planning control committee item 7

Classification: OFFICIAL


PLANNING CONTROL COMMITTEE 10 September 2015

Report of the Strategic Director of Neighbourhoods

ITEM 7

Applications to be Considered

SUMMARY

1.1 Attached at Appendix 1 are the applications requiring consideration by the Committee.

RECOMMENDATION

2.1 To determine the applications as set out in Appendix 1.

REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION

3.1 The applications detailed in Appendix 1 require determination by the Committee under Part D of the Scheme of Delegations within the Council Constitution.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

4.1 As detailed in Appendix 1, including the implications of the proposals, representations,

consultations, summary of policies most relevant and officers recommendations.

OTHER OPTIONS CONSIDERED

5.1 To not consider the applications. This would mean that the Council is unable to

determine these applications, which is not a viable option.

This report has been approved by the following officers:

Legal officer Financial officer Human Resources officer Estates/Property officer Service Director(s) Other(s) Ian Woodhead 16/02/2014

For more information contact: Background papers: List of appendices:

Ian Woodhead Tel: 01332 642095 email: [email protected] None Appendix 1 – Development Control Monthly Report


Appendix 1Index

Planning Control Committee 10 September 2015

ItemNo.

PageNo.

ApplicationNo.

Address Proposal Recommendation

1 1 - 27 06/15/00720 Land off NorthAvenue, DarleyAbbey, Derby, DE221EZ

Residential developmentof up to 49 dwellingsand areas of openspace

To refuse planningpermission.

2 28 - 36 05/15/00578 Chellaston Academy,Swarkestone Road,Chellaston, Derby,DE73 1UA

Demolition of 'maths'block and erection oftwo storey classroomblock and refectory

To grant planningpermission withconditions

3 37 - 49 03/15/00293 Plots 2 & 3, TrafalgarPark, Trafalgar ParkWay, Derby, DE248DX

Erection of power plantcompound to includegenerators, kiosk,sub-station, welfarecabin, switchgear cabin,transformers andacoustic fence

To refuse planningpermission.

4 50 - 58 01/15/00118 Land at side of 25Fairbourne Drive,Mickleover, Derby,DE3

Erection of dwellinghouse - approval ofreserved matters ofappearance,landscaping and scaleunder outline permissioncode no.DER/03/12/00268/PRI

To grant planningpermission withconditions



Committee Report Item No: 1

Application No: DER/06/15/00720 Type:


1

Outline (with access)

1. Application Details

Address: Land to north of North Avenue, Darley Abbey

Ward: Darley

Proposal:

Residential development of up to 49 dwellings, formation of vehicular access and open space

Further Details:

Web-link to application: https://eplanning.derby.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=details&keyVal=_DERBY_DCAPR_98351

This is a revised outline application for residential development on a greenfield site to the north of North Avenue, on the edge of Darley Abbey. The previous proposal for up to 45 dwellings, with means of access off the eastern end of North Avenue, was refused outline permission in 2014. This refused scheme related to a larger site area and incorporated a larger area of open space on the site.

The current outline proposal seeks permission for up to 49 dwellings and provision of open space on the agricultural land, which lies to the north of residential properties at 1 – 15 North Avenue. Approval for means of access is being sought as part of the outline scheme, with all other matters being reserved for future reserved matters approval. Vehicular access is proposed from the turning head on North Avenue, by extending and improving the existing gated farm access at the south west corner of the site.

The current application site is approximately 2.2 hectares in area and is comprised of open fields with an existing farm track running across the site from the gated access. The site is in an elevated position on the western slope of the Derwent valley. The land slopes generally downhill from the A38 to the north and the A6, Duffield Road to the west, towards the River Derwent, flood plain to the east of the site. The land is enclosed by mature hedgerow boundaries and individual trees.

The landscape in this area is open in character and affords views from the river corridor and across the valley. To the south east of the site is the Nutwood Local Nature Reserve, which is a woodland area alongside the riverside. The existing residential areas of Darley Abbey and Allestree are located to the south, north and west of the site and are separated by major roads to the north and west. There are also two existing telecom masts on and close to the site abutting the A38 embankment.

An indicative site layout for the proposed development has been submitted in support of the outline application, which does not form part of the determination process for this application. This shows a suggested layout of dwellings served off a single access road from North Avenue. It indicates the provision of a landscaped buffer around the boundary with the A38/ A6 embankment and the eastern boundary. An area of open space, balancing pond and play area are shown on the proposed layout

https://eplanning.derby.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=details&keyVal=_DERBY_DCAPR_98351






2


plan and a footpath link to the eastern edge of North Avenue is shown as being formed from the development.

This application is supported by various documents, including a Design and Access Statement, Archaeological Appraisal, Flood Risk Assessment, Green Wedge Assessment, Heritage Assessment; Desk based Land Contamination assessment, Ecological Appraisal and Transport Statement.

2. Relevant Planning History:

DER/02/14/00198 – Outline for residential development of up to 45 dwellings, formation of access road, car park and open space, Refused – September 2014


Reasons for refusal: 1. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, residential development on the

application site would be prominent and visually intrusive, leading to the narrowing of the Green Wedge, between Darley Abbey and Allestree, resulting in a loss of openness and undeveloped, landscape character in this highly sensitive part of the Green Wedge. It would lead to further coalescence of the Allestree and Darley Abbey neighbourhoods. As such, the proposal would compromise the role and function of the Green Wedge in this location, contrary to the aims of saved policy E2 of the adopted City of Derby Local Plan Review.

2. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority residential development on this site would have an unsatisfactory relationship with the prevailing built form of Darley Abbey. Given the topography of the site and its surrounding fields, which falls west to east, towards the River Derwent and the pattern of residential development on North and South Avenues, it is considered that it would be difficult to secure a layout of development that relates well to existing housing in the locality. The existing houses on North Avenue turn their backs to the site and the site is enclosed from the north and west by substantial raised embankments to the neighbouring trunk road network; it would virtually be an island of development that would struggle to relate to neighbouring communities. As such, the Local Planning Authority has little confidence that reserved matters submissions could deliver an overall layout that would provide a high quality design that would relate well to existing housing in the locality. The proposal is therefore contrary to saved policies GD4, H13 and E23 of the adopted City of Derby Local Plan Review and the over-arching design guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework.

3. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, residential development on this site, which would fall within the Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site and its associated Buffer Zone, would be harmful to the Outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage Site. This is due to the site being an important part of the undeveloped rural landscape providing the setting for the Darley Abbey Mills industrial settlement, which makes a contribution to the significance of the World Heritage Site. The site is therefore highly sensitive and the proposal







3


would result in the loss of the rural character and landscape and would change both the character and experience of this part of the setting of the World Heritage Site, eroding the clear relationship between the rural landscape and the historic settlement, which is an integral part of its contribution to the Site. The proposal is therefore contrary to saved policy E29 of the adopted City of Derby Local Plan Review and the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework.

4. The application is not supported by an archaeological evaluation of the site, to investigate for the potential evidence of a Roman Road, a site on the Historic Environment Record, which is identified as being located within the application site. Insufficient information has therefore been provided to enable the significance of the impacts of the development on the heritage asset to be properly assessed. The application does not therefore meet the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework paragraph 128 and is accordingly contrary to saved policy E21 of the adopted City of Derby Local Plan Review.

3. Publicity:

Neighbour Notification Letter

Site Notice

Statutory Press Advert

This publicity is in accordance with statutory requirements and the requirements of the Council’s adopted Statement of Community Involvement.

Prior to the previous application in 2014, a public consultation exercise was undertaken, which involved meetings with local stakeholders, a public exhibition in Darley Abbey and head teacher of the Old Vicarage School.

No further consultation of the local community has been done, since the refusal of the previous scheme and before the current application was submitted.

4. Representations:

157 objections and 1 supporting comment have been received to date, to the application. These include objections made by Cllr Repton, Cllr Stanton and Amanda Salloway MP. Objections have also been received from the Darley Abbey Historical Group, Darley Abbey Society and Friends of the Nutwood Local Nature Reserve.

The main issues raised in objection are as follows:

Adverse impact on the character and historic interest of the Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site

Significant harm to setting of heritage assets

Visual intrusion into the Green Wedge

Increased traffic flows and parking congestion in Darley Abbey and local roads

No capacity in local schools





4


Narrow roads not able to cope with increased traffic

Detrimental impact on junction of South Avenue/ Church Lane of increased traffic on highway safety

Poor vehicle access onto North Avenue

Loss of important landscape and open countryside

Detrimental impact on wildlife value of Nutwood LNR

Site not allocated in the Preferred Growth Strategy and Draft Local Plan for housing

Proposed development out of keeping with character of historic village

Not clear if surface drainage on site could be achieved to minimise flood risk in local area

Poor planning of new footpath due to land slope and harm to amenity of neighbouring dwelling

Damage to potential Roman Road archaeological remains. Site survey not sufficiently robust to demonstrate that there are no heritage features on site

Removal of important trees which screen the site

Development would be poorly related to existing facilities

Relationship of the development with neighbouring dwellings would be overbearing and unacceptable

Inadequate consideration of agricultural need of existing farm

Increase in danger for school children using local roads.

Supporting comments as follows:

Darley Abbey would benefit from additional housing, supporting local facilities and encouraging growth

Suitable area of Green Wedge for development

No undue traffic impacts.

5. Consultations:

CAAC: Resolved to recommend refusal on the following grounds:

The proposal is detrimental to the World Heritage site and encroached into the buffer zone and Green Wedge.

Highways DC: The proposed layout of the access road, results in substandard visibility for the access to 1 Church Lane. The access to 1 Church Lane is existing however there will be an intensification of use with the proposed development. The tracking provided on drawing F15018/01 rev B appears to show that the vehicles will overrun the kerbs.





5


Drawing F15018/01 rev B shows a verge width of 0.5m however this should be 1.0m wide as detailed in table DG1 of the 6C’s design guide.

Footway width – the Transport Assessment states that according to the Manual for Streets a footway width of 1.5 metres is acceptable, however the Manual For Streets shows in 6.3 22 and fig 6.8 that the minimum width should be 2.0 metres.

Unless these points are resolved, then recommend refusal.

Highways – Land Drainage: Insufficient detail has been included in the Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) to support the proposals, on the basis that it does not fully account for all sources of existing flood risk to the development site and does not explicitly state where surface water disposed of from the site will be discharged to. It also appears that the proposed layout may conflict with the existing sewer and highway drainage easements. Further concern raised about the content of the FRA, which would need to be addressed at detailed design stage.

Recommend conditions to secure a detailed surface water drainage scheme and a management and maintenance plan for surface water drainage features.

Natural Environment: The only individual trees of note, identified in the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal, and shown on the Phase 1 Habitat Plan, are trees 2 and 6. Tree 6 is protected by Tree Preservation Order (TPO) 17. Tree 2 is located outside of the application area, within gardens on North Avenue. The mixed plantation woodland and dense scrub, identified on the Phase 1 Habitat Plan along the embankment with the A6 and A38, are again located outside of the application area and are the Councils’ responsibility and the Highways Agency respectively.

The hedgerows within the application site were identified as species poor in the Derby City Hedgerow Survey in 2003.

In relation to trees 2 and 6, and the mixed plantation woodland and scrub along the embankment with the A6 and A38, no further comment to make other than the usual standard conditions to ensure tree protection measures, such as protective fencing is in place before and during construction works and, where necessary, no dig solutions are implemented in the root protection area.

Rights of Way There are no recorded public paths within the application site. That is not to say though that rights haven’t been established through usage.

The creation of a secondary footpath link out on to North Avenue from the proposed development, in addition to the footpath adjoining the proposed highway, is welcomed.

It is unfortunate though that the proposed creation of a footpath loop to the River Derwent and potential link to the Nature Reserve (on the previous application) has not been included within this revised scheme.





6


In relation to potential path routes to the north of the proposed development site, our Rights of Way Improvement Plan proposes a walkway / cycleway to the east of the river, rather than the west, following the line of the existing definitive footpath from Haslam’s Lane, through water meadow, coming out on to Ford Lane, Little Eaton, having utilised the subway under the A38.

Although there is public open space on the western side of the river, north of the A38, with paths running through it, one of which goes under the A38, no desire lines could be in-between the A38 and the application site on the western side of the river. We believe this is because Holme Nook Farm is positioned at the narrowest point of this land between the river and the A38, meaning it would be unlikely that anyone could walk this route without being challenged.

DCC Archaeologist: The application site is crossed towards its eastern edge by the probable route of the Roman road known as The Street, between Derby and Buxton (HER 99030). The route of this road at the Derby end is not known with certainty, but the suggested alignment is based on detailed map and landscape analysis by Farnsworth and Whirrity (2006).

In response to this archaeological interest, the applicant has carried out archaeological evaluation to a specification agreed by the Local Planning Authority, and has presented the results as part of the planning application. No evidence for the Roman road was found during the evaluation trenching. This may be due to subsequent disturbance. The evaluation did find evidence for modern made ground and infill perhaps associated with road construction to the north and west of the site and it may be that remains of the road have been removed by medieval and modern ploughing. However, the natural ground surface was present over the majority of the site and it seems rather more likely to be that, rather than having left no trace and the Roman road in fact follows a different alignment.

The applicant has therefore submitted sufficient information to allow archaeological potential to be assessed in line with NPPF para 128, and for this potential to be judged as minimal. I therefore recommend that there is no need to place any further archaeological requirement upon the applicant.

Environment Agency: No objections to the proposed development as submitted. The application site is located in flood zone 1 and surface water management is now the responsibility of the Lead Local Flood Authority (Derby City Council).

We do not consider this proposal to be high risk. Therefore we will not be providing detailed site-specific comments with regards to land contamination issues for this site. We would appreciate being informed if contamination is subsequently identified that poses a significant risk to controlled waters. The developer should address risks to controlled waters from contamination at the site, following the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework and the Environment Agency Guiding Principles for Land Contamination.





7


Due to the former land use(s), soil and /or groundwater contamination may exist at the site and the associated risks to controlled waters should be addressed by:

1. Following the risk management framework provide in CLR11, Model procedures for the management of land contamination

2. Referring to the Environment Agency guiding principles for land contamination and the land contamination sections in the Environment Agency’s Groundwater Protection: Principles and Practice.

Derbyshire Wildlife Trust: Comments regarding the position within the Green Wedge remain unchanged.

We note that the current application is supported by the same ecological study which is dated November 2013 (Clear).

Under normal circumstances we would advise that an updated survey would be considered necessary. However, the principal ecological features identified in that Report (hedgerows, mature/over mature trees, bats and badgers) are likely to be still present. The assessment of the field’s habitat value, which represents the bulk of the application site, will not have altered in the intervening period as the site is still in active agricultural production.

The submitted layout avoids the isolation by the access roads of the known badger sett, which represents an improvement on the previous illustrative layouts and is to be welcomed.

However, the increase in the housing density appears to have resulted in a decrease in the area available to provide compensation and mitigation for the identified biodiversity features on the site.

The landscape buffer zone to the east of the site incorporates the balancing pond and children’s play area and appears to be narrower than in previous iterations of the scheme, although it is difficult to scale off the plans provided. The relative positioning of the play area will increase the level of disturbance in the vicinity of the badger sett at a point where the buffer zone appears narrow. We would suggest that clarification of the width of the buffer zone vs density of the proposal is sought and that the width of the buffer zone is increased to allow greater biodiversity enhancement within the proposal and the probability that mature and over mature trees on the hedgerow boundaries can be retained intact without danger to any property, in addition to providing a greater width at its southern end to protect the badgers.

We would strongly recommend that any Reserved Matters application, if approval is granted, should be conditioned to retain the extent of the negotiated landscape buffer. In addition, a reassessment of the location of the play area should be undertaken to provide a detailed layout with sufficient cover for the badgers to continue to utilise their sett/setts.

Any permission if granted should be supported by a condition to require a badger survey of the whole site and an assessment for the need for a badger licence for works within 30m of a sett. This should be used to inform the final layout of the Reserved Matters scheme. The Report should give a detailed assessment and





8


programme of necessary mitigation measures required to avoid infringement of the legislation (Badger Protection Act 1992).

Given the layout of the scheme and the lack of any tree removal plan it is assumed that all the trees (whether dead/dying or completely healthy) within the application site’s hedgerows and elsewhere can be accommodated within the proposal. A condition should therefore be required to temporarily fence the hedgerows, retained trees and any active badger setts (within 40m of any earthworks or construction activity) prior to the commencement of any vegetation clearance, earth moving or enabling works.

Any vegetation clearance, earth moving or enabling works should avoid the bird breeding season (March – August inclusive) unless it can be demonstrated that no breeding birds are present (Wildlife & Countryside Act 9181). This should include the field area which although not currently utilised by ground nesting species due to the active agricultural production, may become available for nesting if management alters. A condition should be required to implement this.

A condition will be required to ensure that at Reserved Matters stage all trees which are subsequently found to require tree surgery work should be reassessed for their suitability to support bat roosts (Habitats Regulations 2010), which should include tree climbing assessment and activity surveys where necessary. The condition should make it clear that this applies equally to any dead/dying trees as well as healthy specimens.

A condition should require that the Reserved Matters application be supported by full Landscape Ecological Management Plan (LEMP) which includes:

planting details and management proposals for the landscape buffer zone

design and management of the open water attenuation feature with regard to its management as an attenuation feature but incorporating the principals of biodiversity management

costed proposals for a period of 15 years, which should be linked to the owner contributions under the section 106.

Police Liaison Officer: No objections to the principle of residential development in this location.

Natural England: Based on the information provided, the proposal is unlikely to affect any statutorily protected sites.

Biodiversity enhancements This application may provide opportunities to incorporate features into the design which are beneficial to wildlife, such as the incorporation of roosting opportunities for bats or the installation of bird nest boxes. The authority should consider securing measures to enhance the biodiversity of the site from the applicant, if it is minded to grant permission for this application. This is in accordance with Paragraph 118 of the National Planning Policy Framework. Additionally, we would draw your attention to





9


Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act (2006) which states that ‘Every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity’. Section 40(3) of the same Act also states that ‘conserving biodiversity includes, in relation to a living organism or type of habitat, restoring or enhancing a population or habitat’.

Landscape enhancements This application may provide opportunities to enhance the character and local distinctiveness of the surrounding natural and built environment; use natural resources more sustainably; and bring benefits for the local community, for example through green space provision and access to and contact with nature. Landscape characterisation and townscape assessments, and associated sensitivity and capacity assessments provide tools for planners and developers to consider new development and ensure that it makes a positive contribution in terms of design, form and location, to the character and functions of the landscape and avoids any unacceptable impacts.

Historic England: Within this part of the Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site (DVMWHS) the Darley Abbey Mills is the most complete of the industrial complexes along the Derwent Valley, forming a significant part of the Outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage Site. It is part of the closely related network of pioneer textile manufacturing sites with housing and facilities provided for the workers, in the hitherto rural Derwent Valley and sits alongside these settlements in terms of both historic and architectural significance.

This industrial complex as an entity is exceptional in its completeness of survival, and significant to its character is the uniform appearance revealed in construction, buildings material and design. Beyond the mills and Darley Abbey village, the survival of the rural landscape sharply contrasts with the former industrial settlement, demonstrating how the factory system was imposed on a rural landscape. The development site sits in an elevated position above the major natural boundary of the Derwent which lies in the relatively deep valley - this was a significant natural feature which enabled the industrial development within the Derwent Valley. Within this part of the DVMWHS, development and expansion has taken place around the settlement of Darley Abbey and along the A38/A6 within the buffer zone, though the road infrastructure in itself now forms a distinct boundary - in this location beneath the road and towards the east, the rural and semi-rural appearance has been retained. 20th century expansion is acknowledged in this area but it is clearly distinguishable from the rural landscape and has not encroached further upon adjacent fields - thus there is a definite boundary between the built settlement and rural backdrop. The contribution of this site to the OUV of the DVMWHS is therefore through the survival of this rural landscape character, clearly defined against the housing development along North Avenue and bounded by the screened A38 above. The site helps to reinforce the strong contrast of the rural landscape with the historic urban settlements and the relationship with the water tributaries, which provides a reminder of how this area evolved and the parameters and arrestment of development.





10


The site lies within the buffer zone - as defined this is the area surrounding the World Heritage Site to give an added layer of protection to the World Heritage Site. It can therefore be seen as part of the setting (though setting can be more extensive than the buffer zone). The presence of the buffer zone recognises the need to acknowledge and protect the significance of the WHS as a cultural landscape. Within the WHS the relationship between the industrial mill buildings within the historic settlement, the River Derwent and its tributaries, and the topography of the surrounding rural landscape, with historic roads connecting the settlements, is a key element of the character and significance of the Buffer Zone. This relationship today is spatial, visual and historic. In the immediate area of and including the development site, the open fields form part of this character, contributing to the setting of the WHS.

Impact of the proposed development on significance The proposed development site’s character is essentially one of rural landscape with field boundaries, lying above the Derwent. It is sensitive to change and fundamentally, development for housing with associated infrastructure will result in the loss and further erosion of this rural character in this part of the World Heritage Site and its buffer zone. The heritage statement refers to a localised effect and that the rural character of the area in the immediate vicinity, will be eroded to a small extent. Fundamentally, redevelopment would change both the character and experience of this part of the rural setting further eroding the clear relationship between settlement and rural landscape within this part of the buffer zone. This relationship has both historic and aesthetic value. Much of the contribution made by the site to the OUV of the DVMWHS and the setting of Darley Abbey Conservation Area lies in moving along the area which creates a cumulative experience of the overall character of this part of the DVMWHS - this is not confined to static views. As

Government guidance advises, setting is not confined to visual factors such as sight lines and views; it is as much defined by spatial associations and by our understanding of the historic relationships between places.

Policy Context The importance of conserving heritage assets is recognised in the NPPF as one of the 12 core principles of sustainable development. In considering the impact of this proposal, the decision-maker must give the conservation of the asset at the minimum great weight, and where the asset is of a particularly high level of importance the weight given to its conservation must be particularly great [NPPF 132].

The NPPF makes it clear that significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset, and as heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification - paragraph 132. Harm to the historic environment can be justified under the NPPF, but the public benefits delivered by the development would have to be substantial to outweigh the level of harm to the OUV of the DVMWHS. In this respect we refer you to paragraph 134 of the NPPF and paragraphs 137-138 in revealing the significance of heritage assets. It is not the case that harm, which may be considered less than substantial, means the proposal is acceptable. In our view the proposals do not seek to sustain and





11


conserve the significance of the Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site. We are not convinced that the justification for this development outweighs the harm caused.

For the reasons set out within this advice letter, we consider this proposed housing scheme is harmful to the outstanding universal value of the Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site. We therefore recommend refusal of this application. Ultimately it is for your authority to balance all planning considerations in determining this proposal.

Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site Technical Panel: This undeveloped area of open, green countryside was deliberately included within the Buffer Zone to protect the setting of the Site. Any significant development would impact in a negative way on the setting of the Site by substituting housing for this survival of the natural rural landscape context, within which the historic industrialisation emerged and survives today in its arrested state.

The proposed development immediately abuts the inscribed Site. The Site is characterised at this point as open natural flood plain to the River Derwent, where the only tangible signs of human intervention north of the Darley Abbey Mills complex is the railway, essential infrastructure e.g. strategic roads and sewerage works, and the occasional isolated farmstead, before the Site reaches the historic settlements of Makeney and Milford.

