plan indicates the retention of a substantial group of trees along this boundary, to be reinforced by proposed native hedge planting.

6.39. West Midlands Police have been consulted by the Architects in the development of

the scheme and they have confirmed that it could potentially achieve ‘Secured by Design’ certification.

Other Matters

6.40. Conditions are recommended in respect of remediation and drainage as requested

by colleagues in Regulatory Services and Severn Trent respectively. 7. Conclusion 7.1. The application site is previously developed land located in a predominantly

residential area, with good links to public transport and local services. The principle of the re-development of the site as an extra care village was established through the approval of outline application no. 2012/00513/PA in April 2012.

7.2. Whilst the current scheme does not reflect the original proposal for this part of the site, the proposed use is of a nature consistent with that of the wider development. As such, the proposal for semi-independent living is considered acceptable in principle.

7.3. The outline application included consideration of design principles to be adopted,

along with parameters (floor areas/building heights) in respect of the various elements, and the current proposals (albeit for a different use) broadly reflect the principles accepted at the outline stage.

Page 10 of 13

7.4. The detailed design has been developed in consultation with City Design and

Landscape Officers and the resulting scheme is considered to be of a high quality design that would sit comfortably within its surroundings.

7.5. The proposal is for a sustainable development, which would make a valuable

contribution to the regeneration of the site and the wider area. The proposal is therefore considered acceptable, subject to conditions.

8. Recommendation 8.1. Approve, subject to conditions. 1 Requires the prior submission of hard and/or soft landscape details

2 Requires the prior submission of hard surfacing materials

3 Requires the prior submission of earthworks details

4 Requires the prior submission of boundary treatment details

5 Requires the prior submission of a landscape management plan

6 Requires the prior submission of sample materials

7 Requires the prior submission of level details

8 Requires detail of tree protection prior to clearance

9 Requires the prior submission of details for tree works

10 Restriction on noise from plant/extraction

11 Requires a scheme of noise insulation.

12 Extract and odour control details

13 Requires the prior submission of a scheme for ecological/biodiversity/enhancement

measures

14 Requires submission of a method statement for pond removal.

15 Requires the scheme to be in accordance with the listed approved plans

16 Requires the prior submission of a drainage scheme

17 Requires the prior submission of cycle storage details

18 Requires the prior submission of details of refuse storage

19 Limits the approval to 3 years (Full)

Page 11 of 13

Case Officer: Alison Powell

Page 12 of 13

Photo(s)

View of site from main access

Page 13 of 13

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