The application site is highly visible from within the World Heritage Site, and from Darley Abbey to Breadsall, and just beyond. From the public amenity route of the Derwent Valley Heritage Way that follows the edge of the River Derwent, the lower valley slopes rising from the river meadows of the flood plain, on its western side, retain an undeveloped character; the tower of St Matthew’s Church, Darley Abbey, is almost the only visible built feature within this expanse of tree covered slopes. If the application site were to be developed with housing as proposed, despite its lower level than the existing adjacent housing of North Avenue, it would not be perceived as a natural extension to the existing edge of settlement development, but would appear as a highly visible, isolated development within this, the designated ‘Green Wedge’, consisting of the tree covered valley slopes and the natural meadows of the River Derwent’s flood plain.

Any built development will reduce the open, landscape character of the setting and consequently impact on the Outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage Site. Screening as a form of mitigation is not of any real help, firstly because such an argument could be used over and over again in such circumstances and the open landscape setting would be lost incrementally, and secondly, tree screening can be lost by felling, thinning or disease.

The Derwent Valley Mills’ intact ‘arrested’ condition, in a rural landscape setting, was a significant contributing factor in its inscription. Loss of that landscape would be damaging to the Outstanding Universal Value. For this reason the Derwent Valley Mills WHS Partnership objects to the proposed development and trusts that its comments will be taken into account.





12


6. Relevant Policies: Saved CDLPR policies

GD1 GD2 GD3 GD4 GD5 H11 H12 H13 E2 E4 E7 E9 E10 E17 E21 E23 E29 L2 L3 T1 T4 T6

Social Inclusion Protection of the environment Flood Protection Design and the Urban Environment Amenity Affordable Housing Lifetime Homes Residential Development – general criteria Green Wedge Nature Conservation Protection of habitats Trees Renewable energy Landscaping Schemes Archaeology Design Protection of World Heritage Site and its surroundings Public open space standards Public open space requirements in new developments Transport implications of new developments Access, parking and servicing Provision for pedestrians

T10 Access for disabled people

The above is a list of the main policies that are relevant. Members should refer to their copy of the CDLPR for the full version or access the web-link.

http://www.cartogold.co.uk/DerbyLocalPlan/text/00cont.htm

Over-arching central government guidance in the NPPF is a material consideration and supersedes earlier guidance outlined in various planning policy guidance notes and planning policy statements.

7. Officer Opinion:

Key Issues:

In this case the following issues are considered to be the main material considerations which are dealt with in detail in this section.

Residential development

Impact on Green Wedge

Impact on World Heritage Site and Buffer Zone and Other Heritage Assets

Access and traffic implications

Impact on trees and habitat

Residential amenity and urban design






13


Introduction This application which seeks outline permission for residential development on a green field site, north of North Avenue, Darley Abbey, is for a revised scheme following refusal of a similar application in 2014, for up to 45 dwellings, with associated access and open space. The four reasons for refusal related to the potential impacts of the development on the Green Wedge, unsatisfactory relationship with the prevailing built form in the area, potential harm to the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the World Heritage Site and lack of archaeological evaluation of the site.

The current proposal relates to a smaller overall site area of approx. 2.2 hectare, by removal of the eastern part of the site to take it out of the World Heritage Site. The proposed means of access to the development has also been amended to form the principal access road from the turning head on North Avenue. This would involve widening the existing farm access to the site. There would be no access formed from the eastern section of North Avenue, except for a footpath link to be sited alongside 15 North Avenue.

The application site is currently agricultural land, bordered by mature hedgerow boundaries and abutting the embankment of the A38 and A6 to the north and west of the site. The land is in an elevated position on the western slope of the Derwent Valley and is in a prominent location visible from the River Derwent corridor to the east.

The site lies wholly within the World Heritage Site Buffer Zone and the Green Wedge. It is clearly located outside the built up envelope of Darley Abbey, which is residential and suburban in character in this locality, along North and South Avenues.

Nutwood Local Nature Reserve, which is located to the south east of the application site, is a designated wildlife site, characterised by woodland and riverside habitat. The nature reserve would not be directly affected by the proposed development. The River Derwent corridor to the east is also an identified wildlife site.

The site is not identified for development in the draft Local Plan Part 1 (Core Strategy) and is not considered to be strategic in scale.

Residential Development The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) requires all housing proposals to be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. This means that where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, planning permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole (Paragraph 14).

The Council has accepted that it does not currently have a deliverable 5 year housing land supply. Work is on-going to progress the Local Plan, Part 1 (Core Strategy) which will provide the Council with a 5 year supply. However work on this document is not sufficiently progressed to enable the proposed allocations to be taken account of. In this case, the NPPF is clear that where a 5 year supply cannot be demonstrated, the relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be





14


considered up to date. Therefore, the statement at Paragraph 14 of the NPPF applies to this proposal.

The question to be considered is whether any adverse impacts associated with permitting this proposal would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole.

The adopted Local Plan has saved policies relating to the provision of residential development which are still relevant to this application. Policy H13 relates to the general criteria by which to assess residential development proposals. The policy seeks to ensure that a satisfactory form of development is provided, which safeguards residential amenities and forms high quality living environment, achieves appropriate housing densities and interesting urban forms and townscape design.

Policy H11 requires affordable housing to be provided for the scale of this development, to meet a housing need in the local area. An affordable element of the scheme would be provided on the site, at 30% of the total number of units and this is agreed in principle with the applicant to be secured via a Section 106 Agreement.

Policy H12 seeks provision of 10% proportion of the units to be Lifetime Homes on housing sites of this size.

In regard to the education provision in the local area, there are considered to be adequate school places to meet the estimated need generated by this development. The scale of this development, providing up to 49 dwellings, is relatively small in terms of the number of school aged children generated and there is judged to be sufficient capacity at the present time in local schools to accommodate the development. Recent expansion of the Walter Evans C of E primary school provides a further addition to school places in the locality.

Impact on Green Wedge Green Wedges are a longstanding policy principle in Derby and are identified by Policy E2 in the City of Derby Local Plan Review. Their primary function is to define and enhance the urban structure of the City as a whole. Green Wedges create a more attractive and interesting form to the overall pattern of development and bring the countryside closer to the City. The retention of areas of open land between separate parts of the City helps to maintain their identity and reduces the impression of urban sprawl. The underlying principles of Green Wedges therefore relate back to protecting the character of Derby and making it a pleasant place to live and work.

The NPPF is clear that in the absence of a five year supply, the only policies that should be considered to be out-of- date are those which relate to the supply of housing. Recent appeal decisions in the city, relating to new housing proposals at The Hollow, Mickleover and Humbleton Barn, Radbourne Lane (APP/C1055/W/14/3001441and APP/C1055/W/15/3003445) which are both sites also located in Green Wedge, have categorically concluded that Green Wedge designations are not relevant to the supply of housing and are consistent with the aims of the NPPF in terms of protecting local character and promoting good design. Both of these appeals were dismissed on the grounds that the proposed development would be an intrusion into the Green Wedge and undermine the





15


openness and function of the Wedge in that location. Therefore, Policy E2 can be afforded significant weight in the consideration of this application.

Policy E2 identifies the different types of development that are considered to be acceptable in principle within Green Wedges. Residential development is not one of the identified uses and therefore the proposal is in conflict with this element of the policy. In cases where a use is acceptable in principle, Policy E2 goes on to state that development should not endanger the open and undeveloped character of the Green Wedge or its links with open countryside and natural history value.

Through work on the Local Plan, Part 1 (Core Strategy), the Council has identified a number of sites within Green Wedges that are considered to be acceptable in principle for residential development, helping to meet objectively assessed housing needs. The identification of such sites was informed by the Green Wedge Review, published in 2012, which assessed potential housing sites in terms of their impact on Green Wedge function. Sites were only identified as having potential for development where they would not undermine the primary function of a Green Wedge and not prejudice the essential characteristics of being open and undeveloped.

This site was specifically considered as part of the Green Wedge Review, having previously been promoted to the Council as a potential housing site. The Green Wedge Review makes a number of observations about the potential impacts of developing this site on the function of the Green Wedge. Observations include:

The site is remote from the main axis (the most sensitive part of the Green Wedge) and makes minimal contribution to the function of separating residential and commercial areas. Built development would extend into the Green Wedge, roughly continuing the line of South Avenue, causing narrowing, but would have little impact upon the extent to which the Green Wedge penetrates the city

The topography of the site falls from west to east meaning that the site is significantly lower lying than the built area to the south. This makes the site an obvious part of the Green Wedge rather than a clear extension to the built up area of Darley Abbey. Due to the topography of the site, development of this area would appear isolated and unrelated to either Darley Abbey or Allestree.

Although built development in the location to the north of Darley Abbey would not impact on the openness to the east of the settlement, it would create a very

visible and prominent developed area to the south‐east of Allestree. Whilst separating Darley Abbey from Allestree is not one of the main functions of the Green Wedge, development of the site would lead to further coalescence of these two areas of the city, closing off an open and undeveloped area.

The Inspector at the examination of the City of Derby Local Plan stated that there were 'no strong boundaries to this area and that there was no justification for deleting this small area from the Green Wedge allocation'. He went on to say that even if this were not so, 'any residential development would have an unsatisfactory relationship to the adjoining long established group (of houses). It would not be ‘rounding off’, as was claimed by the promoter, but a clear extension into open countryside'.





16


The Council’s Green Wedge Review concludes that the site does not have capacity to accommodate built development (from a Green Wedge impact perspective) due to the impacts outlined above.

The applicant has commissioned their own Green Wedge Study in support of the application. Whilst the Study challenges the methodology adopted in the Council’s Review and some of the findings, I consider the Council’s Review to be a robust assessment of Green Wedge function and the potential impacts of promoted housing sites. The findings of the Council’s Review were also material in the consideration of the recent Brook Farm appeal decision (APP/C1055/A/14/2222939). It should be noted that the Planning Inspector considering the merits of the Brook Farm proposal did not raise any concerns about the robustness of the Review and did not disagree with its findings in relation to the Brook Farm site.

The concerns highlighted by the Council’s Green Wedge Review apply directly to this proposal and need to be taken into account in its determination. In considering the cumulative impact of all the points highlighted by the Green Wedge Review, it is clear that the prejudicial impact upon the Green Wedge in terms of its openness and undeveloped character in this location would be significant, indicating further conflict with Policy E2, in addition to the in principle conflict.

The NPPF is clear that in the absence of a 5 year supply, the adverse impacts need to be weighed against the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole. Whilst the NPPF does not make specific reference to Green Wedges, it does state that permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions (Paragraph 64). As noted above and accepted in recent appeal decisions, the principles that underpin Policy E2 clearly relate back to the need to protect the urban structure of the city and particularly the character of our neighbourhoods.

The open and undeveloped character of this part of Darley Abbey is an important local characteristic that contributes towards the function of the Green Wedge and the character and setting of the adjacent World Heritage Site. On this basis development of the site would fail to take the opportunity to improve the character of the area and is in conflict with Paragraph 64 of the NPPF.

The NPPF also refers to the need to promote or reinforce local distinctiveness (Paragraph 60). The Green Wedge is an integral part of the character and local distinctiveness of this part of the city. The proposal will undermine the essential characteristics of the Green Wedge and is therefore considered to also be in conflict with this section of the NPPF.

Impact on World Heritage Site and Buffer Zone and Other Heritage Assets The conservation of heritage assets is addressed in the policies of the NPPF and in considering the impact of any proposed development, a significant level of weight should be given to heritage assets which have a high level of importance (paragraph 132).





17


The NPPF makes it clear that significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset and as heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification. Harm to the historic environment can be justified under the NPPF, but the public benefits delivered by the development would have to be substantial to outweigh the level of harm to the OUV of the Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site. Where there is less than substantial harm, then the public benefit should be weighed against the harm of the development (paragraph 134). Paragraphs 137-138 of the NPPF refer to the significance of heritage assets, including World Heritage Sites. It states that the loss of elements which make a positive contribution to the significance of the WHS should take account of its relative significance to the Site as a whole.

The revised application site has been reduced in area and is now confined to the World Heritage Site Buffer Zone. The site adjoins the World Heritage Site (WHS) itself, which borders the site boundary to the east. The proposed housing development, including the access road is therefore to be sited outside the WHS, although it would have a significant visual impact on the WHS, by virtue of its elevated position and prominence when viewed from the river corridor and wider landscape to the east of the River Derwent.

As WHS Buffer Zone the site is a designated heritage asset of national and international importance, with a high degree of historical significance. The site is an integral part of the rural landscape within the Derwent Valley, which was specifically included within the Buffer Zone due to its association with the industrial buildings and settlements within the river valley. On this basis, the site contributes to the Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) of the WHS, since the landscape is specifically referred to in the criteria used in the designation of the WHS. The Statement of OUV highlights that “the relationship of the industrial buildings and their dependent urban settlements to the river and its tributaries and to the topography of the surrounding rural landscape has been preserved.” The OUV makes it clear that the rural landscape is important alongside the industrial landscape in the Derwent Valley and the fact that it has survived is of great importance to the WHS. The landscape is a key feature of the setting of the early industrial settlements and has remained largely intact and is therefore afforded a high degree of protection as part of the WHS and its Buffer Zone.

The proposed development is for up to 49 dwellings, which is 4 more than the previous scheme and is therefore a higher density proposal, with a reduced amount of landscaped buffer and open space, to soften the visual effect of the development. The proposal would have an urbanising impact on the rural landscape in this part of the WHS Buffer Zone and clearly result in harm to the historic significance and setting of the World Heritage Site. Having regard to the policies in the NPPF, the main considerations are whether the proposal would result in substantial harm to the WHS and if there is sufficient public benefit arising from the scheme to outweigh the harm cause to the designated heritage asset.

The application is accompanied by a Heritage Statement, which considers that the proposed development would result in less than substantial harm to the OUV of the





18


World Heritage Site, by reason of being sited in the buffer zone only and by the proposed screen planting around the development to minimise the visual impact. Whilst the development would be outside of the WHS itself, this is not so dissimilar from the previous application, which proposed to locate all of the housing within the buffer zone, except for the principal access road and some of the landscaping, which were to encroach into the Site. The supporting statement concludes that the less than substantial harm to the WHS is outweighed by the contribution of the development to the city’s five year housing supply and Section 106 benefits which would arise from the scheme.

I note that the heritage consultees including the Council’s Conservation Officer continue to raise objections to this revised application, on the basis that there would still be significant harm to the OUV of the World Heritage Site, as a result of the proposed development of the site. Whilst the harm, which would be caused by the residential development, is described as less than substantial harm to the significance of the WHS, there is not considered to be a significant public benefit to be gained by the delivery of the proposed housing in this location, to outweigh the harm to the internationally important historic site. The public benefit has to be balanced against the high level of significance and importance which is attached to the Derwent Valley Mills heritage asset.

The potential impacts of the proposed housing scheme on the rural character and landscape of the valley, by virtue of key views from the World Heritage Site and the wider area, is an important consideration in assessing the harm to the significance of the WHS. The site’s existing character is essentially one of open fields, with substantial hedge boundaries and individual trees, situated in an elevated position above the River Derwent. It is a highly sensitive landscape, by reason of its historical associations with the industrial mill settlements in the Derwent Valley. The development of housing and associated infrastructure would result in an urban extension into the countryside, with a detrimental impact on the rural character of the site and a loss of landscape value in this part of the WHS Buffer Zone. It is accepted that some views of the development from across the valley, would be limited due to screening by existing trees and hedgerow features and the addition of further landscape planting. However, this would not necessarily integrate the development into the rural setting. Instead it amounts to an attempt to hide the proposal from view and is not a sufficient reason for allowing the site to be developed. There would still be a loss of open fields and rural character, which cannot be mitigated by the use of a landscaped buffer. The introduction of housing in this location would substantially change the character of the site and the surrounding landscape and be harmful to the setting of the industrial settlement of Darley Abbey and its rural hinterland.

I am of the opinion that the public benefits for the residential development in this location, in terms of contributing towards housing land supply and provision of affordable housing and open space facilities, do not outweigh the significant harm to the rural character and landscape value of this part of the WHS. The amount of housing which would be provided on the site is not particularly significant and would not a high quality housing scheme, sufficient to overcome the detrimental impact, in terms of loss of historic landscape and setting to the highly significant Derwent Valley





19


Mills. The proposed development does not therefore sustain and conserve the special character and setting of the World Heritage Site and is considered contrary to the policies of the NPPF and the provisions of Policy E29.

In regard to the archaeological interest of the site, there is believed to be the probable route of a Roman road which crosses the site in a north to south direction, between Buxton and Derby. The previous refusal of permission, (DER/02/14/00198) included a reason relating to the absence of any archaeological investigation of the site, to clarify the presence of the Roman road. This was based on concerns raised by the County Archaeologist that the application was not compliant with the policies of the NPPF, because insufficient information had been provided to allow the significance of any heritage assets below ground to be assessed.

An archaeological survey of the site has now been undertaken in order to confirm if there is archaeological evidence, which needs to be taken into account. The County Archaeologist is now satisfied with the results of the archaeological site investigation and report, which did not find evidence of a road on the site and concluded that there are not likely to be significant below ground heritage assets present within the site. There is now sufficient information submitted to show that there are no archaeological impacts resulting from this proposal and it satisfactorily meets the requirements of the NPPF and Policy E21.

Access and Traffic Implications As with the previous application, means of access is being determined under this outline proposal, although the access arrangement has been substantially altered to remove the proposed access road from the World Heritage Site. The proposal had been to form a vehicular access onto the eastern side of North Avenue and this had not raised any concerns in terms of traffic impact and highway safety. The current application, proposes an extra four dwellings, bringing the total up to 49 units, to be served off the existing farm access from the turning head at the end of North Avenue. The access is to be widened and formalised to form a highway, which would serve the whole development.

In terms of traffic generation, the proposed residential scheme of up to 49 dwellings does not raise issues of capacity on the local network. The site would be accessed via South Avenue and North Avenue, which are relatively narrow residential streets. However, the overall increase in traffic flows arising from the development would not be particularly significant and is not likely to have a detrimental impact on traffic flows in the local area. The existing road network is considered to have sufficient capacity to accommodate the additional traffic arising from the development. Overall, the traffic impact of the development is not considered to be excessive and is therefore acceptable in this residential area in line with the requirements of Policy T1.

The proposed alterations to the existing access into the site, has raised objections from the Highways Officer on the grounds that the layout of the road would result in poor visibility for the access to 1 Church Lane and there is to be inadequate width of footway alongside the carriageway. 1 Church Lane is a dwelling at the end of North Avenue, which fronts onto the turning head and has a vehicle access at the northwest corner of the plot. Its access is located directly adjacent to the right angled





20


bend in the proposed road serving the development, which would give rise to very limited visibility for users of the highway and for the occupants of 1 Church Lane. There would clearly be a much more intensive use of the access into the site, resulting from the development than the existing farm track. I also note that submitted tracking details in support of the road proposal indicate that there is likely to be some vehicles overrunning the kerb on the sharp bend of the access, which is also unacceptable and may cause issues for the occupants of 1 Church Lane. I am in agreement with the concerns raised by the Highways Officer that the proposed design of the access road into the development is not satisfactory and would cause a potential danger to vehicles and pedestrians using the road. Since this would be the only principal vehicular access to the development, which is a major housing scheme, the proposed access is considered to be of an insufficient standard of design to safeguard highway safety for users of the development and existing residents. I therefore have to conclude that the means of access to the site would not be in accordance with the requirements of Policy T4 and GD5.

In regards to footway links, the proposal only indicates one separate footpath to provide a link to North Avenue at the south eastern edge of the site. This would be located alongside 15 North Avenue. This would be acceptable in principle to provide further linkages with the existing residential areas of Darley Abbey. No other proposed links are shown on the indicative masterplan, which is disappointing, although the plan layout is only notional at this stage. In principle pedestrian routes could be incorporated into a detailed scheme with the surrounding area and as such the outline proposal would accord with the provisions of Policies T6 and T10.

Impact on trees and habitat The application site is agricultural land, comprising an open field with mature hedgerow and trees along the perimeter. There is a narrow strip of dense woodland on a raised embankment alongside the north and west boundary of the site, forms part of highway verge of the A6 and A38. These tree belts should not be affected by the development and would form a buffer from the adjacent highway. There are a small number of other individual mature trees around the edge of the site and on adjacent land which have been identified by the submitted Phase 1 Habitat Survey. Two of these are dead trees and another one, an Oak tree has a Tree Preservation Order on it. The protected tree is located on the eastern boundary of the site on an area identified on the master plan as a landscaped buffer. The proposed development could therefore be carried out without significant harm or loss of woodland or trees on and around the site in line with Policy E9.

The hedgerows around the perimeter of the site are identified in the Survey as being species poor, which concurs with the findings of the Council’s 2003 hedge survey, which means that they currently contain a limited number of plant species. However, they are features of habitat value, which should be retained wherever possible within the scheme. The indicative master plan suggests that the hedgerows would be largely retained intact around the edge of the development, as part of a landscape buffer along the eastern boundary of the site.





21


In regard to protected species, the submitted Habitat Survey was carried out in 2013. However, I note that Derbyshire Wildlife Trust is generally satisfied that its findings are still relevant. The survey identifies the presence of badgers on and around the site and the potential for bat roosts in some of the mature trees. Both of these animals are protected from disturbance and loss of habitat by wildlife legislation and I note the recommendations of Derbyshire Wildlife Trust that further surveys and mitigation strategy to safeguard their habitat would be required in support of any reserved matters application.

The proposed landscape buffer areas indicated on the layout plan appears to have been reduced in width from the previous proposal. This is likely to be the result of an increased density of housing proposed and the reduced site area. Whilst, this is regrettable and may reduce the opportunity for biodiversity enhancement within the development, these are indicative features at this stage. Subject to appropriate protection measures and management strategy for the habitats, including hedgerows and the protected species identified within the site, the scheme overall is considered to adequately safeguard ecological interest on and around the site, in accordance with Policies GD2, E4, E7 and E9.

The revised application site is in Flood Zone 1 as identified on the EA’s flood maps and therefore at a low risk of flooding in a 1 in 100 year flood event. Topographically the site is in an elevated position relative to the River Derwent flood plain and it is not identified as being at a significant flood risk from watercourse flooding. Due to the scale of the development, a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) has been submitted for this proposal. I note that concerns have been raised by the Council’s Land Drainage team to the content of the FRA. This suggests that the submitted FRA is not sufficiently detailed and not adequate in its assessment of the flood risk to the development. These concerns are in respect to the assessment of flood risk on the site and proposed disposal of surface water from the development. Having said that, a more detailed FRA and surface water drainage scheme could be secured by condition, at the detailed stage under a reserved matters submission. I therefore considered that this is not a robust enough reason to refuse the proposed development.

The report recommends a Sustainable Drainage scheme (SUDs) for the development, to mitigate the impact of surface water run-off by means of balancing pond and/or swales. The location of a balancing pond is shown on the indicative layout plan, in the south east corner of the site, alongside the eastern boundary landscape buffer. The details of such a SUDs solution for the proposal would form part of a reserved matters submission. Having regard for the comments of the Environment Agency and the Council's Land Drainage team, any development proposal would need to be subject to an agreed SUDs scheme, to be secured through appropriate planning conditions, to minimise flood risk to occupiers of the development and the surrounding area. This would therefore accord with NPPF flood risk policies and Policy GD3.





22


Residential amenity and urban design

The proposed housing development would represent an urban extension into the open countryside which lies to the north and east of Darley Abbey. This landscape is rural in character and partially enclosed by tree and hedgerow features. The residential area to the south of the site is suburban in character, comprising mainly of houses and bungalows with modest gardens. The location of the new housing to the rear of North Avenue would be relatively isolated and detached from the existing residential area. Whilst layout and design is a reserved matter, it is clear from the land levels on and around the site and even the revised location of the proposed access that the new dwellings would not appear connected with the existing street scene or form a continuous built up frontage with the existing urban area. The sloping gradients across the site would present challenges in terms of forming a road layout and built framework which would tie in with the character of existing settlement. The properties on the North Avenue, which back onto the site, are at an increasingly elevated level relative to the land behind them, such that the new dwellings would be lower in floor level than the existing dwellings and also sloping down towards the east boundary. Overall, the new housing would appear detached from the existing properties on North Avenue and somewhat isolated from rest of the residential area to the south. The development would not tie in a successful manner with the existing built up area and is likely to appear as a clear extension of housing development into the open countryside. The proposal would therefore be an undesirable intrusion into the rural landscape and be contrary to Policies GD4 and H13 in relation to achieving a high quality form of development, which respects the urban grain of the existing streetscene.

In terms of the impact of the development on residential amenity, the properties most affected would be on North Avenue, in particular those on the north side of North Avenue. These are generally a mix of two storey dwellings and bungalows. The rear of these properties face onto the site and those towards the eastern end are in an elevated position, in relation to the application site. There is a hedgerow along the boundary with the North Avenue properties and some trees, which would provide some screening for the existing properties from the development. Since site layout is a reserved matter, it is not clear at this stage where the proposed dwellings would be positioned in the site. However, normal distances between dwellings to achieve sufficient levels of privacy and amenity can be achieved on this site, to safeguard the living environment of the neighbouring dwellings on North Avenue. The amenities of nearby residents could therefore be satisfactorily maintained by an appropriate site layout and design in line with Policy GD5.

Whilst layout is a reserved matter, the site is capable of forming an appropriate living environment for any future occupants of the development. A reasonable density of housing development is proposed for the size of the site, which is comparable with that of existing housing in North and South Avenues. Landscape planting buffers are proposed alongside the road embankments and the eastern boundary of the site, to increase tree cover adjacent to the development. The existing tree buffers on the raised embankments alongside the A6 and A38 would provide significant screening for the future occupants from potential noise and disturbance emanating from the





23


trunk road. This buffer area does appear to have been reduced in width following the previous application, which may bring dwellings closer to the main road. However, provided that suitable noise assessment and mitigation measures are put in place within the development, (which could be secured by means of a reserved matters approval) to protect future occupants from unreasonable disturbance from the trunk road, I am satisfied that an acceptable standard of residential amenity could be achieved on the site in line with Policies H13 and GD5.

A draft Section 106 Agreement has been submitted in support of the application, which agrees to secure contributions to provide 30% affordable housing within the development, provision of off-site incidental and major open space, public realm and highways improvements to the A6 transport corridor.

Conclusion The NPPF requires us to consider all proposals for housing in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. This means that in the absence of a 5 year supply of deliverable housing sites, proposals should be permitted unless the adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the NPPF as a whole.

The proposal is located within a Green Wedge which has for many years received policy protection to resist inappropriate development. Policy protection continues through the provisions set out in Policy E2, which, as has been proven by recent appeal decisions for new housing in Green Wedge, can still be given significant weight in a post- NPPF context. Development that would undermine the openness and undeveloped character of Green Wedges is generally considered to be unacceptable.

The principle of the proposal is in conflict with Policy E2, which specifically restricts residential development within Green Wedges. The proposal would introduce a significant amount of new built development into a very sensitive part of the Green Wedge that clearly relates to the rural landscape of the Derwent Valley and less so to the built up area of Darley Abbey. The site is located within the World Heritage Site Buffer Zone and the proposed development would have a significant adverse impact upon the setting of the World Heritage Site and detract from its Outstanding Universal Value, by reason of the urbanising nature of the proposal and its prominent and elevated position in the landscape.

The proposal would create an isolated and unsatisfactory form of development, creating an obvious intrusion into the open countryside within the designated Green Wedge. It would represent a clear extension of the existing urban area, which would have a poor relationship with the existing residential area around North Avenue and South Avenue, due to the falls in land level across the site and the difficulties of integrating the development with the existing street pattern. Development in this location would undermine the open and undeveloped character of this part of the Green Wedge and lead to further coalescence of Darley Abbey and Allestree.





24


In considering the cumulative impact of all of these points, the proposal is considered to be in conflict with Policy E2 of the adopted Local Plan and subsequently Paragraphs 60 and 64 of the NPPF.

Whilst the Council has accepted the principle of some housing development within Green Wedges in recent times, it has only been where a proposal would make a compelling contribution to meeting housing needs and where the proposal would be in a less sensitive part of the Green Wedge. This has enabled us to conclude that the benefits would outweigh the potential adverse impacts of such schemes.

There are also significant concerns in regard to highway safety, arising from the proposed reconfiguration of the existing site access to form the principal vehicular access to the development. The details of the access improvements submitted with the application, do not provide satisfactory evidence that the new road would meet the Highway Authority’s requirements in terms of suitable visibility and manoeuvring of vehicles around the right angled bend in the carriageway. The increased use of the access is also likely to impact on the amenities of an existing dwelling, which is already served off the access. The proposed access solution is therefore not appropriate for the nature and scale of the development, which it is to serve and is likely to lead to a potential danger for road users and local residents, contrary to the provisions of Policy T4.

The proposal does provide some limited benefit in terms of boosting the supply of housing, providing an additional 4 dwellings compared to the previous application which was refused and the proposal for up to 49 dwellings could provide much needed affordable housing. However, taking account of the small increase in dwelling numbers, it is still considered that the cumulative adverse impacts highlighted by the conflicts with Policy GD4, GD5, H13, E2, E23 and E29 and T4 of the adopted Local Plan and with paragraphs 60, 64 and 132 to 138 of the NPPF, relating to the protection of landscape and heritage assets, would significantly and demonstrably outweigh these benefits. Therefore the proposal cannot be considered to be a sustainable form of development and it is recommended for refusal.

8. Recommended decision and summary of reasons:

To refuse planning permission

Reasons: 1. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, residential development on the

application site would be prominent and visually intrusive, leading to the narrowing of the Green Wedge, between Darley Abbey and Allestree, resulting in a loss of openness and undeveloped, landscape character in this highly sensitive part of the Green Wedge. It would lead to further coalescence of the Allestree and Darley Abbey neighbourhoods. As such, the proposal would compromise the role and function of the Green Wedge in this location, contrary to the aims of saved policy E2 of the adopted City of Derby Local Plan Review.

2. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority residential development on this site would have an unsatisfactory relationship with the prevailing built form of Darley Abbey. Given the topography of the site and its surrounding fields, which





25


falls west to east, towards the River Derwent and the pattern of residential development on North and South Avenues, it is considered that it would be difficult to secure a layout of development that relates well to existing housing in the locality. The existing houses on North Avenue turn their backs to the site and the site is enclosed from the north and west by substantial raised embankments to the neighbouring trunk road network; it would virtually be an island of development that would struggle to relate to neighbouring communities. As such, the Local Planning Authority has little confidence that reserved matters submissions could deliver an overall layout that would provide a high quality design that would relate well to existing housing in the locality. The proposal is therefore contrary to saved policies GD4, H13 and E23 of the adopted City of Derby Local Plan Review and the over-arching design guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework.

3. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, residential development on this site, which would fall within the Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site and its associated Buffer Zone, would be harmful to the Outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage Site. This is due to the site being an important part of the undeveloped rural landscape providing the setting for the Darley Abbey Mills industrial settlement, which makes a contribution to the significance of the World Heritage Site. The site is therefore highly sensitive and the proposal would result in the loss of the rural character and landscape and would change both the character and experience of this part of the setting of the World Heritage Site, eroding the clear relationship between the rural landscape and the historic settlement, which is an integral part of its contribution to the Site. The proposal is therefore contrary to saved policy E29 of the adopted City of Derby Local Plan Review and the policies in the National Planning Policy Framework.

4. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the proposed alterations to the access to the turning head on North Avenue, to form principal vehicular access to the development, would be detrimental to traffic and pedestrian safety on the highway and harmful to the amenity of the residential property at 1 Church Lane, by reason of the poor visibility which would be afforded to the existing access to 1 Church Lane due to the tight bend in the road in close proximity to the access, inadequate footway width for this type of road and potential for vehicles to overrun the footway as shown on tracking drawing no. F15018/01 Rev B. Accordingly, the proposal is contrary to saved policy T4 of the adopted City of Derby Local Plan Review and the relevant technical guidance outlined in ‘Manual for Streets’.

S106 requirements where appropriate: Affordable housing (30% provision)

Incidental and Major Open Space

Public realm





26


Transport improvements to A6 corridor, improvements to public transport, pedestrian and cycling.

Application timescale: The target period for determination of the application expired on 31 August 2015 and is brought to committee due the level of local interest and for Member’s interest.





27


8

2

44

14

7

286

27

18

31

55

7

4

6

25a

29

17

51

10

House

19

2

31

4

Lawn

2

23

5

Mount Carmel

School

24

86

22

9

159

2

137

21

3

Convent

24

House

1

7

2

24

6

22

2

1

1

17

1

78

11a

39

61

28

13

7

2

175a

PO

61

PCs

11

8

3

2

33

98

18

a

6

27

17

7

8

40

18

51

11

55

40

8

30

Park Farm Centre

14

49

101

15

Bank

32

39

22

1

176

Norbury

172

5

1

20

28

152146

11

11

12

8

6

2

2

7

234

4

2

39

213

a

49c

150

Primary School

St Mary's Catholic

152

10

170

398

124

4

132

168

136

170

150

Saint Benedict Catholic School

9

2

19

1

1

48

332

1

6

28

Hawthorns

57

1

49

1

45 to 49

13

51

2

8

37 to 43

215a

57

30

2

1

30

7

254

1

22

1

4

2a

26

28

15

Ked

lesto

n C

ou

rt

30

2

4

8

22

1

101

7a

El Sub Sta

2

23

215b

13

11

1

2

4

58

McAuley

6

16

25

8

18

3

29

1

2a

21

60

69

19

28

24

1

12

44

362

122

20

11

0

71

4

21

1

70

4

8

88

1

406

11

8

50

209

2

14

1

2

3

2

1

95

The Bungalow

16

67

175

224

2

112

13

232

32

31

246

33

13

2783

174

1

148

156

13

17

19

Centre

18

134

7

2

25

17

21

175

1

El Sub Sta

24

2

20

1c

C o

f E

Aid

ed

201d

33

8

5

30

48

2a

12

38

8

5

4

10

Prim

ary

Scho

ol

7

13

14

7

(PH)

12

223

350

1

El Sub Sta

Wal

ter Ev

ans

15

14

6

3

15

36

20

1a

10

24

3

22

10

16

11

19

36

21

3

2

394

44

56

9

ESS

38

1

59

91

29

68

113

14

14

1

38

30

36

34

20

15

284

153

2

242

2

88

10

Park Farm

185a

1

(PH)

El Sub Sta

16

18

80

and Performing Arts College

18

23

20

39

16

3

6

2

10

9

109

14

Park

53

1

55

102

98

114

173

15

2

70

121

1

59

35

13

38

1

63

26

23

15

Church

4

126

47

Catherine McAuley

6

35

52 to 62

15

64

27

22

11

15

123

128

82 to 92

120

14

5

24

1

25

47

189

25

12

185

1

302

1

25

26

59

41

University of Derby

201

183

29 to 35

29

16

8

24

66

22

35

18

11

14

2

10

33

151

1

5

4

4

5

Catechetical

Highfields

25

5

39

70

21

77

20

50

51

20

27a

2

14

29 to 47

8

5

300

14

Bank

Surgery

1

4

Libra

ry

253

1

149

18

1

49

2

2

13

Centre

1

2

12

11

Primary

54

19

18

8

1

140

19

117

12

244

8

17

29

67

119

62

51

47

and Nursery

4

28

28

178

182

148

85

142

9

160

13

4

144

12

4

2

Shelter

14

16

16

5

185

7

5

110

30

1

32

162

166

24

2

180

14

138

10

15

2

192

20

9

Patch

158

130

215c

5

126

6

24

9

Shelter

72

15

282

334

131

4

2

21

5a

19

14

5

11

41

Ridgeways

314

35

1

14

100

142

11

38

2

Duffield House

Croft

208

18

10

The

25

20

3

29

5

18

11

1

61

37

2

1

4

22

4

Farm

41

9

6

71

3

3

21

61

5

141

21 to 27

3

7

11

60

19

16

386

53

8

12

Methodist

40

Beechwood

31

5

20328

1

31

27

4

70 to 80

6

177

12

St Philomena's

26

7

11

187

17

3

17

260

1

16

24

112

1

14

73

28

Lodge

28

12

33

48

28

11

7

12

15

23

210 to 220

37

204

183b

200

20

120

8

8

12

47

16

1

5

2

8

4

25

11a

26

2

Catherine

18

243

71

251

11

3

9

24

5

83

108

Court

7

El Sub Sta

222

36

15

248

to 2

58

228

1

2

27

8

28

2

55

5

Clinic

124

183c

56

19

77

264

1

402

10

6

94 t

o 1

04

House

14

9

308

28

Lansdown

1

300

2

294

183

a

167

220

11

20

9

27

34

128

140

154

12

11

16

1

1

207

215

336

31

6

11

18

48

2

Beaumont House

2

136

2a

3

Priors

384

7

182

42

4

Highcroft

7

21

1a

The Limes

2

6a

18

217

207a

10

69

229

75

1

8

115

St John's

Hotel

49

35

120

1

21

25

5

206

15

45

1

90

3

36

14

11

36

97

3

28

51

2

230

2

55

27

3

28

29a

8

40 to 50

39

2

16

11

44

Broadway

106

5

Cedar

22

1

Sub Sta

El Sub Sta

Games Court

Tree

Tre

es

Playground

Car Park

Pond

Pond

Sinks

El Sub Sta

Boro

Const

Bdy

CR

CR

BP

CLO

SE

CLOSE

WIC

KER

SLEY C

LO

SE

ST H

UG

H'S

FARNWAY

BRIARSGATE

HARPSW

ELL

FINNINGLEY DRIVE

AV

EN

UE

WIL

LOW

PORTREA

TH D

RIVE

BRO

AD

WAY

BEEC

HW

OO

D

FO

XLA

ND

S

CLOSE

THE RISE

CA

USEW

AY

FA

RN

WA

Y

CL O

SE

BRAITHWELL

PA

RK

FERRERS WAY

DU

FFI E

LD R

OA

D

DA

RLE

Y A

BB

EY

WOODVIEW GARDENS

LANSCOMBE

MEW

S

FA

RN

WA

Y

HIGHFIELDS

Posts

FERRER

S W

AY

Posts

QU

EEN

SW

AY

MID

WA

Y

LB

EA

ST C

LOSE

DR

IVE

LB

Turbine

PARK

WIN

DLE

Y

TCBs

Post

Posts

MS

77.4m

96.3m

L Twr

FB

86.9m

Wind

86.9m

81.7m

80.5m

85.0m

87.8m

Trees

Car Park

87.5m

81.7m

90.5m

88.4m

95.1m

87.8m

89.0m

TRESILLIAN

MARCH

INGTO

N

86.0m

BI R

CH

OV

ER

WA

Y

LAVENDER ROW

BA

RD

EN

DR

IVE

QU

EEN

SW

AY

AB

BEY

HIL

L R

OA

D

CR

ESC

ENT

CLOSE

CR

ESC

EN

T

JACKSDALE CLOSE

GA

TE

COPPICE CLOSE

CADGWITH DRIVE

SLACK LANE

PARK

Path

Posts

Path

LB

L Twr

79.2m

82.0m

82.9m

100.6m

96.0m

Boro

Const

Bdy

El Sub Sta

Games Court

El

Tree

s

Pond

Pond

9

5

59a

46

72

28

90

17

1

20

10

58

15

88

2

ALSTONFIELD DRIVE

FIN

NIN

GLE

Y D

RIV

E

ING

TO

N

MEW

S

CLO

SE

WY

AST

ON

DU

FFIE

LD R

OA

D

WEST

CLO

SE

VICARWOOD AVENUE

DA

RLEY G

RO

VE

THATCH CLOSE

WIN

DLEY

MA

LTB

Y

BEECHW

OO

D PA

RK DRIV

E

PLO

UG

H

Boro

Cons

t Bdy

BER

RY

Co

Const

& W

ard B

dy

OA

KO

VER

DR

IVE

THE CRES

T

CR

PENTEWEN CLOSE

Posts

Path

TCB

TCB

7

L Twr

89

105

3

91.4m

27

84.1m

66.4m

95.4m

81.1m

Trees

El Sub Sta

FRIARS CLO

SE

AB

BEY

NORBURY CLOSE

TH

E C

LOSE

DA

RLE

Y P

AR

K R

OA

D

CLOSE

MILE

ASH LA

NE

CH

URC

H LA

NE

CH

ATSW

OR

TH

CR

ES

CEN

T

DRIV

E

Post

CANON'S WALK

DARLEY PARK DRIVE

NORBURY CLOSE

WALK

CA

RS

THORPELANDS

WESSIN

GTO

N

PARK

SO

NG

BI R

D C

L OSE

FERRERS WAY

DR

IVE

CLO

SE

PA

RK

HIG

HFI

ELD

S

BA

RD

EN

DR

I VE

PA

RK

FA

RM

DR

IVE

HIGHFIELDS

El

DRIVE

DRIVE

Posts

GP

L Twr

L Twr

L Twr

ABBEY

CH

UR

CH

LAN

E

TCB

86.6m

War Memorial

LB

92.0

m

86.3m

86.3m

88.7m

89.0m

Co C

onst

& W

ard

Bdy

Co

Con

st &

War

d Bd

y

11

House

6

Park Gates

61

12

9

St Matthew's

26

95

13

22

26a

13

Church

2 t

o 6

TH

E O

RC

HA

RD

S

PARK FARM DRIVE

BANK SIDE

ABBEYCROFT LANE

ST JOH

N'S C

LOSE

CLIFTON ROAD

DR

IVE

ST MATTHEW'S

PARK

ABBEY HILL ROAD

WHITEWAY

CLO

SE

MIS

TER

TO

N CLOSE

QUEE

NSW

AY

BRENDAN GARDENS

RO

AD

CA

VEN

DI S

H A

VEN

UE

DRIVE

LB

L Twr

LB

Sundial

L Twr

L Twr

82.0m

84.7m

80.5m

99.7m

99.4m

80.5m

80.8m

72.5m

Sub Sta

St M

atth

ew's

1

2

23

23

111

34

8

DA

RLEY

ABB

EY L

AN

E

DR

IVE

60.7m

Tree

El Sub Sta

DARLE

Y

62.2m

2

2a

10

7

98

Trees

LBLB

1

48

2

Priors

29 to 35

7

42

29

69

18

12

28

29a

18

8

39

32

2

24

16

2

Cedar

9

Patch

40

20

48

1214

57

Lodge

33

49

45 to 49

13

37 to 43

57

1

2a

406

El Sub Sta

C o

f E

Aid

ed

5

Prim

ary

Scho

ol

Wal

ter Ev

ans

14

10

16

19

8

44

2

59

44

27

47

35

18

49c

22

30

47

22

30

8

1

31

1

55

32

4

6

15

27a

1

29

2

1

18

a

8

59

1

8

12

2

11

1

61

1

4

51

6

8

21 to 27

24

10

11

12

56

2

11

27

34

DR

IVE

ST MATTHEW'S

CLOSE

DA

RLEY G

RO

VE

66.4m

Sub Sta

ST H

UG

H'S

El

Car Park

COPPICE CLOSE

LB

DA

RLE

Y A

BB

EY

DA

RLE

Y P

AR

K R

OA

D

WALK

24

Stand

52

50

11

23

Colemans

House

5

(PH

)

6

6

Park Gates

Old Vicarage School

61

2

10

16

2a

2

7

17

2

Abbey View

12

2

11a

17

16

10

1

7

Darley Abbey

10

9

15

3

Woodville

House

The Bungalow

1

One Oak

GVC

Sub Sta

6

Wo

rks

7

59

St Matthew's

Derwent

2

26

4

6a

95

1

13

House

15c

22

Park

17

6

31

13

32

26a

Toll

Riverside

13

43

9a

Gas Govn

1

Darley Park House

1a

Stand

3

16

Factory

1b

6

13

Church

2 t

o 6

West View

9

Folly

8

10

2

1

3

Meteor

8

Works

Centre

8

1

The

7

65

2c

98

7

7

1

55

24a

Works

El Sub Sta

26a

8

ESS

3

15

9

Vicarage

6

6a

El Sub Sta

1

3

12

11

14

5

El Sub Sta

12

Works

18

4

8

House

2

Robert W

Kirklan

d

59a

14

7

7

Lyndhurst

12

2

Pendinas

Mills

1

15

Ab

bot

Mew

s

Kinseys Yard

22c

16

SQUARE

46

72

15b

28

2

27

90

House

12

20

24

53

Works

17

9

2

5

10

4

9

El Sub Sta

Square

13

27

28a

25a

Wes t

Co

ttag

es

5a

1

14

7

1

4

1

Yard

Club

Hollies

Centre

15

9

29

Parker

Works

10

30

6

15

to 6

2

26

2

10

7

14

27a

28

2

2

11

Brewery

1

St M

atth

ew's

3

3a

Sub Sta

12

11

7

5

1

(Augustinian founded c.1137)

18

El Sub Sta

20

1

Club House

12

5

El

The

Centre

10

Community

7

4

6

13

26

House

1

9

89

15

River D

erwen

t

105

Th

e A

bb

ey

1

Pond

29

12

Dra

in

5

22

8

1

41a

1

10

65

9

Mill

13

41

5

1

Aubretia

Nevinson House

17

3

19

16

1

5

14

17a

27

Westleigh

5

47

PCs

1

House

1

2

Methodist Church

3

22a

16

4

El Sub Sta

El Sub Sta

House

Ppg Sta

58

6

Pevril

2

7

16

15

6

16

88

The

6

23

THE HILL

15a

8

27a

23

21

21

2b

35

Ward

Bd

y

2

41

CR

Ward

Bd

y

69

111

8

5

2

2a

Depot

17

Perkins Yard

Trees

WB

9

2

6

1

6

11

15

3

2

11

5

34

25

Darley

18

8

Abbey

100

River D

erw

ent

24a

10

4

Tomlinsons

Cottages

1

Estate

Tomlinson Industrial

DA

RLE

Y S

TR

EET

RO

AD

DA

RLEY

ABB

EY L

AN

E

DR

I VE

WEI

RFI

ELD

Posts

ESS

Tank

60.7m

47.9m

48.5m

Sloping

48.7m

BS

Trees

MP 129.5

Remains of

Darley Abbey

Drain

NU

TW

OO

D

NORTH ROW

DO

WER

CLO

SE

WEST R

OW

RO

AD

FRIARS CLOSE

AB

BEY

Tank

48.

2m

48.2m

48.8m

49.7m

58.8m

48.8m

47.8m

CR

SP

LEAFENDEN CLOSE

CLO

SE

SPINNEY CLOSE

SO

UTH

AV

EN

UE

OLD LANE

THISTLEDOWN CLOSE

Tra

ck

Path

Path

Posts

LB

Bridge

Foot

LB

48.5m

48.2m

47.9m

53.0m

47.8m

DARLEY

masonry

ABBEY

El

Dra

in

Tree

Depot

WB

El Sub Sta

Tennis Court

Nut Wood

Playing Field

Rugby Ground

River D

erw

ent

Dra

in

Dr a

in

SL

Pond

SOUTH AVENUE

NEW ROAD

MP 129.75

FOLL

Y R

OA

D

ABBEY

CH

UR

CH

LAN

E

CLOSE

Track

TCB

FB

FB

War Memorial

Weir

Hopper

LB

48.5m

BR

ICK

RO

W

PO

PLA

R R

OW

CH

URC

H LA

NE

AB

BEY Y

AR

D

TH

E H

ILL

HASLAM'S LANE

ALF

RETO

N

ABBEYFIELDS

WATERSIDE CLOSE

DARLE

Y

DRIV

E

AL F

RETO

N R

OA

D

Posts

Chy

Tra

ck

Tank

Hopper

Post

Stone

Mast (Telecommunication)

62.2m

48.5m

Tank

48.8m

49.7m

47.

8m

48.2m

47.9m

50.0m50.0m

10

Vicarage

31

7

Hall

22

15

12 2

15

11

15

House

10

1

67

24

11

14

2a

8

Croft House

2

2

9

7

19

12

Gov

13

(PH)

29

1

65

193

295

2

School

Fermyn Wood

18

60

14

60

PC

Pavilions

17

6

19

24

2

17

79

175a

21

28

9

42

45

2

21

14

7

39

234

184

70

26

21

33

55

2

Pavilion

39 to

46

41

7

8

85

7

4

160

27

25

2

285

38

6

14

114

48

1

61

406

58

27

40

2

1

101

94

15

1

14

11

22

0

14

1 to 4

33a

20

12

31

22

28

46

1

3

6

2

250

2

6

43

67

293

240

11

El Sub Sta

1

72

34

112

67

1

Woodside

16

2a

175

9

1

11a

24

50

24

37

41

1

53a

219

11

71

12

12

8

68

20

1

61

19

1

1

53

10

8

160

5

2

15

11

11

The Beeches

189

Hall

192

7

62

15

18a

8a

24

97

30

23

2a

40

5

3

70

10

2

38

34

1

6

2

11

2

18

20

2

10

14

53

Blenheim Parade

1

23a

173

2

35

7

13

1

38

4

41

15

3

6

6

207

51

14

151

31

1

39

38

177

Exchange

11

15

8

2

75

Infant School

15

50

58

24

2

1

4

51

21

124

Hall

3

1

1

12

1

14

1

8

1

56b

15

22

29

15

23

25

163

Ashford

2

59

2

36

9

1

15

3

2

18

4a

18

29

St Edmund's

15

18

37

1 to 9

251

76

11

House

231

24

5

Church

90

44

3

25

7

36

15

48

29

8

8

4

2

36

1a

16a

Merrieworth

2

8

21a

102

13

26

21a

402

14

4

The Woodlands

1

7

172

10

Fairlawns

Orchard House

115

21

9

Lansdown

9a

1

2

38

65

6

59

Woodlands

28

15

84

74

196

14

64

10

1

16

43

238

14

32

7

11

285

109

242

8

36

5

5

23

23

4

17

13

14

43

14

21

24

Portway

39

4

52

12

11

16

48

6

18

2a

Priors

17a

Highcroft

7

1a

The Limes

2

British Legion

6a

229

14

1

Evergreen Hall

Th

e P

op

lars

Pavilion

1a

49

21

15a

29

56a

Cranford

20

25

103

Club

27

a

45

1

30

1

6

36

172

38

House

1

1 t

o 3

25

1

51

2

28

9

2

19

30

12

19

17

Court

4

77

195

6

4

11

5

10

St George's House

1

21b

21

1b

28

63 to

70

1

48

87

3

34

7

16

150

3

289

50

11

4

41a

35

14

3

93

34

83

5

25

8

11

253

1

43a

1

8

6a

2

11

3

Royal

18

1

28

7

37

49

2

53

12

15

9

11

Pavilion

10

27

Birchover

31 to

38

13

(PH)

121

1a

2

4

23

19

1 to 8

253

8

208

29

22

86

29

48

1

Garage

85

2

14

36

14

16

11

16

Courtland

170

30

295

27

3

32

1a

76

8

185

140

124

19

78

1

184

15a

28

22

8

1a

19

Tudor

109

12

Telephone

39a

8

57

24

46

243

46

138

5

12

2

2

169

13

Houses

5

14

7

57

6

Sub

Police

12

11

25

Sta

126

15

25

5

20

Portway Junior School

11

8

2

6

1

17

116

1

El

6

20

14

Chapel

13

7

17

69

56

9

10

1

161

2

17d

Patch

2

1

5

Duffield House

1a

22

18

4

25

4 t

o 9

1

House

15

2648

16

120

12

243

23b

293a

124

9

29

48

11

1 to 5

4a

15

1

26

3

13

7

31

Red Cow

13

2

1

29

7

33

11

a

1a

1

61

23

13

13

11

4

11

127

9

12

1

53

2

9

38

2

18a

3

95

12

19

32

39

8

4

12

Gas

18

2

187

19

17

7

8

35

18

8

176

73

18

6

56

13

281

8

11

42

28

18

62

275

2

22

19

55

47

14

167

37

3

34

7

15

28

15

7

45

4

33

1

12

22

97

191

18

35

24

31

148

16

36

34

398

6

Hawthorns

2

7

4

24

118

21

Playground

El

El

Car Park

El S

ub S

ta

ST MAWES CLOSE

BIR

CH

OV

ER

WA

Y

ROBIN CROFT

NO

OK

ALL

EST

REE

LA

NE

ROAD

DRUM CLOSE

BA

RD

EN

DR

IVE

LEA

CLIFTON ROAD

TH

IRLM

ERE

AVEN

UE

OA

K C

LOSE

CADGWITH DRIVE

TAY WALK

TCB

LB

(Tel

ecom

munic

atio

n)

88.4m

93.5m

79.2m

102.7m

93.9m

91.2m

100.6m

Sub Sta

ALLESTREE

Sub Sta

35

24

21

85

37

20

22

CR

ELM GROVE

SHORT

7

24

18

5

CR

ESC

EN

T

Church

LIME C

RO

FT

1

8

6

PINGLE

2

Allestree

PORTREATH

1a

BRIARSGATE

KIN

GS C

RO

FT

CA

VEN

DIS

H A

VEN

UE

PORTREA

TH D

RIVE

SYC

AM

OR

E A

VEN

UE

Parade

PO

PLA

R

ROAD

RID

DIN

GS

DU

FFIE

LD R

OA

D

PARK LANE

Mas

t

TCB

LB

89.6m

83.8m

89.0m

85.6

m

84.1m

Bowling Green

El

AVEN

UE

MP

LB

85.3m

CRE

SCEN

T

BASLO

W D

RIVE

WEST

BA

NK R

OA

D

ASH

CLO

SE

ALL

ESTR

EE L

AN

E

LAN

E

CH

AN

DR

ES C

OU

RT

BLENHEIM DRIVE

ST AGNES AVENUE

LISKEARD DRIVE

CLOSE

BIR

CH

OVER

WA

Y

Path (um)

Path

LB

LB

101.8m

83.2m

98.5m

88.4m

87.8m

81.4m

86.0m

97.2m

11

68

3011

2

12

1

1

59

4

36

Sub Sta

28

El

Tennis Courts

Recreation Ground

30

16

1

3

20

9

2

2

Cricket Ground

297

1

6

Dra

in

28

20

321

Bowling Green

2 to

12

Sub Sta

307

26

Sub Sta

353

El

345

2

2

15

CH

URC

H LA

NE

DU

FFIE

LD R

OA

D

Church Walk

TCB

10

BU

TTER

MER

E D

RIV

E

CLO

SE

TH

E C

LOSE

MU

LBER

RIES

CH

ATSW

OR

TH

CR

ES

CEN

T

CO

RN

HIL

L

SIDD

ALS

CLO

SE

ST E

DM

UN

D'S

CLO

SE

FOXES WALK

TAMAR AVENUE

Boro

Cons

t Bdy

LABURNUM CRESCENT

BA

RD

EN

DR

I VE

Co Con

st &

War

d Bd

y

DU

FFIE

LD

COURT

RO

AD

LARCH CLOSE

MAIN

DEVONSHIRE AVENUE

Pump

FRIARS CLO

SE

(Tel

ecom

munica

tion)

TCB

Gate

92.0

m

97.8m

RA

NN

OCH

DRIVE

CALDER

PORT

REATH

DRIV

E

WIN

DER

MER

E

CLO

SE

QUEE

NSW

AY

NO

RTH

CH

AR

TER

STO

NE L

AN

E

BEAUREPER AVENUE

WO

OD

LA

ND

S R

OA

D

KINGS CRO

FT

THATCH CLOSE

NESS WALK

PARK VIEW CLOSE

ST GEORGE'S CLOSE

FIRS

TH

E O

RC

HA

RD

S

CH

AR

LESTO

WN

DR

IVE

ROBIN CROFT ROAD

PENTEWEN CLOSE

CH

UR

CH

LA

NE

Lych

Ble

nhei

m

ST JOH

N'S C

LOSE

LB

Stone

CORNHILL

LB

CLIFTON ROAD

LB

RYD

AL

CLO

SE

ABBEY HILL ROAD

LADYCROFT PADDOCK

CA

VEN

DI S

H A

VEN

UE

96.6m

GIS

BO

RN

E C

RES

CEN

T

97.8m

Posts

90.8m

Church Walk

77.1m

Mas

t

82.3m

88.7m

93.6m

84.7m

86.9m

83.8m

88.4m

91.7m

82.6m

99.7m

99.4m

13

2

6

73

32

22

319

Shelter

446

313

Surgery

2

10

20 48

28

49

23

9

1

16

32

17

Mast

22

El

44

4260

57

MAIN

AVENUE

36

11

14

32

34

365

323

4

5

1

34

3

10

5

26

22 1

3

1

2

2a

2a

Methodist

3

15

PO

361

34

7 t

o 3

51

Lam

bour

nCour

t

El Sub Sta

Sub Sta

QUEENSWAY

81.7m

54

47

Tree

s

DU

FFIELD

86.0m

84.7m84.7m

Th

e P

op

lars

9

15a

48

1

13

12

7

2

7

10

18a

289

31

3

3

7

1 to 8

12

15

Gas

15

Tudor

281

2a

4

Gov

2

60

9

1

Court

285

406

5

18

6

12

5

1

36

8

295

8

9

24

Patch

4

8

7

1a

293

21

9

10

Priors

11

8

Path

(Tel

ecom

munica

tion)

12

1

2

6

NO

OK

CH

UR

CH

LA

NE

(Tel

ecom

munic

atio

n)

GIS

BO

RN

E C

RES

CEN

T

NO

RTH

LB

88.4m

Mas

t

KIN

GS C

RO

FT

PO

PLA

R

ROAD

DU

FFIE

LD R

OA

D

Mas

t

MAIN

AVENUE

16

SHORT

2

5

23

10

10

10a

15

13

2

1

13

22

11

2

11

15

28

1

20

46

27

21

12

26

319

2 to

12

282

26

27

271

11

233

21

Shelter

7

49

0

23

39

522

520

16

15

55

17

353

498

345

446

260

59

1

292

313

14

3

36

478

269

281

41

13

10

14

9

Surgery

1

211

2

510

167

34

56

13

2

4

1

75

2

518a

205

21

17

19

5

157

33

17

6

15

535

8

490

to

1

4

9

36

6

15

470

11

14

8

25

33

31

Old Vicarage School

1

7

14

32

1

2

24

2a

34

2a

4

257

7

365

3

9

18

245

488

289

6

1

518

Methodist

526

39

3

458

5

1

323

2

210

526a

10

13

10

47

4

20

5

9

Church

5

20

371

2

14

28

50

62

1

2

8

272

6

26

1

38

279

1

500

18

5

2

6

PO

232

528

25

2

2

34

3

361

Allestree

53

34

7 t

o 3

51

1

258

19

6

43

500

a

1a

238

88

22

10

2

30

83

191

15

3

20

22

240

11a

9

18

5

16

Holme Nook Farm

7

502

91

El Sub Sta

21

8

1

80

Lam

bour

n

230

Court

ESS

5

29

8

41

3

19

47

33

179

4

20

10

9

16

250

6

2

2

252

26

1

22

18

1

524

13

1

6

56

2

76

GVC

1

2

15

297

45

6

7

287

1

63

2

321

221

307

468

19

14

25

7

26

16

9

2a

49

6

Tennis Court

Nut Wood

Derw

en

t

Dra

in

Pond

Derwent

Co Const

Bdy

CR

CR

Und

UA

Bd

y

Boro C

onst B

dy

CH

URC

H LA

NE

DRIVE

NORTH AVENUE

PORTW

AY CLO

SE

ABBEY HILL

DU

FFIE

L D R

OA

D

FOUNTA

INS CLO

SE

ROCKINGHAM

Track

CLOSE

LB

Church Walk

Mast

Tra

ck

Stone

TCB

Air Shaft

377

a

21

10

4

27

14

52

24

57

162

24

19

44

7

19

1

138

12

141

4

CL O

SE

LAN

E

Pat

h (u

m)

83.5m

River

Drain

Holme Nook

El

Tree

s

Pond

Dra

in

El Sub Sta

Sub Sta

Riv

er

Drain

Drain

Ri v

er

Der w

en

t

Co Const

& Ward

Bdy

River

Boro Const & UA Bdy

Derwent

CR

Pond

CR

BS

CR

RO

AD

NU

TW

OO

D

WO

OD

SI D

E D

RI V

E

DRIVE

DERW

ENT

CLO

SE

MAIN

DERWENT

GARDENS

LAM

BO

URN

DRIV

E CLO

SE

FRIARS CLOSE

ASHBERRY COURT

Air Shaft

Air Shaft

Und

Def

Boro C

onst Bdy

RH

Co Const Bdy

Co Const & W

ard Bdy

Boro C

onst &

UA B

dy

Boro Const

Bdy

Co Const

& W

ard B

dy

SOUTH AVENUE

CLO

SE

LAMBOURN

HOME FARM DRIVE

AVENUE

AVEN

UE

FA

RN

BO

RO

UG

H

ABBEY HILL

DERWENT AVENUE

DU

FFIELD

Tra

ck

LEAFENDEN CLOSE

Path (um)

MP

CLO

SE

GEM

A

LB

ABBEY H

ILL

FB

Air Shaft

WHARFEDALE

QUEENSWAY Mast

LB

THISTLEDOWN CLOSE

22

A 38

Trac

k

Air Shaft

Lay-by

Air Shaft

Lay-by

85.3m

42

Path

15

2

Path

20

48.5m

158

81.7m

11

85.3m

86.0m

84.7m

DRIV

E

DRIV

E

PADLEY CLOSE

FO

RD

375

31

379

24

32

536a 2

12

377

537

23

El

176

139

18

536

1

13

53

2

5

16

54

12

6

26

47

75

23

Sub Sta

19

24

13

148

Drain

LAM

BOURN

Def

SP

EN

BEC

K

MED

WAY

SEV

ER

NV

ALE

Path

(um

)

Path

(um

)

Air ShaftAir Shaft

Crown copyright and database rights 2015 Ordnance Survey 100024913





28

Full


Address: Chellaston Academy, Swarkestone Road, Chellaston.

Ward: Chellaston

Proposal:

Planning permission is sought for the demolition of the existing detached “maths” block and its replacement with a detached two-storey building to accommodate a classroom block and refectory.

Further Details:

Web-link to application: https://eplanning.derby.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=_DERBY_DCAPR_98198

The existing two and three storey classroom block to the south west of the school buildings and adjacent to the school’s sports pitches to the west of the site would be demolished and replaced with a detached two-storey block. The new block would be composed of two parts, accommodating classrooms to the north and a refectory (communal dining hall) to the south. Due to the need to accommodate pupils while the build is in progress, the existing maths block to be removed would remain in situ whilst the refectory and some of the classrooms are under construction (Phase 1A). Once this phase is complete, the existing maths block would be demolished and the new classroom block constructed (Phase 1B).

The proposed block would have a rectangular footprint of approximately 1100sqm and a flat roof with a height of approximately 8.2 metres. The plant room would project upwards of the main roof and have a height of approximately 9.6 metres.


None of relevance in this particular part of the Academy site.

3. Publicity:

Neighbour Notification Letters

Site Notice

Statutory Press Advert


4. Representations:

35 third party representations have been received, generally in objection, including two from ward councillors. The points of objection are:

Loss of Ash tree situated close to the site’s boundary with the gardens of properties on Swarkestone Road

https://eplanning.derby.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=_DERBY_DCAPR_98198

https://eplanning.derby.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=_DERBY_DCAPR_98198





29

Full

Implications for residential amenity by way of overlooking and visual presence from the proposed building, and noise from the proposed extended car park and potential events involving the refectory

Inappropriate siting of building and the potential for relocation

Potential for disturbance of nearby residents from bin collections

Lack of pre-application consultation with residents.

5. Consultations:

Highways DC: These comments are made with reference to the Application Form, Design and Access Statement and the Site Plan – Proposed all dated 01/05/15.

The proposed development includes for an increase in car parking however it is not proposed to increase the staff numbers. The increase in parking spaces is included to stop parking on the internal roads.

Pre-application advice was given for this development regarding cycle storage provision and waste collection, you should be aware that this information has not been given in the documents provided.

Recommendation: Should planning permission be granted, I would recommend the following (two conditions recommended, please refer to the Conditions and Reasons section).

Natural Environment (Tree Officer): There are no trees protected by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO) within the grounds of the Academy and the Academy is not in a conservation area. Therefore, as long as the advice given / recommendations made in the submitted British Standards 5837:2012 Tree Survey, Arboricultural Impact Assessment, Arboricultural Method Statement and Tree Protection Plan are followed, no further comment to make.

Derbyshire Wildlife Trust: We have considered the relevant documents submitted as part of the planning application with particular reference to the following:

Preliminary Ecological Appraisal and Bat Building Assessment report ref: RSE_255_01_V1 prepared by RammSanderson dated April 2015.

The planning application for the demolition of the existing maths block, construction of a new classroom block and refectory and new car parking, is supported by an ecological survey report. A Phase 1 Habitat Survey was undertaken on 1st April 2015 and the field survey work is supported by a desk study which is welcomed. Scattered trees, hedgerow, amenity grassland, a building and hard standing were identified on the site. The site is not considered to support any protected species such as great crested newt, water vole, badger or reptiles; however there are opportunities available for nesting birds in the trees and where there are nest boxes. The building is assessed as having negligible potential to support roosting bats and no evidence





30

Full

was recorded. It is considered that adequate survey work has been undertaken in support of the planning application.

It is understood that the initial site layout involved the removal of a mature ash tree; however the layout of the car parking has now been altered to enable this tree to be retained which is welcomed.

Paragraph 109 of The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that “the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible………..”. We support the recommendations made within the ecological survey report on page 19 that provides advice in relation to nesting birds and recommendations for native tree and shrub planting. We would also recommend that the construction of the new building provides opportunities to incorporate features for roosting bats and nesting birds. These measures should be secured through appropriately worded planning conditions.

Paragraph 125 of the NPPF states “by encouraging good design, planning policies and decisions should limit the impact of light pollution from artificial light on local amenity, intrinsically dark landscapes and nature conservation. We recommend that external lighting is minimised as much as possible as part of the development and in order to ensure that lighting proposals are appropriate.

(Three conditions recommended, please refer to the Conditions and Reasons section).

Land Drainage: I have reviewed the application and have the following comments

The planning statement indicates that as the site is in Flood Zone 1 there is no external flood risk. However the national flood zones only consider flooding from fluvial sources and do not consider pluvial flood risk.

The EA have produced flood risk areas for pluvial flooding known as the Flood Maps for Surface Water version of the maps can be seen on their website.

These maps show that the site is at high risk of surface water flooding which should be considered as part of the application.

It appears that the block is to be sited in a shallow valley that effectively channels any overland flood flows from the surrounding area towards the development. The flood risk from surface water will therefore need to be addressed. It is suggested that this could be address by contouring the paved areas around the building to divert flood flows away from the building and raising floor levels above the 1 in 100 year flood level plus an allowance for freeboard.

The application includes no details of the drainage design and the only sustainable drainage feature that is evident is the proposed permeable surfacing to the car park and access road. The application suggests the use of tanks for attenuation but tanks are not generally considered a form of sustainable drainage unless they form part of a SuDS treatment train.





31

Full

The application can only therefore be supported subject to the imposition of the following conditions. (Three conditions recommended, please refer to the Conditions and Reasons section).

Sport England [4.8.2015]: Sport England originally raised an objection to the scheme on the grounds of loss of playing field land, but has since removed that objection based on the work put together during the life of the application. The last consultation response of Sport England, therefore, reads as follows…Thank you for the revised details and further information indicating a reduction in the car parking area and that the building will not impact on summer/winter pitch layouts. Based on the information provided Sport England confirms that we consider the application largely complies with Exception E3 of our policy and therefore withdraw our objection.

Relevant Policies: Saved CDLPR policies

E9 E23 GD3

Trees Design Flood Protection

GD4 Design and the Urban Environment GD5 Amenity L6 LE1 T4

Sports Pitches and Playing Fields Education Uses Access, Parking and Servicing

T6 Provision for Pedestrians T7 Provision for Cyclists T10 Access for Disabled People




6. Officer Opinion:

Key Issues:

In this case the following issues are considered to be the main material considerations which are dealt with in detail in this section.

Amenity

Highways

Design

Flood Protection






32

Full

Amenity Saved policy LE1 Education Uses of the adopted Local Plan Review stipulates that development for education and training purposes should be “in keeping with the general scale, character and levels of activity of the surrounding area” and that “in the case of development in residential areas, the site or building is sufficiently large and self contained to prevent unacceptable levels of disturbance to nearby properties”

Several of the objections received raise concerns over the possibility of noise generation out of school hours by use of the refectory for extra-curricular activities and events. This suggestion is refuted by the applicant, but in the interests of nearby residential amenity I suggest securing this by use of a condition limiting the hours of use or limiting the use of the building to activities associated with the school’s operation.

As regards the visual presence of the scheme, the proposed building would not replace the existing maths block on a like for like basis. The footprint of the proposed block is larger than that of the existing (1100sqm proposed compared with 400sqm existing), and it would be positioned further to the south, so projecting from the main cluster of school buildings. It is reasonable to conclude that the building would have a visual presence when viewed from the rear of properties on the western side of Swarkestone Road. This point has been raised by several nearby residents, as has the possibility of overlooking occurring from the southern stairwell of the proposed block to the gardens to the east. Given the distances involved (the distance between the location of the proposal and the nearest garden is over 70 metres, the distance between the location of the proposal and the nearest habitable room window is over 100 metres), and the position of the Ash tree to be retained (see below) a significant degree of overlooking seems unlikely but a condition could be attached requiring the windows serving this stairwell be obscurely glazed.

A further concern regarding residential amenity is the relocation of the bin store. The disturbance caused by bin collection has been mentioned by several residents and the relocation of the bin store closer to nearby housing would exacerbate this disturbance to some degree. It has been stated by the applicant that negotiations are underway to arrange for the bin collection to occur later in the day and this seems to me to be the best way forward although it should be noted that such arrangements fall outside the remit of the planning process and must be made outside of its control. At present it is unclear exactly how access would be achieved to make these collections and a condition is recommended requiring further details, as per the Highways’ consultation response.

Much concern has been expressed over the original proposal’s intention to remove the Ash tree situated to the east of the application site (T16 in the arboricultural assessment accompanying the planning application). The revised plans now show the proposed car park extension as reconfigured and with this tree as being retained as a result.

Highways The revised layout has been deemed acceptable by the Highways Engineer consulted and I see no reason to disagree with this assessment.





33

Full

As previously mentioned, further details on the method of access for refuse collection are required, as are details on provision for cycle parking. Conditions are recommended to secure these details.

Design The proposed block would be of a fairly simple, contemporary design which would achieve a reasonable degree of visual cohesion with the existing school buildings. The position of the proposed building’s footprint would relate acceptably well to the arrangement of the existing buildings. It has been suggested that the block could be positioned closer to the main school building in the interests of reducing its visual presence, although this has been rejected as impractical due to the need to keep the existing maths block in situ during Phase 1A of the build. In my opinion, even if this were achievable, the reduction in visual presence that would result from this relocation would be limited.

Saved policy L6 Sports Pitches and Playing Fields requires that development cannot “involve the loss of land previously or currently used for sports or recreational purposes, including playing fields associated with educational establishments”. The design originally submitted did involve the loss of some playing field area. The layout has since been revised and is now considered acceptable; see also Sport England’s consultation response.

Flood Protection As detailed above, the site of the proposed block lies in a slight dip which is at risk of pluvial flooding. To mitigate this, the Land Drainage Engineer consulted recommends several conditions which are listed below.


To grant planning permission with conditions.

Summary of reasons: As the existing maths block is approaching the end of its functional life, its replacement can be justified as an appropriate development in the school’s operation. The increased visual presence of the proposed block in comparison to the existing arrangement would be acceptable given the distance from residential properties on Swarkestone Road, and the retention of the Ash tree would reduce visual presence of the proposed building still further. Provided excessive noise is not generated out of school hours by use of the refectory it is the City Council’s opinion that no significant harm to residential amenity would occur as a result of the development.

Conditions: 1. Standard condition 03 (standard time limit)

2. Standard condition 100 (approved plans)

3. The development shall not become operational unless or until provision has been made within the application site for parking of cycles in accordance with details submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The cycle stands shall be located near to the main entrance to the





34

Full

development, be covered and that area shall not thereafter be used for any purpose other than the parking of cycles.

4. The development shall not become operational unless or until provision has been made within the application site for waste collection facilities, including how the vehicle will access and egress the site to service the area in accordance with details submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority

5. Standard condition 101 (Tree protection during construction)

6. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority no removal of trees, hedgerows or shrubs that may be used by breeding birds shall take place between 1st March and 31st August inclusive, unless a competent ecologist has undertaken a careful, detailed check of the vegetation for active birds’ nests immediately before the work is carried out and provided written confirmation that no birds will be harmed and/or that there are appropriate measures in place to protect nesting bird interest on site. Any such written confirmation should be submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

7. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority no development shall take place until an ecological enhancement strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such approved measures shall be implemented in full and maintained thereafter.

8. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority no development shall commence on site until an external lighting strategy has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such approved measures must be implemented in full and maintained thereafter.

9. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority no development shall take place until detailed proposals for the management of the surface water drainage and flood risk have been submitted to and improved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The agreed details shall be implemented and retained for the life of the development.

Reasons: 1. Standard reason 56

2. Standard reason 04

3. Standard reason E16 and to promote sustainable travel.

4. Standard reason E07 To ensure that suitable arrangements are provided for the waste collection to be undertaken

5. Standard reason E11






35

Full




S106 requirements where appropriate: There is no Section 106 requirement for this development.

Application timescale: The determination period expired on 09/07/2015





36

Full

Cuttle Bridge Cottage

105

1

23

6

3

18

5

5

2

9

2

51

1

7

68

70

15

61

16

21

26

22

14

62

37

6

12

11

5

38

2

2

30

37

17

Sta

12

1

15

0

63

162

36

9

92

26

1

11

26

19

1

2

23

19

20

12

1

25

5

17

49

322

11

15

27

8

15

6

9

1

7

28

27

181

Old

Bezant House

30

8

11

2

25

138

2

5

40

13

14

4

35

10

60

Chellaston Hill

3

14

5

5

14

10

15

Swarkestone

15

1

25

Boat Club

15

1

Lock House

12

1

13

3

24

Weston House

30

27

2

11

130

12

11 6

111

1

155

149

PH

10

1

46

2

14

43

El Sub

11

58

54

169

50

167

39

28

El S

ub Sta

6

141

121

165

Rose Cottage

159

8

The Hill

143

71

153

15

2

1

10

183

48

7

11

Windmill Cottage

12

31

42

56

Mill House

20

Windmill

15

16

32

10

2

23

31

25

53

1

23

10

55

27

1

7

166

163

15

6

18

106

10

20

21

9

20

14

118

82

Cuttle Brook

(dis

use

d)

GVC

Trent andMersey Canal

Drain

Lock

Derb

y C

anal

SM

Cutt

le B

roo

k

FW

RH

Boro Const & U

A Bdy

CS

(disu

sed

)

Co Const Bdy

Derb

y Can

al

Swarkestone

SP

Un

d1. 2

2m

Def

FF

Drain

Def

RH

Un

dFW

Drain

RH

1.2

2m

RH

Swarkestone Junction

Def

Und

Drain

Co Const Bdy

CS

Und

SP

MP 128

Def

Boro Const & UA Bdy

Un

d

1.22m RH

Und

Boro Const & UA Bdy

Co Const Bdy

Un

d

Und

Boro Const & UA Bdy

Def

DUCHESS W

AY

MP 128.5

REG

AL G

ATE

HOLM

LEIGH W

AY

A 50

GLENWOOD ROAD

COUN

TESS

GRO

VE

Path

48.8m

VIEW

HER

ALD

GRO

VE

GLEN

PA

RK C

LOSE

Weir

AVALON DRIVE

BRADGATE PARK

SW

AR

KESTO

NE

53.6m

HOLMLEIGH WAY

MOYNE GARDENS

CROW

N W

AY

Towing Path

MARQUIS G

ARDENS

HOLMLEIGH WAY

CO

UR

TW

AY C

RESC

EN

T

Lay-by

Lay-by

Tra

ck

RO

AD

KINGSDALE

GROVE

MP

Pat

h

Co Const Bdy

A 514

LB

A 5

14

ESS

RH

38.4m

FW

QUEENSGATE DRIVE

46.6m

ROYAL APPROACH

1.2

2m

RH

Un

dFW

Tra

ck

MP 128.25

Cuttle Bridge

41.5m

A50

CROWN WAY

KNIGHTS R

OAD

BOYD GROVE

REALM C

LOSE

55.5m

46.3m

39.9m

15

11

9

2

15

21

Chellaston School

35

78

29

13

15

22

El Sub Sta

22

99

15

89

38

7

89a

91

11

12

11

16

19

19

57

41

42

19

35

9

11

Tennis and Netball Courts

23

15

52

8

4

14

93

11

49

60

84

Co C

onst BdyBoro C

onst & U

A Bdy

CO

UR

TW

AY

CR

ESC

EN

T

DO

MA

IN D

RIV

E

CS

Playground

MEADOW

Foot BridgeFoot Bridge

11

12

1

12

30

31

2

16

15

15

10

31

23

27

106

92

6

2

14

10

1

11

39

28

6

37

38

30

AVALON DRIVE

11

25

KNIGHTS R

OAD

15

REALM C

LOSE

35

46.3m

1

1

2

20

5

8

1

4

12

1

14

El Sub

GLENWOOD ROAD

COUN

TESS

GRO

VE

55

27

45

24

30

49

48

56

25

26

29

47

45

30

4

10

51

57a

El Sub Sta

12

34

8

Gas Govn

80

2

74

1

2

33

22

19

24

1

4

140

62

33

14

17

24

19

29

9

50

49

57

11

Hall

19

55

11

32

93

Chellaston

57

1

12

to

1

53a47

3

1

11

22

15

Community

53

19

2

14

17

7

1

19

24

11

29

19

36

87

3

1

23

11

PW

14

18

2

Hall

1

15

7

5

30

20

9

30

1

11

11

2

3

1

9

3b

Garage

4

10

15

356

Pin

21b

1

Centre

37

28

6

27

5

The Corner

75

2

2

17

15

4

5

20

9

Surgery

1

55

1

43

2

5

89

21 t

o 5

7

11 to 20

28

19

15

1

20

6

1

49

8

36

60

10

28

2

47

3c

21

45

11

5

43

44

6

2

214

6

30

12

40

5

99

2

2

11

2

7

1

2

1

53

23

45

1

47

6

11

69

15

16

1 to 10

14

14

11

52

1

90

87

3

11

15

1

49

21

8

7

27

15

49

46

1

11

60

119

2

108

26

19

32

48

7

17

34

16

92

132

2

129

1

20

20

2

59

5

2

27a

1a3

131

71

1

89

12

91

14

El

105

8

1

64

52

20

19

5

30 Sub Sta

10

1

15

3

3

14

36

31

7

26

20

1

75

4

43

3

15

61

14

128

19

30

1

1

148

37

54

12

9

40

10

1

3

61

1

24

63

19

12

39

23

21

58

56

17

1

41

33

51

9

Ashleigh

175

191

33

25

16

16

31

44

188

20

1532

9a

99

101

10

25

12a

75

58

26

53

16

69

25

10

25 to 3

5

19

88

55

2

14

11

2

16

33

17

Primary School

7

51a

15

26

21

El Sub Sta

9

47

50

25

House

15a

13

23

14

38

40

84

El Sub Sta

45a

37

35

36

15

11

to

14 to

24

21

78

5

7

11

El Sub Sta

9

15

2

6

15

21

21

64

Centre

Chellaston School

3

(PH)

19

7

25

20

6

105

11

16

2

3

30

5

41

9

26

1

1

7

14

63

22

5

Hotel

2

23

22

Sta

111

1

49

27

66

85

11a

2

11

25

105

5

23

8

27

4

2

1a

5

1

2

71

1

29

1

4

58

2

23

9

35

98

2

10

32

33

20

1

34

8

93

24

54

10

1

26

101 to 1

11

8

12

57

55 4

1

2

6

3a

1

83

79

1

3

El

11a

15

36

93

100

2

19

93

30

23

74

Junior School

20

2

20

11

11

18

22

44

84

31

36

27

11

35

45

49

39a

38

1

11

2

West

79

44

18

34

31 to

1

31

2a

10

5

12

79

83

MARQUIS G

ARDENS

40

CO

UR

TW

AY C

RESC

EN

T

74

5

14

1

9

14

1

Lavinia Court

17

4

Homefields

22

17

19

Centre

53

52

11

El Sub Sta

Bluebell Park

35

12

3

78

50

29

41

22

Vicarage29

43a

21

82

2

24

26

28

49a

22

11

22

4

6

1

99

PO

2 to 1

2

1 to

10

10

2

6

2

4a

6

23

19

Rose and Crown

1

17

58

7

12

31

6

20

15

Works

1 to 1

1

4

4

12

2

5

45

17

34

4

33

45

1

18

11

7

1b

10

7

19

1

20

1d

8

9

4

15

2

3

11

5

14

6

2

922

15

El Sub Sta

11

22

90

38

34

Lavinia Court

43

25

40

116

35

110

32

114

23

100

35

147

15

2

134

27

22

16

24

13

36

57

62

15

91

7

7

5

9

53

3

2

15

23

59

El Sub Sta

89

14

89a

11

17

91

72

27

15

15

49

2

1

60

29

Club

68

17

104

28

40

11

41

154

Pavilion

7

47

2

66

5

31

10

83

21

21

15

65

129

25

53

72

2

56

21

55

2

20

1

70

Chellaston

17

12

17

65

65

23

11a

8

18

11

21

Standon

11

44

14

124

18

10

37

20

2

25

1c

39

15

79

1

50

15

4

27

3

45

3

8

16

6

1

6

176

18

18

6

25

1

83

8

46

7

36

38

11

7

38

11

24

15

52

39b

12

25

Nursery

27

15

28

76

139

85

64

15

85

29

10

16

15

1

27

2

8

7

51

1 to 12

55

3

12

1

83

4

81

31

44

11

6

37

68

ETL

1

19

29

11

16

4

155

81

33

15

24

13

90

15

2

El S

ub Sta

9

11

2

14

14

44

3

23

15

114

108

17

67

112

11

89

25

75

58

2

72

2

71

11

27

30

47

16

31

60

32

169

23

198

37

8

22

14

182

178

Orchard Close

Ashleigh Coach House

View

8

25

69

40

25 to 30

11

32

23

27

29

15

43

83a

2

29

78

24

63

Library

14 to 17

2

29

16

39

51

Playground

Playground

Play Area

Drain

Sinfin Moor

Sinfin Moor

Bowling Green

El Sub Sta

CS

Dism

antled Railway

LOC

KIN

GTO

N

ASHLEIG

H

BROOM CLOSE

CHEL

WO

OD R

OAD

SPR

ING

FIELD

DRIVE

SINFIN MOOR LANE

CLO

SE

THISTLE GROVE

FORDYCE CLOSE

GLE

ND

EV

ON

WA

Y

WALK

CO

RD

ELIA W

AY

REDMIRES DRIVE

COURTTOUCHSTONE

HIGH STREET

BA

RLE

Y C

RO

FT

HO

LLYM

OO

R D

RI V

E

CLO

SE

MEADOW

ORL

AN

DO

CO

URT

Ps

Foot Bridge

TCB

42.4m

49.4m

43.9m

MA

PLE D

RIV

E

VICARAGE R

OAD

RO

AD

DRIVE

OCTAVIA CLOSE

NESTOR CL

ASTORVILLE

LADY

NERISSA

CLO

SE

PARKW

AY

SIMCOE LEYS

LYSANDER D

RIVE

RYE

BUTT

S

PARKWAY

15

GLEN

DEV

ON

WA

Y

1

Children's

Ps

Walk

Path (u

m)

10

MP

25

Medical Centre

TCB

TCB

12

13

to

52.4m

2

22

47a

11

21

16

19

40

10

17

19

1

3

Tel Ex

42

Sherwin

41

1

6

57

The

PCs

7

11

2

(PH)

21

74

26

53

17

32

40

25

49

37

20

10

15

14

39

11

2

17

23

2

16

29

9

3a

9

1

6

2

8

4

3

20

23

35

37

7

15

El Sub Sta

41

42

35

11

38

16

15

8

24

2

39

60

20

7

9

58

2 to 12

5 t

o 1

5

to

11

66

2

11

95

85

11

9

28

5

24

172

27

1

5

45

Sub Sta

132

15

Whitworth

16

14

10

2

18

11

11

55

10

20

143

14

105

3

59

2

15

34

El Sub Sta

29

21

31

32

171

12

22

11

Shelter

16

57

55a

28

17

85

83b

28

Sandleford

1

25

27

15b

15a

24

49

Tennis and Netball Courts

El

Playground

Cuttle Brook

Def

OR

CH

AR

D W

AY

HIG

HGRO

VE

CLO

SE

LINCOLN GREEN

CA

STLE

LAN

D W

AY

ROSYTH CRESCENT

CARRADALE G

ROVE

CO

UR

TW

AY

CR

ESC

EN

T

DO

MA

IN D

RIV

E

MO

NTA

GU

E W

AY

RED

MIR

ES D

RIV

E

SIM

CO

E LE

YS

FERN

CROFT

DIS

EWO

RTH

CLO

SE

DR

UM

MO

ND

WA

Y

HAMLET COURT

DUNDAS WAY

BRODIE CLOSE

STA

TIO

N

LEE FARM CLOSE

SM

ALL M

EER

CLO

SE

CLO

SE

DA

RR

AW

AY G

AR

DEN

S

GARDENS

Path (um)

Ps

(Telecom

municatio

n)

LB

45.7m

43.9m

CHELLASTON

El Sub

Sub Sta

Play Area

Sta

MIL

L M

OO

R

WES

T AVEN

UE

DAVID'S CLOSE

ALO

NSO

CLO

SE

MANTLE CL

HOLLYMOOR

CR

ESSID

A C

OU

RT

CH

ELLAST

ON

PA

RK C

OU

RT

ATHEN

S CO

URT

MARIA

NA C

LOSE

GLENSHEE

Path

LB

Chy

Mast

52.4m

52.1m

Recreation Ground

Games Court

Co C

onst BdyBoro C

onst & U

A Bdy

NEW

BOLD

CLO

SE

RO

AD

HILLSW

AY

ROSE CLOSE

RO

SYTH

CR

ESC

EN

T

PARK ROAD

OB

ER

ON

CLO

SE

OTH

ELL

O D

RIV

E

BALGONIE COURT

PENHALIGAN'S CLOSE

STATION ROAD

SINFIN MOOR LANE

VEN

ICE

FALSTA

FF CO

URT

CHURCH CLOSE

Stadmoor

Court

52.5m

CLOSE

DRIVE

BIRCHFIELD CLOSE

MIDDLEBECK CLOSE

BU

RG

HLE

Y

DER

BY

CASTLELAND WAY

SK

IPN

ESS C

LOSE

SOMERSAL CLOSE

WES

T AVEN

UE

KILDRUMMY CLOSE

GREEN

VILLE C

RO

FT

RO

WA

LLAN

WA

Y

WA

KA

MI C

RES

CEN

T

VER

ON

A W

AY

PARKWAY

PRESTWICK WAY

MANOR ROAD

DER

BY R

OA

D

WO

ODBRID

GE CLO

SE

SW

AR

KESTO

NE R

OA

D

GR

OV

ES NO

OK

TH

UR

STO

NE F

UR

LON

G

Ps

Posts

Ps

GP

Path

an

d C

ycle P

ath

Path

(um

)

Penhaligan's

50.3m50.3m






37

Full Planning


Address: Plots 2 & 3 Trafalgar Park, Trafalgar Park Way, Derby.

Ward: Sinfin

Proposal:

Erection of power plant compound to include generators, kiosk, sub-station, welfare cabin, switchgear cabin, transformers and acoustic fence

Further Details:

Link to application: https://eplanning.derby.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=details&keyVal=_DERBY_DCAPR_97900

The full planning application seeks permission for the erection of a power plant compound to include generators, kiosk, sub-station, welfare cabin, switchgear cabin, transformers and acoustic fence within plots 2 and 3 of Trafalgar Park. The application site is located to the rear of the business park adjacent to the railway line.

The proposal comprises of 10 generators with acoustic enclosures. There are two 8 metre high exhaust stacks each fed by 5 of the generators. The number of exhaust stacks has been reduced during the life of the application and increased in height in order to assist in reducing air quality impacts. 5 transformers are located centrally to the site. To the eastern side of the site is the gas kiosk which has a footprint of approximately 1.8 metres by 6.2 metres with a height of 4.4 metres. To the south of the site is the switch gear cabin which has a footprint of approximately 12 metres by 2.2 metres.

The proposed welfare cabin is located centrally to the south of the application site comprising of staff facilities and a small office. The proposed acoustic fence is located on the western boundary with a height of 4 metres which would screen a large proportion of the facilities on this site.

Through the life of the planning application an acoustic assessment has been prepared, submitted and re-consulted upon along with amendments to the acoustic fence. An air quality assessment has also been requested and this has been submitted and the application re-consulted upon.

According to the submitted Design and Access Statement, as amended, the proposal is supported by National Energy Policy and meets the aims of The Energy Act 2013. Furthermore such a power plant would form the central column of HM Government Energy Policy. The Energy Act seeks to encourage the building of power plants that can provide electricity at times it is most required, particularly at a time when most of the coal-fired plants are facing closure and the generation of renewable energy is intermittent. The proposed plant will be gas powered which is purported to be ‘very clean and over 39% efficient’. The plant takes 15 seconds to be turned on and start generating power and thus is considered to be effective in times of high demand, particularly when other energy production cannot do the same. Other types of power plants that have efficient start times are old heavy-fuel-oil or diesel generators which







38

Full Planning

have higher emission profiles and are less effective. This also includes open cycle gas turbines which have an efficiency rating of between 27-35% - this power plant is 39% efficient or 43% for each generator. The power plant would not, as it serves a localised area, result in the loss of generated power during transit; current transmission loss nationally amounts to between 8-14% depending on the region. The proposal is therefore considered to be very efficient and considered one of the best in terms of carbon efficiency.

The applicant will be contracted to the National Grid and will be used in times of demand and known as a “peaking station”. The facility will seek to reduce blackouts and power fluctuations and serve the locality. Such facilities are being designed to form part of the new generating capacity which will replace old coal and nuclear plants as they cease operation. Providing new power plants is now at a critical point.

The most updated Air Quality Assessment proposes the plant to run on average for 1250 a year, this is based on historical data and projections.

The applicant has also provided details of the Site Selection carried out. A location in Derby will mean that the facility will be close to the properties and businesses that need security of an electricity supply. The applicant advises that the network in the city is particularly difficult to connect generation onto and this type of generation proposed requires a site with the ability to connect to both the electricity and gas networks. A comparative assessment of alternative locations in Derby reveals that Trafalgar Park is the only location in the City, according to the applicant’s site selection process:

Site Electrical

Connection Gas

connection Area Suitability

Cotes Park Industrial Estate

Available Not Available Industrial No

Holme Lane Industrial Estate

Restrained Not Available Industrial No

Trafalgar park Available Available Industrial Yes

Ascot Drive, Osmaston Not Available Not Available

Near Housing

No


No history specifically related to this use on this site.

DER/05/08/00773 Grant – Erection of Offices (use classes B1, B2 and B8) https://eplanning.derby.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=details&keyVal=_DERBY_DCAPR_86253

3. Publicity:

Site Notices displayed on 13 March 2015 and 26 June 2015







39

Full Planning


4. Representations:

No third party representations have been received.

5. Consultations:

Highways DC: The following comments are made in reference to planning application form dated 03/03/2015 and the supporting documents submitted alongside the application.

The Trafalgar Park Way is within a business park located off Victory Road, which is a classified single carriageway road (C167) that is subject to a 30 mph speed limit. The road carries significant numbers of vehicles including HGV’s especially during the peak traffic flow periods. Parking is restricted 8am to 6pm, Monday to Saturday, on Victory Road in the vicinity of the business park.

The application site is located within the gated business park, which is not adopted as highway maintained at public expense. It is accessed via a private road system, and is approximately 200 metres from the shared vehicular access onto Victory Road. The means of access to the site would be unaffected by the proposed development and is considered adequate. There appears to be sufficient room within the business to allow vehicles to enter and manoeuvre before leaving in a forward gear. The applicant indicates that the numbers of vehicles visiting the site in operation would be low, 2 car parking spaces within the secure compound is offered and considered satisfactory.

There are no highways concerns regarding this application and therefore no objection to the proposal.

Land Drainage: The application form includes for SuDS drainage with no connection to public sewers. I do not consider that soakaways will be sufficiently efficient to ensure that the 1 in 100year flood will be retained on the application site in compliance with the NPPF and I would advocate a SuDS system at a higher horizon. Officially the part of the development is within Flood Zone 2 and a SSFRA should be submitted but in this case I do not consider that much will be achieved by such a submission. The area that is likely to be a risk is close to the railway line this could be defended by a bund or small wall or robust gravel boards at the base of the acoustic fence returned both sides under the fence some 9m or until the land loses its steeper gradient. This could also fulfil the requirement for some retention of runoff on the site. There is no other information regarding drainage of the site.

Environmental Services (Health – Pollution): Comments – 4 June 2015

Further to those comments, I am now in receipt of an Air Quality Impact Assessment (Amec Foster Wheeler Ltd, June 2015), submitted in support of the application. I can comment on the report and its findings below.





40

Full Planning

Air Quality Impact Assessment The report considers predicted increases in nitrous oxides (as NO2) and carbon monoxide (CO). Other potential pollutants (e.g. PM10) have been screened out of the assessment and I would accept the justification for doing this.

The plant is predicted to operate for a maximum of 2000 hours per year (approximately 23% of the time).

I would accept that the assessment is robust and depicts a worst-case scenario, based on the assumptions in the report.

The impact on ecological receptors is discussed in the study. I am unable to comment on these areas and so I would recommend that a suitably qualified ecologist is consulted regarding this aspect of the assessment.

Based on the modelling, increases in nitrogen dioxide are expected to reach as high as 0.85µgm-3 based on the three receptor locations chosen along Osmaston Park Road, within the Council’s AQMA.

Although the increases on their own would be considered to be relatively small (approximately 2.2% of the national objective) they relate to receptors who already suffer NO2 levels well in excess (117%) of the national objective. Consequently, relevant guidance (namely IAQM, 2015) categorises this as a ‘substantial’ impact.

Increases in NO2 levels along Victory Road are expected to be even greater (approximately 9.7%), however the air quality objectives are still expected to be met comfortably in this location and so the overall impact here is considered to be ‘slight’.

Increases in carbon monoxide are expected to be ‘negligible’.

Conclusions and Recommendations Based on guidance produced by Environmental Protection UK (EPUK) and the Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM) for the consideration of air quality within the land-use planning and development control processes, this development would be classed as having a substantial impact upon local air quality.

Considering the relevance of the IAQM classification in this specific location and context is however a matter of professional judgement as there are other factors that will determine the significance of these impacts.

I would consider the following points to be of particular relevance:

The existence of and impact upon the Council’s outer ring road Air Quality Management Area (AQMA);

The number of sensitive receptors potentially affected by the increases (not known);

Cumulative effects of other developments within this area of the City;

The results of any human health impact assessment (not known);

The degree of mitigation possible to minimise predicted impacts.





41

Full Planning

The study provides details to answer some, but not all, of the considerations highlighted above. It may therefore be prudent in the first instance to investigate these matters further. In particular, it would be helpful to review information detailing the number of receptors/properties affected by each category of concentration increase. If necessary, human health impact assessment may also be required to demonstrate that the proposal will not impact upon local health.

If the development were allowed in its current form, it has the strong potential to detriment the successful implementation of Derby City Council’s Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP) for NO2.

It is also my view that the development is in contravention of Local Plan Policy GD5 (amenity) due to the potential for ‘unacceptable harm’ to occur.

As suggested under the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), the developer may be able to demonstrate how the development can be amended to make it acceptable, however under the current proposals, I would recommend refusal of the application on air quality grounds.

Given the nature of the proposal (as a power plant) and the limited NO2 mitigation options available, I would strongly recommend consideration of an alternative development site located out of the influence of the Councils AQMAs.

Comments - 10 June 2015 I refer to my comments of 21st May 2015 and also those of the 4th June 2015 regarding the above application, which should be read in conjunction with this document.

Further to those comments, I am now in receipt of an Update to Air Quality Impact Assessment (Amec Foster Wheeler Ltd, June 2015), submitted in support of the application. I can comment on the report and its findings below.

Air Quality Impact Assessment In the previous assessment, the plant was predicted to operate for a maximum of 2000 hours per year (approximately 23% of the time). The update now suggests that the plant is predicted to operate for a maximum of 1250 hours per year (14% of the time). There is no explanation in the report for the proposed reduction in hours of use.

The update re-models predicted nitrogen dioxide (NO2) concentrations in line with the reduced hours of use. No other input changes are made to the modelling.

Based on the updated modelling, increases in nitrogen dioxide are now expected to reach a maximum of 0.53µgm-3 within the Council’s AQMA, compared with 0.85µgm-3 previously.

Under the IAQM/EPUK Guidance, this moves the impact category down from a substantial to a moderate impact.

The assessment still provides no details on the number of properties currently located within the AQMA and potentially affected by notable increases in NO2.





42

Full Planning

Based on the contour plots provided in figure 2.1, I estimate that this is likely to be somewhere in the region of 50 to 60 dwellings.

The report still provides no site appraisal assessment to explain why this site is a preferred site against alternative available sites. This appears to be in contravention of the Air Quality Policy under the NPPF.

Conclusions and Recommendations The updated assessment revises down the impact classification under relevant guidance from substantial to moderate.

Given the number of properties potentially affected by notable increases in NO2, it is my view that the updated proposals are still in contravention of Derby City Council’s Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP).

I do accept however, that the moderate impact relates to the current year. Consequently, the impact of the development would be expected to reduce in future years due to a predicted gradual decline in background NO2.

Based on the information provided and given the site’s proximity to the Council’s AQMA, I would advise that an alternative site for this development is sought, located a greater distance from any of the Council’s AQMAs.

In the absence of a detailed site appraisal, I am therefore still minded to object to the application based on the information before me.

Should the LPA still be minded to grant permission however, then I would strongly recommend that a condition is attached to any consent restricting the hours of operation of the plant to the suggested 1250 hours per year.

I have no further comments to make at this time.

Comments - 27 August 2015 I refer to my earlier comments of 4th June and 10th June 2015 respectively, regarding the above application, which should be read in conjunction with this document.

Further to those comments, I note the submission of a third revision of the Air Quality Impact Assessment (Amec Foster Wheeler Ltd, June 2015, Final Report Revision Ref 15228i2) and additional discussions with the applicant. I can comment on the report and discussions below.

Air Quality Impact Assessment As before, the report considers predicted increases in nitrous oxides (as NO2) and Carbon Monoxide (CO) and has screened out particulates. The assessment confirms that the plant is now predicted to operate for around 5 hours per day and a maximum of 1250 hours per year (approximately 14% of the year).

The report is now based around the use of a maximum of 10 generators (as opposed to the 12 units previously proposed), each exhausting via individual flues in one of two stacks of 8m height, with each stack containing five flues with a common windshield.





43

Full Planning

I would accept that the assessment is robust, based on acceptance of the assumptions in the report.

Based on the modelling, increases in nitrogen dioxide are expected to reach a maximum of 0.23µgm-3 based on the three receptor locations chosen along Osmaston Park Road. This is within the Council’s Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) and relates to properties that already experience NO2 levels in excess of the national air quality objective (AQO) of 40µgm-3.

Relevant guidance (namely IAQM, 2015) categorises this maximum increase as a ‘moderate’ impact, with most properties within this location affected by ‘negligible’ impacts.

As previously, increases in NO2 levels from the facility along Victory Road are expected to be greater, however the air quality objectives are expected to be met comfortably in this location and so the overall impact here is again considered to be ‘negligible’.

Increases in carbon monoxide are expected to be ‘negligible’.

There appears to be discrepancies with the information described in the AQ assessment and the details within the Design and Access Statement provided for the application. For example, the AQ assessment suggests that the plant will operate for a maximum of 1250 hours per year, however the updated Design and Access Statement suggests that the plant “will run on average for 1250 hours a year”.

Although there is disparity between the engine manufacturers/models described in the D&A Statement compared with the AQ Assessment, following discussions with the developer I understand that the proposed model is the Cummings, as stated in the assessment.

Conclusions and Recommendations Based on guidance produced by Environmental Protection UK (EPUK) and the Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM), the revised engine configuration proposed at the development would be classed as having a moderate impact on local air quality for a limited number of properties, with the majority of receptors within the AQMA experiencing a negligible impact.

It is important to note that these conclusions are based on the assumption that the plant operates strictly within the confines as described within the AQ Report (i.e. no more than 10 generators with the associated flues/stacks of the specification described, operating for a maximum of 1250 hours a year).

Following further discussions with the applicant, I am aware that there is some uncertainty regarding the potential future operating hours of the plant, with the potential of additional operations being required during the high-demand winter months. Consequently, the assessment is not considered to represent a worst-case scenario.

Clearly any increase in operating hours above the report’s stated maximum 1250 hours will result in an increase in NO2 emissions above and beyond those described





44

Full Planning

within the report and a resultant increase in the predicted air quality impacts from the development.

I would state that I still have concerns regarding this application on air quality grounds, however if the LPA are still minded to grant permission, I would strongly recommend that the limitations described in the report are agreed and subsequently made a requirement of any permission via an appropriate planning condition. These are as follows:

A maximum of 10 Cummins QSK60 engines permitted on site (or other generators to be agreed with the LPA);

The flue/stack design and specification shall be as detailed within AQ Assessment and drawing 227/006;

Maximum operating hours restricted to 1250 hours per year.

In the absence of the above restrictions, I would have significant concerns regarding the suitability of the development in this location on air quality grounds. In particular, any increases in operating hours over and above the stated 1250 hours per annum could in my view cause the proposals to be in breach of relevant national planning policy on air quality, including Local Plan Policy GD5.

Consequently, if the applicant is unable to demonstrate confidently that the plant will operate within the confines detailed above, then I would recommend that planning permission be refused in the hope that a more suitable location for the development can be found, away from the Council’s AQMAs.

Network Rail: No in principle objection to the development but have asked that the applicant contact them regarding detailed design.

Health and Safety Executive: Consultation not required as the application site is outside of the designated zone.


GD4 Design and the Urban Environment GD5 Amenity EP11 Development in Existing Business and Industrial Areas E12 Pollution E23 Design T4 Access, Car Parking and Servicing









45

Full Planning

7. Officer Opinion:

Key Issues:

Visual Amenity

Noise

Air Quality

Visual Amenity The location of the proposed plant is embedded within an existing industrial estate and therefore is an acceptable commercial operation in terms of siting, design and location. There are no views to this area of the site from the public domain. The site is located away from existing residential units and therefore there are no concerns with impacts on residential amenity in terms of scale or massing. Furthermore the street scene is not duly impacted upon as a result of the proposal.

Noise The initial environmental health comments requested the submission of an acoustic assessment; this was duly submitted along with an amended site plan identifying the increased height of the acoustic fence to a height of 4 metres. In other locations this height of fencing would be considered inappropriate however given the nature of the site and its commercial neighbours to the rear I see no reason to resist such an amendment. Furthermore the fence is considered necessary to mitigate noise arising from the development.

Air Quality The application site is located within a zone of influence upon the Council’s Outer Ring Road Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) (junction of Osmaston Park Road and Victory Road). Dwellings within the AQMA already experience poor air quality, with associated exceedances of both EU and National limits for NO2. Any development producing significant contributions of NO2 within the AQMA is likely to inhibit attempts to reduce NO2 towards compliance with EU/National limits and also hinders successful implementation of the Council’s Air Quality Action Plan (AQAP).

The submitted Air Quality Assessment is considered to be robust but does not portray a worst case scenario. The report has been revised throughout the application process providing details of the 10 generators as opposed to the 12 originally proposed as part of the application. As detailed within the Environmental Health comments set out above, there is clearly a concern with regards to impacts on Air Quality; when considering the guidance produced by Environmental Protection UK (EPUK) and the Institute of Air Quality Management (IAQM) it is felt there would be a moderate impact on local air quality for a limited number of properties, with the majority of receptors within the AQMA experiencing a negligible impact as a result of the development. These conclusions are based on the submitted report which confirms the use of no more than 10 generators operating for a maximum of 1250 hours a year.

The concerns relating to air quality have been discussed, at length with the applicant, and they have made subsequent amendment to try and mitigate these impacts; a





46

Full Planning

reduction from 12 generators to 10 generators and increasing the height of the exhaust stacks and reducing the number of overall exhaust stacks.

If the plant operates for more than 1250 hours over a year then this will result in an increase in NO2 emissions above and beyond those described within the report and a resultant increase in the predicted air quality impacts from the development. Therefore the impacts on the AQMA and local properties will be increased above the moderate and negligible impacts described within their submitted report.

During the life of the application the above concerns have been expressed to the applicant and amendments have been submitted where practically possible. However there remains a concern that increased use above the specified hours would have an impact on air quality.

In order to control impacts on air quality a condition has been recommended stating “The operational hours of the power plant shall be restricted to a maximum of 1250 hours per annum.” Whilst such a condition would usually suffice to control hours of operation the applicant has suggested that should National Grid require additional power from this development then they would continue usage even if this results in a breach of the specified condition.

There are not any other legislative regimes to control excessive emissions of nitrogen dioxide (NO2) under the circumstances described here, other than through a relevant planning condition or an environmental permit. Neither is there any legislation which creates an offence for emitting excess NO2 (other than via breach of a condition or a permit). We believe that an environmental permit is not required in this instance. The applicant has also confirmed this “

The generation compound will not require an Environmental Permit until the introduction of the medium combustion plant. The engines are turbo charged spark ignition engines with a quoted thermal input of 3,412 kW (manufacturers data), so with ten engines the total thermal input is 34MWth below the requirement for a part A(1) permit and as spark ignition engines they do not fall under Part B.”

When recommending conditions, all conditions must meet the six tests set out in the Use of Planning Conditions as set out in the National Planning Practice Guidance. The tests are as follows: 1. Necessary;

2. Relevant to planning and:

3. To the development to be permitted:

4. Enforceable;

5. Precise and;

6. Reasonable in all other aspects.

We are confident that the proposed condition would meet the tests relevant to being necessary, relevant, associated to the proposed development, precise and





47

Full Planning

reasonable. However, we are of the opinion that the condition would not be enforceable. Guidance states:

“Enforceable – Would it be practically possible to enforce the condition? Unenforceable conditions include those for which it would, in practice, be impossible to detect a contravention or remedy any breach of the condition, or those concerned with matters over which the applicant has no control.”

Whilst we can request, by way of a condition, the submission of a monthly, quarterly or annual monitoring statement which would specifically detail the hours of operation for that period and the NO2 outputs from the development there is, in my opinion, little if anything that can be done to remedy a breach. Furthermore potentially we would not be in a position to know the condition had been breached for a period of time. In addition the above would rely on the operator being open and honest. The further concern would be if the power plant used all of the operating hours before the year is out. The question would be who would take priority National Grid’s demand or the breach of a planning condition?

The applicant has previously indicated that they would have to run the facility if National Grid required, despite the hours set out within the condition. Therefore there are matters which are out of the applicant’s remit that cannot be controlled.

Therefore the only conclusion to be made is that the proposed condition is not enforceable and therefore fails the test and the condition cannot, in my opinion, be imposed.

The National Planning Practice Guidance for Air Quality provides guidance on “How do considerations about air quality fir into the development management process?” This guidance is set out in a flow chart format suggesting the course of action if concerns are raised about air quality. I am confident that the consideration of this application has followed this guidance and as we cannot make any further amendments or satisfactorily control the proposal by way of condition then the application should be considered for refusal.

Summary The application has not attracted any objections from third parties and those representations made by consultees are set out above in Section 5 of this report. The comments provided by the Environmental Health Officer have been duly considered and amendments sought through negotiations with the applicant. However on balance and taking all material matters into consideration it is felt that the proposal without a condition restricting hours of use the development would introduce levels of NO2 in an area where NO2 levels already exceed national and European targets. Therefore as there is not a suitable condition, that meets the tests, then the proposal is unacceptable.

The recommendation has taken into consideration the wider benefits of the proposal, its technology and low carbon emissions but, on balance, feel that this location, given the proximity of the AQMA and existing background NO2 levels, is unacceptable.





48

Full Planning


To refuse planning permission

Reasons: 1. In the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, the siting of the proposed power

plant compound in this location would introduce significant Nitrogen Dioxide emissions into a designated ‘Air Quality Management Area’ (the junction of Victory Road and Osmaston Park Road) which has existing high levels of Nitrogen Dioxide and, as a result, the proposal would exacerbate poor air quality in the local area to the detriment of the health and general environmental amenity of nearby residents. The development would also inhibit the Council’s ability to meet EU and National air quality targets. Whilst the stated intention of the applicant is that use of the proposed plant would be limited to times of high electricity demand and, accordingly, usage of the plant would be limited to reduce emissions, the Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that emissions from the proposed plant can be effectively controlled and enforced by planning condition, particularly given the practical difficulties of detecting a potential breach of emission levels, of subsequently remedying such a breach and as consumer demand for electricity is a factor beyond the control of the applicant. For these reasons the proposal is, therefore, contrary to saved policies GD5 and E13 of the adopted City of Derby Local Plan Review and the over-arching guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework and the National Planning Practice Guidance.

S106 requirements where appropriate: No requirement for a Section 106 Agreement.

Application timescale: The target date for determination of this application has lapsed, 5 June 2015 and the application is brought before committee due to the sensitive nature of the proposal.





49

Full Planning

63

57

26

45

17

221

24

211

31

33

53

10

58

13

Sinfin

1

41

21

68

AR

16

Centre

33

Test

67

34

18

15

21

54

46

2

241

37

20

43

44

37

52

231

58

Centre

Community

45

Enterprise

33

Driving

Centre

26

55

Tanks

Tks

Weir

49.7m

Light Twr

47.2m

Pond

Cuttle Brook

MP 1.75

KINGSLEY STREET

SH

ER

IDA

N S

TR

EET

CARLY

LEST

REE

T

49.7m

Chy

46.6m

49.7m

49.4m

Signal

Gantry

ESS

Tank

1

72

13

Warehouse

Gas

11

Sinfin Central Station7

79

10

Works

74

19

6

Sinfin

15

(Disused)

23

El Sub Sta

135

9

12

2

116

Patten Court

97

42

49

3

Sta

60

129

44

101

5

73

94

9

1

37

21

Cope Court

5

32

34

15

73

3

23

57

144

Club

38

33

63

39a

El Sub Sta

5

El Sub Sta

El Sub Sta

4

1b

1c

86

48

63

Works

Garage

207

El

5

Works

Works

1

1

115

24

59

17

59

63

ElTr a

ns

Sta

47

8

60

Works

58

84

Housing

Shelter

65

El Sub Sta

Betjeman

Pavilion

Factory

Pavilion

Works

121

100

North

Sub Sta

46

El Sub Sta

Station

Governor

22

Works

2

1

4

61

Works

Fire Station

28

17

2

(Disused)

The

35

71

7

47

51

29

82

15

18

39

2

Office

44

44

House

32

25

1

12

56

46

65

Sub

Shelter

106

1

27

Works

41

14

85

1

126

El Sub Sta

78

4

Square

59

60

22

8

5

109

70

5

30

24

127

El Sub Sta

Spinney

1

3

Larkin Close

2

10

68

El

51

El Sub Sta

34

1

12

41

McG

oug

h M

ews

43

8

13

25

Works

16

27

77

56

5355

9

7

10

16

1a

9

39

68

23

Coach Depot

55

53

Factory

51a

Works

Works

67

PO

69

75

9

11

Sloping Masonry

Municipal Golf Course

Allotment Gardens

Car Park

Bro

ok

MP 131

MP

130.5m

Tre

es

VICTO

RY ROAD

Drain

THACKERAY STREET

Drain

SHAKESPEARE

Drain

PEAK DRIVE

Light Towers

Tank

Tank

Tank

46.7m

45.1m

45.4m

48.4m

WILM

OREROAD

Subway

Posts

Posts

Tank

Tanks

LB

46.1m

47.8m

45.1m

50.5m

55.7

m

47.5m

47.2m

51.2m

Trees

Sports Ground

Allotment Gardens

Playground

SM

Allotment Gardens

Trees

Trees

(Works)

Sports Ground

Drain

Cuttle

Bro

ok

Drain

Slop

ing

Mas

onry

WB

Trees

Trees

WB

Cu

ttle

SL

War

d Bdy

CR

VICTO

RY PARK

WAY

WILM

ORE R

OAD

AV

EN

UE

SHELLEY DRIVE

CA

RLY

LEST

REE

T

MP

130.25

MACAU

LAY

STREE

T

CO

WP

ER

STR

EET

STREET

WILMORE ROAD

PEAK DRIVE

ASHTREE AVENUE

Path

SIN

FIN

LA

NE

Tanks

LB

Tanks

FSs

Tank

Chimneys

FB

FB

Chy

FB

LB

TCB

TCB

Tank

Tank

Tank

Tanks

TCBs

TCB

Tanks

Tanks

45.7m

49.2m

44.0m

46.2m

EL M

TR

EE

47.8m

47.5m

WO

RD

SW

OR

TH

DR

IVE

TRAFALGAR PARK WAY

44.5m

55.8m

46.3m

Tanks

Tanks

Tank

43.4m

44.9m

53.3m53.3m



Committee Report Item No: 4 Type:

Application No: DER/01/15/00118


50

Reserved Matters - appearance, scale

and landscaping


Address: Land located to the side of 25 Fairbourne Drive, Mickleover.

Ward: Mickleover

Proposal:

Erection of a detached dwelling house - approval of reserved matters of layout, appearance, landscaping and scale under outline permission – DER/03/12/00268

Further Details:

Web-link to application: https://eplanning.derby.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=details&keyVal=_DERBY_DCAPR_97717

The application seeks permission for reserved matters for the erection of a detached dwelling. Approval is sought for layout, scale, external appearance and landscaping on an infil plot of land located on the northern side of Fairbourne Drive, adjacent to No. 25 Fairbourne Drive, which is a detached dwelling.

The application site in question comprises approximately 0.0707 hectare plot and has an irregular shape with a width of approximately 21 metres at the widest point, and a depth of approximately 49 metres. The site does not contain any buildings, however does contain a section of brick wall approximately 10 metres from the highway running parallel with Fairbourne Drive. The site consists of a grassed area with 4 young fir trees of varying heights in the north west of the site, and a Cherry tree to the front of the site, in the position of the proposed access to the site. Land levels across the site vary by approximately 2 metres. The site is bound by 1.5 – 1.8 metre fencing along the western, northern and eastern boundaries; with a dense mature group of trees extending along the eastern boundary, which overhang the site and are protected by a Woodland Tree Preservation Order, covering trees around Whistlestop Close.

Residential properties lie to the north east, west and south on Fairbourne Drive and Whistlestop Close and comprise primarily detached dwellings, with modest curtilages. The application site was formally the side garden area of no. 25 Fairbourne Drive, and the site now shares a boundary with this property. The properties surrounding the site on Fairbourne Drive have a fairly uniform appearance where two storey detached properties of a similar age and design line the street scene.

The proposed development is for the erection of a detached dwelling with four bedrooms and an integral double garage. The dwelling would be a two-storey dwelling, of a traditional design with a hipped roof, two storey bay on the front elevation with timber gable features and two chimney stacks. The dwelling would have an L- shaped footprint and be positioned in the centre of the site, alongside the adjacent dwelling at No.25. To the front elevation of the building the double garage is attached, with provision of a parking and turning area to the front of the dwelling.







51


and landscaping

The proposal would also involve the removal of the five trees within the site. The protected trees along the eastern boundary are to be retained and safeguarded alongside the development. The application is accompanied by an Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report & Method Statement.

The vehicular access to the site is as approved under the outline permission and is to be located in the south east corner of the plot served off Fairbourne Drive.


DER/03/12/00268 – Outline for erection of a dwelling (with means of access and layout) - Granted – 29/05/2012 https://eplanning.derby.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=details&keyVal=_DERBY_DCAPR_92779

DER/09/08/01287– Outline for Residential development (one dwelling house) - Granted - 12/01/2009. https://eplanning.derby.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=details&keyVal=_DERBY_DCAPR_86777

3. Publicity:

Neighbour Notification Letter – 15

Site Notice – Yes


4. Representations:

In total 9 letters were received and of those 7 letters of objection have been received including objections from Councillor Alison Holmes and Councillor Keith. The concerns and objections raised by residents are summarised below:

The proposed development should blend in with existing properties and landscapes.

The proposal should allow easy access to maintain (neighbouring) property.

How will the property be connected to existing foul and surface water drainage system?

Connecting the dwelling to the mains sewer system would mean a lot of ground works and issues in relation of the adjacent protected trees.

There needs be clarification of the proposed site entrance/driveway in relation to the adjacent neighbour

There will be difficulty accessing the proposed application site during the proposed construction phrase.

The proposed property would be too big for the proposed application site and will look at odds with the local surrounding









52


and landscaping

The proposed property would affect the existing trees which are covered by protected order and the affect the habitat wildlife

The agent hasn’t specified the type of trees to be removed

The proposed development contradicts the recommended footprint –which is 3 times bigger than the existing dwellings fronting Fairbourne Drive.

The proposed development is not sympathetic to the local setting

The developer is capitalising on the proposed plot space

The proposed property will impact on the existing root protection area/trees covered by a protection order

The proposed access will impact on the protected trees

The proposed finish (rendering) of the proposed dwelling would appear to contradict the existing dwelling fronting Fairbourne Drive

Why are applications made to fell/kill tress which are covered by TPOs

The development is much too close to a line of trees which are protected. We have already lost too many trees and resultant wildlife. Before the Whistlestop Close development took place. Now they are already depleted and will be more so if there is further building, so the statement that wildlife will not be affected is inaccurate.

Councillor Holmes and Councillor Keith’s highlight:

The existing woodland appears to be targeted for development use

The proposed building works will encroach on the existing TPOs

The proposed property will be too big in comparison to the local setting

The agent doesn’t specify the existing trees to be removed

The proposed construction works will impact on the existing trees

Any proposed works to the existing woodland and the trees covered by a tree preservation order will impact on the amenity of the area

5. Consultations:

Highways DC: The Arboriculturist has confirmed that he misinterpreted the position of the proposed driveway in his original Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report (ref. 25 Fairbourne Drive / 001) and confirmed that the proposed driveway is situated outside the RPA of the retained ash tree at the front of the site and has therefore confirmed that a no dig construction is not required for the driveway.

The revised Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report & Method Statement (ref. 25 Fairbourne Drive / 002) identifies this in more detail





53


and landscaping

Recommendation: Should planning permission be granted, I would recommend that conditions are attached to secure hard surfacing, surface water drainage and dropped vehicular crossings.

Natural Environment (Tree Officer): As long as the advice given / recommendations made in the ‘Arboricultural Impact Assessment and Method Statement’ and the ‘Arboricultural Survey and Protection Plan’ are followed, no further comment to make other than the usual standard conditions to ensure tree protection measures, such as protective fencing is in place before and during construction works and, where necessary, no dig solutions are implemented in the root protection area of trees to be retained.


GD5 H13 GD2 E9 E23 GD4 E17

Amenity Residential Development – General Criteria Protection of the Environment Trees Design Design and the Urban Environment Landscaping schemes

T4 Access and servicing




7. Officer Opinion:

In this case the following issues are considered to be the main material considerations which are dealt with in detail in this section:

Layout

Appearance and design

Scale

Landscaping

Layout The layout of the development was approved under the outline permission, although it has been amended under the current reserved matters scheme. The agent has therefore agreed to layout being considered under this application, along with the other outstanding matters of scale, appearance and landscaping. The means of access to the site has already been agreed under outline and is unchanged under the current proposal.






54


and landscaping

The proposed dwelling is to be sited within an established residential setting, which is characterised by modern detached two storey dwellings, some of which have detached double garages. The site is a relatively wide plot compared to others in the immediate locality. It is also located on the end of a row of continuous detached properties, which are on a similar alignment fronting Fairbourne Drive. The proposed footprint of the dwelling would be roughly in line with the adjacent dwelling at No.25 and sited a distance of about 10 metres from the Fairbourne Drive frontage. The development would have a larger footprint than the existing dwellings in the street, although in this location, it would not appear out of place or excessively large. On the end of the row of properties, the dwelling would form a book end to the group in the streetscene and the built form would be partially screened from the eastern side by the mature belt of trees, which are alongside the development site. These trees would contribute to the landscaped setting of the scheme and soften its visual impact on the streetscene. The secluded character of the site and the proposed layout would result in the impact on the visual amenities of the surrounding area being fairly limited.

There is a satisfactory level of private amenity space to be provided within the development, to ensure that a good quality living environment is formed for the occupants of the dwelling.

The proposed layout of the development is therefore considered to be in keeping with the general character and pattern of residential development in the surrounding area.

Appearance and Design In terms of appearance of the proposed dwelling, the design would be a two-storey traditional style dwelling. It would reflect the style of existing house types in Fairbourne Drive and take reference from the elevational treatment of these properties. Whilst the proposed dwelling would be larger than the neighbouring properties in the street, it would in my opinion sit comfortably on this end plot and complement the residential character of the local area. This area of Fairbourne Drive contains a range of architectural styles and with this in mind, the proposed detailing and materials to be used in the new dwelling would contribute positively to the appearance of the street scape in this location.

The proposed design and appearance is considered to be acceptable in this street context on the basis that it would fit in successfully with the character of the local streetscene.

Scale The proposed dwelling is substantial in scale and massing, when compared with the other nearby properties in Fairbourne Drive. It has a larger footprint and is greater in overall size than the existing dwellings, however considering the scale and proportion (even though slightly bigger) of the proposed dwelling, it would sit comfortably into the street scene, due to its position on the end of the established group of properties and the width of the plot. The proposal would not be any greater in height than the neighbouring properties and would not be an overdominant feature in the street frontage.





55


and landscaping

The scale and proportions of the dwelling would not result in a significant loss of privacy or amenity for the neighbouring residents on Fairbourne Drive and Whistlestop Close. The main impact of the development would be on the adjacent property at No. 25, which lies alongside the proposal. The side flank section would have some degree of massing effect on this property, since it is located close to the side boundary and projects to the rear, beyond the rear elevation of No.25. However, there would not be an undue loss of daylight or overbearing impact on the living conditions of the occupants. No. 25 also has a detached garage in the front garden along the shared boundary with the site, which provides some screening from the development. Other dwellings to the east on Whistlestop Close and south on Fairbourne Drive, would be screened by the woodland belt of trees along the boundary of the site and those on Whistlestop Close are also at a lower ground level than the development site. These properties are sufficiently distant from the proposal and safeguarded by the topography of the locality to ensure that there would be not an unreasonable impact on their amenities, arising from the development.

Landscaping The landscaping scheme for the development would involve the planting of replacement trees to mitigate for the loss of trees on the site, in addition to the normal ornamental planting and hard landscaping within the plot. The landscaping proposals shown the retention of the woodland belt of trees along the eastern boundary of the site and the submitted Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report and Method Statement includes a protection plan and recommended pruning works to some of the trees, which are covered by the TPO. The group of trees which lie alongside the development would frame the scheme and complement the existing landscape. The Tree Officer considers that the proposed protection proposals for the retained trees is deemed as acceptable subject to tree protection conditions being imposed. The protected trees would not be adversely affected by the development, subject to compliance with an agreed tree protection scheme.

Conculsion Overall, I am satisfied that the landscape planting proposals would enhance the setting of the development and make a positive contribution to the urban environment in line with Policies E9 and E17. The proposed design, layout and scale of the residential development would be in keeping with the character and appearance of the surrounding residential area and not undermine the residential amenities of nearby properties in the locality in accordance with the relevant Local Plan Policies H13, GD4, GD5, E17 and E23.


To grant planning permission with conditions.

Summary of reasons: It is my opinion that the proposed development will have no significant streetscene implications. The proposal has been sympathetically designed to fit in with the surrounding context of the neighbouring detached properties. It is considered the proposal will have no amenity impact to neighbouring properties. There would also not be an adverse effect on important trees around the development site.





56


and landscaping

Conditions: 1. Standard condition 100 (approved plans)

2. The driveway to be surfaced in a hard bound material (not loose gravel) for the full length of the driveway, behind the highway boundary. The surfaced driveway shall then be maintained in such hard bound material for the life of the development.

3. The driveway to be constructed with provision to prevent the discharge of surface water on to the public. The provision to prevent the discharge of surface water to the public highway shall then be retained for the life of the development.

4. A dropped vehicular footway crossing to be made available for use and constructed in accordance with the Highway Authority specification to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

5. Tree protection of retained trees and vegetation to be carried out in strict accordance with BS5837:2012 and the submitted’ Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report and Method Statement – Date: December 2014 and submitted details of tree protection and date of implementation.

6. Standard condition 27 (external materials)

7. Standard condition 22 (landscaping maintenance)

8. Standard condition 19 (boundary treatment)

Reasons: 1. Standard reason – E04 (for avoidance of doubt)

2. Standard reason – E19 (in the interest of highways safety of T4)

3. Standard reason - E19 (in the interest of highways safety of T4)

4. Standard reason – E19 (in the interest of highways safety of T4)

5. Standard reason – E14 (interest of visual amenity and benefit of wildlife of GD2, GD4 and E17)

6. Standard reason E04 (in the interest of visual amenities of E23, GD4 and H13)

7. Standard reason E10 – ( in the interests of visual amenity)

8. Standard reason E14 (in interests of external appearance and visual amenity)

Informative Notes: Access to the driveway will require a domestic vehicular crossing constructed. This will need to be constructed under Section 184 of the Highways Act 1980. It requires the formation of an access and footway to the highway, which is land subject to the provisions of the Highway Act 1980 (as amended) over which you have no control. Please contact Street Pride on 0333 2006981 or [email protected] for details of how this work can be undertaken.





57


and landscaping

Application timescale: The target date for determination of the application expired on 30 March 2015 and is brought to committee at the request of Councillor Holmes.





58


and landscaping

62

36

42

9

Und

Co C

onst Bdy

Def

32

19

52

Und

15

50

19

108

17

1.2

2m

RH

Boro C

onst & U

A Bdy

RH

Def

11a

1

11a

112

28

37

123

53

131

131

a

94

76

35

2

11

83

11

14

120

47

71

126

73

2

53

133

43

89

55

32

17

1

85

38

4

80

43

16

13

10

30

1243

16

Pavilion

Royal British Legion

96

21

21a

15

128

5

23

18

13

29

64

132 1

7 27

54

51

209

98

9

76

22

15

56a

1

72

81

28

1

88

59

211

2

4

11

5

Sub

98

16

21

54

9

10

56

1.2

2m

55

63

87

130

Games Court

24

1

MICKLEOVER

20

ROAD

69

LB

FF

ADWICK CLOSE

WEST DRIVE

WEST DRIVE

AP

PLETR

EE W

ALK

TC

B

99.1m

Sta

TAPLOW CLOSE

FENTON

1.2

2m

El

Bowling Green

RH

BARNWOOD CLOSE

35

15

1

24

31

10

19

73

31

9

11

1

12

60 to 88

21

7

45

224

Mew

s C

ou

rt

11

10

23

12

6

43

28

13

67

2

4

21

6

9

2

(PH)

278

44

11

6

22

25

4a

12

25

13

15

32

14

7

19

3

El Sub Sta

5

7

67

1

to

42

2

6

1

1

8

1

33

4

26

16

8

28

41

The

15

82

254

15

2

278b

Station M

asters H

ouse

21

205

50

24

189

9

35

13

28

6

39

13

El S

ub S

ta

38

29

1

6

1219

24

Great Northern

29

11

2

25

2

254b

2

24

21

23

31

2

59

26

39

6

7

10

142

21

80a

25

15

9

185

185

a

52

60

10

6

2

4

24

66

64

21

2

1

38

21

198

7

12

174

19

17

1

1

30

1

8

4

11

19

1

14

19

1

4

135

2

23

2

26

23

1

2

29

2

2

11

13

5

10

13

31

2

10

14

83

Gas Gov

2

1

5

1

23

145

15

33

1

79

6

137

9

186

23

67

22

26

8

14

94

6

17

2

137

11

15

PH

90

5

8

1

1

78

69

28

70

9

17

1

11

47

13

13

1

13

125

25

1

2

26

10

150

1

1

37

2

18

2

158

12

11

2

15

14

2

156

36

162

151

33

203

3

19

11

10

17

1

5

22

14

1

17

22

18

3

82

159

Primary School

9

13

25

12

1

11

10

2

28

173

12

181

14

84

195

16

18

12

18

35

55

15

25

21

64

18

16

84

35

25

Hackwood Farm

39

2

Gas Gov

76

9

3

10

1

1

11

10

11

11

2

11

1

12

21

2

26

34

29

2

36 to 58

2

59

Sta

2

29

2

2

1b

22

1a

El Sub Sta

7

28

1

2

12

11

22

31

10

53

9

2

268

1

1a

106

8

2

3

34

10

1

Sub Sta

4

2

1

55

12

18

286

1

12

Shelter

4

30

3

10

94

13

2

2

38

14

20

22

7

28a

Station Masters Annexe

10

211

11

82

2

3

2

51

26

22

21

4

15

24

18

1b

5

10

27

21

5

1

39

17

3

61

2

16

1

9

16

50a

11

1

1

24

14

169a

38

17

73

162

12

71

20

177

51

37

21

30

31

212

50

4

27

2b

33

3

43

15

24

156

1a

14

29

31

101

2

12

9

2

16

77

27

1

13

2

1

36

169

55

4

31

7

1

30

12

15

134

1

2

8

20

92

33

113

2

15

52

12

10

160

16

1

1

38

23

6

1

2

1

2

2

19El Sub Sta

4

205

2

13

1

27

43

53

17

Silverhill

9

Surgery

166

168

1

16

176

1

11a

1

9

41

12

6

23

30

19

11

14

62

42

20

20

19

25

El Sub

5

1

83

5

15

8

5

59

213

240

25

30

28

0

857

El

3

48

8

13a

25

62

2a

27

23

20

17

77

El

Tree

31

53

Sub Sta

4

1a

Pond

Well

53

Pond

Pond

48

19

15

3a

53a

2

2a

1

8

7

11

2

14

2

175

2

15

5

80

4

14

28

2

20

40

22

63

35

16

19

1

153

173a

11

21

16

1

2

1

Boro C

onst & U

A Bdy

1.22m RH

86

1.2

2m

RH

40

1.2

2m

FF

2

Bo

ro C

onst &

UA

Bd

y

Co Const

Bdy

MP .5

Co C

onst B

dy

9

Dismantle

d Railw

ay

8

16

9

2

30

16 157

147

29

8

34

22

18

161 to 167

187

El Sub Sta

7

5

2

MILT

ON

CLO

SE

MILL LANE

UPCHURCH CLO

SE

CLOSE

ASH

TO

N C

LOSE

LANGFORD ROAD

KINGSMUIR ROAD

10

STARFLOW

ER WAY

MALVERN CLOSE

INGLEW

OOD AVEN

UE

DR

YSD

ALE

RO

AD

66

CLO

SE

LAD

YB

AN

K R

OA

D

SWAYFIELD

CLOSE

CAMELLIA CLOSE

15

HOYLAKE

NA

PIER

CLO

SE

TH

OR

PE D

RIV

E

CLOSE

ROM

SLEY CLOSE

SP

INN

EY

BR

OO

K W

AY

CH

ILSO

N

COURT

MIL

L CR

OFT

DRIVE

18

LO

XTO

N C

OU

RT

LING

FIELD

RIS

E

SANDOWN AVENUE

BO

NS

ALL

DR

IVE

ST

ATI O

N R

OA

D

11

SH

ELF

OR

D C

LOSE

NASEBY CLOSE

RO

TH

WELL

CH

ILSO

N D

RIV

E

BA

NW

ELL C

LOSE

MICKLEROSS CLOSE

21

RO

AD

RANGEMORE

SOUTHGATE

CLOSE

11

WINDSOR COURT

DR

IVE

Posts

CROMFORD DRIVE

BAKEWELL CLOSE

LB

RIG

SBY

CO

URT

DR

AYC

OTT D

RIV

E

18

Ppg

POST

CUTLER WAY


1

TCB

El Sub Sta

Gov

Gas

1

26

98.7m

98.1m

102.7m

96.0m

105.5m

18

Pond

1.2

2m

FF

1.2

2m

RH

1.2

2m

RH

1.2

2m

FF

1.22m FF

HOYLAKE

SEATON

MOORLAND

RO

YD

ON

CLO

SE

CRYSTA

L CLO

SE

CHELMSFORD CLOSE

WHISTLE

STOP CLO

SE

HAILSHAM CLOSE

LAD

YB

AN

K R

OA

D

RO

AD

AD

ELA

IDE

DA

VEN

TRY C

LOSE

CH

ESTN

UT A

VEN

UE

STA

VER

TO

N

DRIVE

Track

LB


El Sub Sta

WEST

OLTO

N R

OA

D

STA

NSTEA

D R

OA

D

DR

IVE

SPINNEYBROOK WAY

MICKLEROSS CLOSE

CLOSE

ONSLOW ROAD

AVE

LEA DRIVE

STARCROSS COURT

BROOMHILL CLOSE

Posts

LB

LB

Aqueduct

102.7m

103.7m

90.8m

92.2m

103.2m

Spring

Pond

FF

FF

Def

Dismantle

d Railw

ay

MARFLEET

B 5

020

CLOSE

BR

AM

PTO

N C

LOSE

EAST AVENUE

WELLA

ND

CLO

SE

BELV

ED

ER

E

HADDON

DENVER ROAD

STA

TIO

N R

OA

D

LAN

TERN G

R

TIVERTON

RU

TL A

ND

DR

I VE

FAIR

BO

URN

E D

RIV

E

WIGMORE CLOSE

WESTH

ALL

RO

AD

SAXONDALE

SPIN

NEYBR

OO

K W

AY

Sta

104.3m104.3m


Application No. Application Type Location Proposal Decision Decision Date

05/14/00724/PRI Full Application - Article 4 19 North Parade, Derby, DE1 3AY Installation of replacement ground floor window to the side elevation

Granted Conditionally 14/07/2015

07/14/00915/PRI Full Planning Permission 9 North Avenue, Darley Abbey, Derby, DE22 1EZ

Demolition of existing bungalow and erection of dwelling house


07/14/00985/PRI Full Planning Permission Site of 10 Waldene Drive and land at side of 56 Field Lane, Alvaston, Derby, DE24 0GQ (access via Field Lane)

Demolition of bungalow and erection of 4 dwelling houses

Refuse Planning Permission

01/07/2015

09/14/01257/PRI Full Planning Permission Land adjacent to 61 Milton Street, Derby

Demolition of outbuildings and erection of 2 flats


09/14/01289/PRI Variation/Waive of condition(s)

Sunny Hill Service Station, Blagreaves Lane, Littleover, Derby, DE23 7PT

Continued use of forecourt area as hand car wash and provision of car parking bays - Variation of condition 2 of previously approved planning permission DER/03/10/00252 to amend opening hours to 0900-1800 on Saturdays and 1000 to 1800 on Sundays and bank/public holidays.


11/14/01540/PRI Full Planning Permission 2 Bedford Street, Derby, DE22 3PB (Bedford Arms)

Installation of external fire escape together with associated walkway


11/14/01569/PRI Outline Planning Permission

The Winnatts, Snelsmoor Lane, Chellaston, Derby, DE73 1TQ

Demolition of three outbuildings. Residential development (one dwelling)


16/07/2015

01/15/00011/PRI Full Planning Permission 22 Hillcross Drive, Littleover, Derby, DE23 3BW

Two storey and single storey extensions to dwelling house (porch, family room, kitchen, utility and cloakrooms, 3 bedrooms, 2 en-suites and enlargement of lounge) and erection of detached two storey outbuilding (garage/leisure room and store)


Derby City CouncilDelegated decsions made between 01/07/2015 and 31/07/2015

Data Source: Acolaid DCCORETime Fetched: 8/7/2015 3:10:47 PMReport Name: Delegated DecisionsPage 1 of 15

ENCLOSURE


01/15/00021/PRI Reserved Matters Land at side of 5 Coxon Street, Spondon, Derby, DE21 7JF

Residential development - approval of reserved matters of access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale under outline permission Code no. DER/10/13/01153/PRI


01/15/00088/PRI Listed Building Consent -alterations

107A Uttoxeter New Road, Derby, DE22 3NL

Installation of windows and replacement staircase in offices (Use Class B1(a))


01/15/00119/PRI Full Planning Permission Site of 17 The Hollow, Littleover, Derby, DE23 6GH

Substitution of house type and alterations to the siting of both plots of previously approved planning permission Code No. DER/04/12/00494/PRI


02/15/00138/PRI Full Planning Permission Flat 5, Alkmund Court, Edward Street, Derby, DE1 3BR

Installation of two replacement windows Granted Conditionally 03/07/2015

02/15/00154/PRI Full Planning Permission 3 Anthony Drive, Alvaston, Derby, DE24 0FZ

Formation of rooms in roof space (bedroom and en-suite) to include alterations to the roof design and installation of rear dormer


14/07/2015

02/15/00171/ Advertisement consent Land in front of Castle & Falcon PH, East Street, Derby DE1 2AU

Display of internally illuminated panel sign on reverse of replacement BT Payphone kiosk


02/15/00173/DC5 Advertisement consent Land at The Spot, London Road, Derby DE1 2NQ

Display of internally illuminated panel sign on reverse of replacement BT Payphone kiosk


14/07/2015

02/15/00213/PRI Full Planning Permission 138 Cowsley Road, Derby, DE21 6EH

Two storey side extension to dwelling house (dining room and two bedrooms) and erection of car port


29/07/2015

02/15/00217/PRI Full Planning Permission 8 Padstow Road, Alvaston, Derby, DE24 0LT

Erection of detached garage Granted Conditionally 06/07/2015

02/15/00231/PRI Reserved Matters Site of Patterdale, Old Hall Avenue, Littleover, Derby, DE23

Erection of two detached dwelling houses Granted Conditionally 24/07/2015

02/15/00235/PRI Full Planning Permission Flat 8, Alkmund Court, Edward Street, Derby, DE1 3BR

Installation of two replacement windows Granted Conditionally 03/07/2015


ENCLOSURE



53 Coronation Avenue, Alvaston, Derby, DE24 0LR (Former Ashlea Hostel)

Variation of condition 2 on previously approved planning permission Code No. DER/09/14/01179/DCC - Demolition of existing building and erection of 13 dwelling house and 2 flats, to amend the approved plans


03/15/00303/PRI Full Planning Permission 5 Scarsdale Avenue, Allestree, Derby, DE22 2LA

Single storey rear extension to dwelling (kitchen/dining room/snug), two storey side extension and formation of rooms in the roof space (three bedrooms and bathroom)


03/15/00309/PRI Full Planning Permission Unit 1, Sawley Park, Nottingham Road, Derby, DE21 6AS

Change of use from Storage and distribution (Use Classes B1 & B8) to Showroom (Use Class A1)


03/15/00310/PRI Full Planning Permission 85-89 King Street, Derby, DE1 3EE Extension and alterations to shop/flats to form offices (Use Class B1a) with flat (Use Class C3) above


03/15/00311/PRI Full Planning Permission 149 Ashbourne Road, Derby, DE22 3FW (Waggon & Horses PH)

Change of use from Public House (Use Class A4) to form two apartments as House In Multiple Occupation (Use Class C4), installation of replacement windows and erection of four apartments as House In Multiple Occupation (Use Class C4)


03/15/00314/PRI Reserved Matters 24 Walton Drive, Derby, DE23 7GN Residential development (one dwelling house) - approval of reserved matters of access, layout, scale, appearance and landscaping under Outline code no. DER/09/14/01272/PRI


03/15/00325/PRI Full Planning Permission 49 Church Lane, Darley Abbey, Derby, DE22 1EX

Two storey and single storey side and rear extensions to dwelling house (kitchen. living room, w.c., utility room, bedroom, en-suite and enlargement of bathroom)



ENCLOSURE


03/15/00342/PRI Full Planning Permission 119 Locko Road, Spondon, Derby, DE21 7AP

Demolition of garage and outbuildings, extensions to dwelling (enlargement of kitchen, family room, utility room and w.c) and formation of rooms in roof space (3 bedrooms and shower room), installation of dormers and replacement roof and erection of detached garage and car port)


03/15/00344/PRI Listed Building Consent -alterations

15 Vernon Street, Derby, DE1 1FT General internal refurbishment, repair of existing sash windows, replacement of casement windows, replacement door, demolition of wall to rear of 15 Vernon Street and replacement of guttering


03/15/00348/PRI Full Planning Permission Intu Derby, West Mall, Derby, DE1 2PL

Installation of extractor ductwork system Granted Conditionally 09/07/2015

03/15/00362/PRI Full Planning Permission British Car Auctions Limited, Raynesway, Derby, DE21 7WA

Erection of vehicle preparation building, inspection canopy and viewing canopy



Site of Mackworth College buildings, Prince Charles Avenue, Mackworth, Derby, DE22 4LR

Residential development (up to 221 dwellings) community facilities and access and open space - approval of reserved matters of layout, scale, appearance and landscaping Code No. DER/03/14/00307/PRI -Variation of condition 1, minor changes to layout to improve access arrangements.


03/15/00369/PRI Advertisement consent Chestnut House, 65A Friar Gate, Derby, DE1 1DJ

Display of one non-illuminated totem sign Granted Conditionally 08/07/2015


ENCLOSURE


03/15/00387/PRI Non-material amendment Warehouse, Newmarket Drive, Osmaston Park Industrial Estate, Derby, DE24 8SW

Change of use from storage and distribution (Use Class B8) to cosmetic repair, vehicle workshop and ancillary dry valeting (Use Class B2), formation of an external jet wash valet enclosure and associated drainage, installation of two personnel doors and roof level fume extraction and inlet ductwork - non-material amendment to previously approved permission DER/11/14/01541 to amend the position of wet valet enclosure

Granted 02/07/2015

03/15/00408/PRI Full Planning Permission Bretherns Meeting Hall, 121 Blagreaves Lane, Littleover, Derby

Erection of three dwelling houses Granted Conditionally 22/07/2015

03/15/00410/PRI Advertisement consent Crompton House, Derwent Street, Derby, DE1 2ZG

Display of various signage Granted Conditionally 24/07/2015

03/15/00412/PRI Full Planning Permission 161 Station Road, Mickleover, Derby, DE3 5FL

Single storey front extensions to dwelling house (enlargement of living room and porch) and installation of render to the front elevation


03/15/00419/PRI Full Planning Permission 24 Louvain Road, Derby, DE23 6BZ Two storey side and rear extensions to dwelling house (store, two bedrooms and bathroom) and erection of detached garage


03/15/00434/PRI Full Planning Permission 295 Uttoxeter Road, Mickleover, Derby, DE3 5AF

Two storey and single storey front, rear and side extensions to dwelling house (porch, w.c, utility room, storage and enlargement of kitchen and dining room) and installation of dormer


04/15/00458/PRI Works to Trees under TPO 2 Cutler Way, Mickleover, Derby, DE3 0BT

Cut back side branches by 3-4 metres of Oak tree protected by Tree Preservation Order No. 221


22/07/2015

04/15/00461/PRI Full Planning Permission 320 Abbey Street, Derby, DE22 3SZ

Alterations and conversion of basement to form apartment (use class C3) and erection of retaining wall



ENCLOSURE


04/15/00464/PRI Full Planning Permission 14 Midland Road, Derby, DE1 2SN Installation of replacement windows, doors and shop front


04/15/00467/PRI Full Planning Permission Stratstone Jaguar, Chequers Road, West Meadows Industrial Estate, Derby, DE21 6EN

Extension to motor vehicle dealership Granted Conditionally 29/07/2015

04/15/00475/PRI Full Planning Permission 107A Uttoxeter New Road, Derby, DE22 3NL

Change of use of outbuilding to offices (use class B1(a)) and alterations to the front elevation


04/15/00478/DCC Listed Building Consent -alterations

41 Friar Gate, Derby, DE1 1DA (Pickfords House Museum)

Repairs and strengthening works to timber roof beam


04/15/00488/PRI Full Planning Permission 23 Waveney Close, Allestree, Derby, DE22 2UE

Single storey rear extension to dwelling (kitchen/diner) and single storey rear extension to garage


04/15/00502/PRI Full Planning Permission 32 Marshgreen Close, Alvaston, Derby, DE24 0XF

Two storey side and single storey front extensions to dwelling house (garage/store, enlargement of kitchen, bedroom and en-suite)


04/15/00503/PRI Full Application - disabled People

6 Adelphi Close, Littleover, Derby, DE23 7XJ

Extensions to dwelling house (utility room, w.c., wet room, bedroom and enlargement of kitchen, bedroom and en-suite)


04/15/00516/PRI Full Planning Permission Unit 21, Perkins Yard, Mansfield Road, Derby, DE21 4AW

Change of use from General Industry (Use Class B2) to Assembly and Leisure (Use Class D2)


04/15/00521/PRI Full Planning Permission Vacant garage site, Moyne Gardens Chellaston, Derby

Demolition of eight garages. Erection of five replacement garages and formation of three parking bays and installation of fencing


04/15/00525/PRI Advertisement consent 27 Colyear Street, Derby, DE1 1LA (Former Night Club Building)

Display of two externally illuminated fascia signs


04/15/00529/PRI Full Planning Permission 183 Chellaston Road, Derby, DE24 9EB

Two storey and single storey rear extensions to dwelling house (porch, enlargement of kitchen/bedroom and bathroom) and erection of boundary wall


02/07/2015


ENCLOSURE


04/15/00540/PRI Full Planning Permission Ashleigh House, Ashleigh Drive, Chellaston, Derby, DE73 1RG

Demolition of conservatory and garage. Two storey side extensions to dwelling house (enlargement of kitchen, double garage, games room and balcony)


04/15/00553/PRI Full Planning Permission Appleby Court and Bradbourne Court, Boyer Street, Derby, DE22 3XD

Installation of replacement windows and doors



Unit 2, Ascot Drive, Derby, DE24 8GW

Variation of Condition 6 of previously approved planning permission Code No. DER/01/87/00102/PRI to amend the range of goods that can be sold from the unit to include bathrooms and tiles


04/15/00565/DCC Local Council own development Reg 3

Ravensdale Junior & Infant School, Devonshire Drive, Mickleover, Derby, DE3 9EY



04/15/00568/PRI Full Planning Permission 76 Crayford Road, Alvaston, Derby, DE24 0HP

Two storey side extension to dwelling house (utility, bedroom, bathroom and enlargement of kitchen)


05/15/00577/DCC Full Planning Permission Land fronting no's. 5-19 Hendon Way, Derby, DE22 4BZ

Formation of 6 parking bays and vehicular access - amendments to previously approved permission Code No. DER/11/14/01575


05/15/00583/PRI Advertisement consent Unit 8b, Kingsway Retail Park, Derby, DE22 3FA

Display of three internally illuminated and one non-illuminated fascia signs and one non-illuminated totem sign


05/15/00584/PRI Full Planning Permission 12 Dalesgate Close, Littleover, Derby, DE23 7XL

Single storey front extension to dwelling house (porch) and erection of 1.8m high boundary fence



ENCLOSURE


05/15/00586/PRI Full Planning Permission 101 Chain Lane, Littleover, Derby, DE23 7EA

First floor side extension to dwelling house (enlargement of bedrooms with en-suites)


05/15/00595/PRI Full Planning Permission 3 Palladium Drive, Littleover, Derby, DE23 7XH

Single storey rear and two storey and single storey front extensions to dwelling house (porch, w.c., bedroom, enlargement of lounge, dining room and bedroom)


05/15/00597/PRI Full Planning Permission 8 Huntley Avenue, Spondon, Derby, DE21 7DU

Demolition of conservatory, kitchen and bathroom. Two storey rear extension to dwelling house (kitchen, bathroom and bedroom)


05/15/00601/PRI Works to Trees in a Conservation Area

81 Belper Road, Derby, DE1 3ER Various works to trees within the Strutts Park Conservation Area

Raise No Objection 01/07/2015

05/15/00606/PRI Full Planning Permission 15 Ettrick Drive, Sinfin, Derby, DE24 3EA

Single storey extension to dwelling house (family room)


05/15/00609/PRI Full Planning Permission National Sikh Heritage Centre & Holocaust Museum, Princes Street, Derby, DE23 8NT

Erection of temporary buildings for use as a Free-School (use class D1) for a temporary period of 2 years


05/15/00615/PRI Full Planning Permission 61 Sancroft Road, Spondon, Derby, DE21 7ET

Two storey side and single storey front extensions to dwelling house (hall, store, w.c, utility, enlargement of dining room, bedroom and en-suite)


05/15/00616/PRI Full Planning Permission 1-39 Back Sitwell Street, Derby, DE1 2JN



05/15/00617/PRI Full Planning Permission Land between Stuart Street and Phoenix Street, Derby

Use of land for coach parking for a temporary period of 3 years


05/15/00619/PRI Works to Trees under TPO 46/48 Station Road, Chellaston, Derby, DE73 1SU

Felling of two Leylandii trees protected by Tree Preservation Order No. 422


05/15/00620/PRI Works to Trees under TPO 10 Barleycorn Close, Oakwood, Derby, DE21 2TY

Crown reduction by 4-5 metres of Oak tree protected by Tree Preservation Order No.31


21/07/2015

05/15/00625/PRI Full Planning Permission 1 Robincroft Road, Allestree, Derby, DE22 2FQ

Single storey rear extension to dwelling house (dining room)



ENCLOSURE


05/15/00626/PRI Full Planning Permission 64 Chester Green Road, Derby, DE1 3SF

Installation of replacement windows and re-instatement of the stone mullions to the front elevation


05/15/00629/PRI Full Planning Permission 71 Rykneld Road, Littleover, Derby, DE23 7BH

Single storey front extension to dwelling house and infilling of car port (dining room and enlargement of kitchen)


05/15/00630/PRI Full Planning Permission 5 Shireoaks Close, Littleover, Derby, DE23 7TP

Two storey front and rear extensions to dwelling house and formation of rooms in the roof space (lobby, landing, sitting area, two bedrooms, two bathrooms, and enlargement of kitchen and bedroom)


05/15/00634/PRI Works to Trees under TPO 7 Spinney Close, Darley Abbey, Derby, DE22 1EG

Felling of dead Leylandii trees and crown reduction by 2m and deadwood of Leylandii trees protected by Tree Preservation Order No. 439


05/15/00637/ Full Planning Permission 12 Valley Road, Littleover, Derby, DE23 6HQ

Single storey side and rear extension to dwelling house (kitchen and utility room)


05/15/00639/PRI Full Planning Permission 31 Fairway Crescent, Allestree, Derby, DE22 2PB

Single storey front extension to dwelling house and infilling of store (laundry room and enlargement of kitchen)


05/15/00644/PRI Works to Trees under TPO 17 Keats Avenue, Littleover, Derby, DE23 7EE

Crown reduction of 2 metres of Atlantic Cedar protected by Tree Preservation Order no. 269


05/15/00645/PRI Full Planning Permission 7 Chester Avenue, Allestree, Derby, DE22 2FE

Two storey rear extension to dwelling house (day room, en-suite and enlargement of bedroom)


05/15/00646/PRI Full Planning Permission 14 Durham Avenue, Derby, DE21 6EQ

Two storey rear extension to dwelling house (lounge and bedroom)


05/15/00652/PRI Full Planning Permission 99A Ashbourne Road, Derby, DE22 3FW

Installation of cedar cladding to the front and side elevations


05/15/00654/PRI Full Application - Article 4 3 Cornhill, Allestree, Derby, DE22 2GG

Installation of replacement windows to the front elevation



ENCLOSURE


05/15/00656/PRI Full Planning Permission 52 Crewe Street, Derby, DE23 8QL Two storey and single storey rear extension to dwelling house (bathroom and bedroom) - Amendment to previously approved planning permission Code No. DER/05/14/00623 to enlarge the first floor extension


05/15/00657/PRI Full Planning Permission Pear Tree Community Junior School, Pear Tree Street, Derby, DE23 8PN

Replacement of windows and doors to main school building in two phases.


05/15/00659/PRI Full Planning Permission 5 Queen Street, Derby, DE1 3DL Reconstruction of gable wall Granted Conditionally 02/07/2015

05/15/00662/PRI Advertisement consent Park Farm Shopping Centre, Carsington Crescent, Allestree, Derby, DE22 2QN

Display of 32 sheet billboard Granted Conditionally 28/07/2015

05/15/00663/PRI Certificate of Lawfulness Proposed Use

86 Kedleston Road, Derby, DE22 1FW

Change of use from dwelling house (use class C3) to house in multiple occupation (use class C4)

Granted 21/07/2015

05/15/00669/PRI Works to Trees under TPO 22 Middleton Avenue, Littleover, Derby, DE23 6DL

Crown lift to 4m and cutting back of Ash Tree protected by Tree Preservation Order No. 274


05/15/00670/PRI Works to Trees under TPO 2 Charterhouse Close, Oakwood, Derby, DE21 2AX

Crown lift to 3 metres, crown thin by 10% and removal of deadwood to Hornbeam Tree protected by Tree Preservation Order No. 477



12 Glebe Rise, Littleover, Derby, DE23 6GW

Single storey rear extension to dwelling house (enlargement of kitchen and dining room)

Granted 21/07/2015

05/15/00674/PRI Full Planning Permission 4 Rowley Gardens, Littleover, Derby, DE23 7GF

Two storey side extension to dwelling (dining room and office) and alterations to roof to include enlargement of rear dormer, installation of dormer to the front elevation and the addition of a pitched roof to the current front dormer windows


05/15/00676/PRI Works to Trees under TPO Our Lady Of Lourdes Catholic Church, 36 Uttoxeter Road, Mickleover, Derby, DE3 5GE

Felling of Scots Pine Tree protected by Tree Preservation Order No. 451



ENCLOSURE


05/15/00680/PRI Full Planning Permission 73 Portland Street and 112 Rutland Street, Derby, DE23 8QD

Change of use of 73 Portland Street from retail/residential (Use Classes A1 and C3) to teaching centre (Use Class D1), single storey rear extension to 73 Portland Street and 112 Rutland Street (meeting room) and alterations to elevations


05/15/00681/PRI Full Planning Permission 2 Folly House, Folly Road, Darley Abbey, Derby, DE22 1ED

Single storey rear extension to dwelling house (porch)



20 Weirfield Road, Darley Abbey, Derby, DE22 1DH

Single storey side extension to dwelling house (toilet)

Granted 17/07/2015

05/15/00684/PRI Full Planning Permission 24 Western Road, Mickleover, Derby, DE3 5GN

Single storey side and rear extension to dwelling house (living space, w.c and dining room)


05/15/00685/PRI Prior Approval - Householder

10 Glen Park Close, Chellaston, Derby, DE73 1NT

Single storey rear extension (projecting beyond the rear wall of the original house by 4.1m, maximum height 3.9m, height to eaves 2.9m) to dwelling house

Prior Approval Not required

02/07/2015

05/15/00692/PRI Full Planning Permission 47 St. Chads Road, Derby, DE23 6RQ

Conversion, alterations and single storey rear extension to existing basement to form apartment (Use Class C3) and alterations to the rear and side ground levels including construction of retaining walls


05/15/00702/PRI Works to Trees under TPO 110 Whitaker Road, Derby, DE23 6AP

Felling of two Silver Birch Trees and a Sycamore tree protected by Tree Preservation Order No. 278


05/15/00704/PRI Full Planning Permission 19 Riddings, Allestree, Derby, DE22 2GD

Erection of detacted garage Granted Conditionally 02/07/2015

05/15/00705/PRI Outline Planning Permission

Land at 23 Charnwood Avenue, Littleover, Derby, DE23 7NG

Residential development (detached bungalow) Refuse Planning Permission

21/07/2015

05/15/00710/PRI Advertisement consent Heron Foods, Wiltshire Road, Derby, DE21 6EZ

Display of two externally illuminated fascia signs


05/15/00712/PRI Full Planning Permission St. Giles School, Hampshire Road, Derby, DE21 6BT

Erection of two garages and bin store Granted Conditionally 24/07/2015


ENCLOSURE


05/15/00715/PRI Works to Trees under TPO 100 Chain Lane, Littleover, Derby, DE23 7EB

Felling of 8 Poplar (T3, T4, T5, T11,T12,T13,T14 and T15), Laburnum (T2), Maple (T1) and Cypress Lawson all protected by Tree preservation Order No. 322


28/07/2015

05/15/00716/PRI Works to Trees under TPO 100 Chain Lane, Littleover, Derby, DE23 7EB

Re-pollard poplars T6, T7, T8 and T16 protected by Tree Preservation Order No. 322


06/15/00718/PRI Advertisement consent 13 Derby Road, Chellaston, Derby, DE73 1SA (Co-op pharmacy)

Display of internally illuminated fascia and projecting signs and non-illuminated window vinyl.


06/15/00719/PRI Full Planning Permission Site of 82 Pastures Hill, Littleover, Derby, DE23 7BD

Partial demolition of dwelling house and erection of replacement dwelling house and triple garage.


06/15/00721/PRI Full Planning Permission Premier Inn, Southmead Way, Derby, DE22 3HN

Extension to hotel to provide 20 bedrooms with associated alterations to car parking and landscaping.


06/15/00723/PRI Full Planning Permission Days Inn Hotel, The County Ground, Nottingham Road, Derby, DE21 6DA

Erection of air conditioning compound Granted Conditionally 28/07/2015

06/15/00724/PRI Full Planning Permission 77 Moor Street, Spondon, Derby, DE21 7EB

Single storey front and two storey side extension to dwelling house (porch, kitchen/diner, bedroom, dressing room and en-suite)



32 Queensgate Drive, Chellaston, Derby, DE73 1NW



08/07/2015

06/15/00730/PRI Advertisement consent 432 Kedleston Road, Derby, DE22 2TF

Display of 1 externally illuminated fascia sign and 1 externally illuminated totem sign


06/15/00732/PRI Full Planning Permission 127 Birchover Way, Allestree, Derby, DE22 2DB

Erection of single storey side and rear extension to dwelling (garage, utility, w.c and enlargement of kitchen)


06/15/00740/PRI Full Planning Permission 309 Ladybank Road, Mickleover, Derby, DE3 5TW

Single storey side and rear extension to dwelling house (dining room, utility and w.c)



ENCLOSURE



8 North Street, Littleover, Derby, DE23 6BJ



09/07/2015

06/15/00745/PRI Full Planning Permission 16 Wade Drive, Mickleover, Derby, DE3 5BS

Single storey rear extension to dwelling house (enlargement of kitchen, garden room and w.c)


06/15/00747/PRI Advertisement consent Land at The Spot, St Peters Street, Derby, DE1 1QP

Display of replacement internally illuminated freestanding double sided advertising unit


06/15/00748/PRI Advertisement consent Land opposite 111 Normanton Road, Derby, DE1 2GG

Display of internally illuminated freestanding double sided advertising unit


06/15/00749/PRI Advertisement consent Land in front of 83 St. Peters Street, Derby, DE1 1QP



06/15/00753/PRI Advertisement consent Land in front of 9 Babington Lane, Derby, DE1 1RH

Display of internally illuminated freestanding double sided advertising unit


06/15/00754/PRI Advertisement consent Land in front of 78-80 St Peters Street, Derby, DE21 2NR



06/15/00755/PRI Advertisement consent Land in front of 63 St. Peters Street, Derby



06/15/00758/PRI Full Planning Permission 43 Nunsfield Drive, Alvaston, Derby, DE24 0GH

Single storey rear extension to dwelling house (conservatory)


06/15/00762/PRI Full Planning Permission 18 Gurney Avenue, Sunnyhill, Derby, DE23 7GR

Two storey and single storey side and rear extensions to dwelling house (kitchen/dining room, covered way, bedroom and bathroom) and erection of detached outbuilding (playroom and store)


06/15/00765/PRI Full Planning Permission Unit 2A, East Street, Derby Installation of new shop front Granted Conditionally 27/07/2015

06/15/00766/PRI Advertisement consent Unit 2A, East Street, Derby Display of two non-illuminated fascia signs Granted Conditionally 27/07/2015

06/15/00767/PRI Full Planning Permission 53 Stafford Street, Derby, DE1 1JL Retention of change of use from dwelling house to two flats (use class C3)


06/15/00768/PRI Works to Trees in a Conservation Area

224 Mansfield Road, Derby, DE1 3RB

Felling of Ash tree within the Little Chester Conservation Area

Raise No Objection 21/07/2015


ENCLOSURE


06/15/00774/PRI Full Planning Permission 61 The Hollow, Littleover, Derby, DE23 6GN

Enlargement of vehicular access Granted Conditionally 29/07/2015

06/15/00775/PRI Full Planning Permission 6 Birchwood Avenue, Littleover, Derby, DE23 7PZ

Single storey rear extension to dwelling house (kitchen and dining room)


06/15/00777/PRI Full Planning Permission 2 Broughton Avenue, Derby, DE23 6JA

Single storey rear extension to dwelling house (enlargement of kitchen)


06/15/00784//PRI Prior Approval - Householder

25 Nevinson Avenue, Sunnyhill, Derby, DE23 7GU

Single storey rear extension (projecting beyond the rear wall of the original house by 3.25m, maximum height 3m, height to eaves 3m) to dwelling house


22/07/2015


14 Litton Drive, Spondon, Derby, DE21 7HP



22/07/2015

06/15/00790/PRI Advertisement consent Unit 8, Pinnacle Way, Pride Park, Derby

Display of two internally illuminated signs Granted Conditionally 29/07/2015

06/15/00793/PRI Full Planning Permission Blocks A, B & C Rauche Court, Morleston Street, Derby, DE23 8FJ (flats 1-23 odds)

Alterations to flats to include formation of three entrance lobbies and gangways with metal railings, installation of new doors and windows, pitched roofs and external render


06/15/00795/PRI Full Planning Permission Blocks D, E & F Lambe Court, Morleston Street, Derby, DE23 8FJ (Flats 1-10)

Alterations to flats to include formation of three entrance lobbies and gangways with metal railings, installation of new doors and windows, pitched roofs and external render


06/15/00797/PRI Full Planning Permission 13 Coxon Street, Spondon, Derby, DE21 7JF

Single storey side extension to dwelling house (family space)


06/15/00802/PRI Full Planning Permission 117 Whitaker Road, Derby, DE23 6AQ

First floor side extension to dwelling house (two bedrooms and en-suite) works to tree and felling of tree protected by Tree Preservation Order No. 280

Invalid - Finally Disposed of

02/07/2015


ENCLOSURE



9 Little Woodbury Drive, Littleover, Derby, DE23 7UN

Variation of conditions 1 and 2 of previously approved planning permission Code No. DER/05/14/00608/PRI to allow allow permanent use as dog grooming parlour and for the business to operate additional hours of between 9am and 5pm on Saturdays


06/15/00831/PRI Advertisement consent Filling Station at J Sainsbury Plc, Wyvern Way, Chaddesden, Derby, DE21

Display of one canopy sign, one fascia sign and one totem sign - all to be internally illuminated


06/15/00836/PRI Full Planning Permission Unit 15A Sawley Park, Nottingham Road, Chaddesden, Derby, DE21 6AS

Installation of four additional first floor windows



ENCLOSURE

planning control committee item 7

Documents