Agenda Item No 6
Planning and Development Board
12 June 2005
Planning Applications
Report of the
Assistant Director (Planning and Development)
1
Subject
1.1
Town and Country Planning Act 1990 – applications presented for determination.
2
Purpose of Report
2.1
This report presents for the Board decision, a number of planning, listed building,
advertisement, proposals, together with proposals for the works to, or the felling of
trees covered by a Preservation Order and other miscellaneous items.
2.2
Minerals and Waste applications are determined by the County Council.
Developments by Government Bodies and Statutory Undertakers are also
determined by others. The recommendations in these cases are consultation
responses to those bodies.
2.3
The proposals presented for decision are set out in the index at the front of the
attached report.
2.4
Significant Applications are presented first, followed in succession by General
Development Applications; the Council’s own development proposals; and finally
Minerals and Waste Disposal Applications. .
3
Implications
3.1
Should there be any implications in respect of:
Finance; Crime and Disorder; Sustainability; Human Rights Act; or other relevant
legislation, associated with a particular application then that issue will be covered
either in the body of the report, or if raised at the meeting, in discussion.
4
Site Visits
4.1
Members are encouraged to view sites in advance of the Board Meeting. Most can
be seen from public land. They should however not enter private land. If they would
like to see the plans whilst on site, then they should always contact the Case Officer
who will accompany them. Formal site visits can only be agreed by the Board and
reasons for the request for such a visit need to be given.
4.2
Members are reminded of the “Planning Protocol for Members and Officers dealing
with Planning Matters”, in respect of Site Visits, whether they see a site alone, or as
part of a Board visit.
D:\533579890.doc
5
Availability
5.1
The report is made available to press and public at least five working days before the
meeting is held in accordance with statutory requirements. It is also possible to view
the papers on the Council’s web site www.northwarks.gov.uk
5.2
The next meeting at which planning applications will be considered following this
meeting, is due to be held on Monday, 17 July 2006 at 6.30pm in the Council
Chamber at the Council House.
D:\533579890.doc
Planning Applications – Index
Item
No
Application
No
Page
No
Description
General / Significant
s
PAP/2006/0284
4
Hams Hall National Distribution Park Hams Hall
Birmingham
Outline - Warehousing and Distribution (B8) – Issues
Report
Significant
s
PAP/2006/0137
83
53 South Street Atherstone
Erection of Three Bedroom Detached House
General
s
PAP/2006/0145
97
Land Adjacent to 1 Woodbridge Park Hurley
Revised Dwelling Design
General
s
PAP/2006/0182
116
Land Rear of 29-41 New Road Water Orton
Warwickshire B46 1QP
Demolition of no: 31B New Road and Erection of 31
Residential Units - Comprising 2 x 1 Bed
Apartments, 14 x 2 Bed Apartments, 5 x 2 Bed
Dwellings, 8 x 3 Bed Dwellings and 2 x 4 Bed
Dwellings
General
s
PAP/2006/0221
190
Former Baddesley Ensor Junior School The
Common Baddesley Ensor Atherstone
Partial amendment to design and layout of 5 houses
approved on the Former Junior School Site and
erection of a further 5 houses, incorporating land to
the rear of Melbourne House, Fir Tree House &
Cherry Tree House, The Common
General
s
PAP/2006/0307
199
95 Witherley Road Atherstone
Two Storey Rear & First Floor Side Extension and
Ground Floor Front Garage Extension with Balcony
above
General
D:\533579890.doc
Applications of Significance
Planning Application 2006/0284
Proposed Warehouse Unit at Hams Hall,
Former ‘B’ Station Site – Issues Report
Summary
An outline application for a large new warehouse distribution unit has been submitted on the
site of the former ‘B’ Power Station at Hams Hall. The site is in the Green Belt and the
application is a departure from the Development Plan. It is accompanied by an
Environmental Statement. This report describes the proposal, the Development Plan
context and identifies some of the main issues that will need to be considered at the
determination stage. Members will recall considering a similar application from Powergen
about four years ago.
The Site
The application site lies within the former Hams Hall Power Station complex, which closed in
1992. The site is that of the former ‘B’ Power Station. It is about 21 hectares in extent and
generally flat and open. The former cooling towers and power station building were
demolished in 1992 and since then, the site has regenerated naturally becoming overgrown
in places. Foundations, surfaces, earth bunds and two small buildings remain on the site.
This area lies adjacent to the existing Hams Hall Manufacturing and Distribution Park being
some 13km north-east of Birmingham and 1km from Junction 9 on the M42 motorway. With
the exception of the southern boundary, which abuts the manufacturing and distribution park,
the site is enclosed by the railway line to the east, and by an area of woodland to the north,
along with the Thermalite premises. (See location plan).
The Proposal
The proposal is for one 70000m2 warehouse and distribution building. This is an outline
application, but an illustrative masterplan has been submitted which provides an indicative
layout, elevations and cross sections, through the site (see Appendices A, B and C). Access
would be from Canton Lane using the existing Hams Hall road network.
It is suggested by the applicant that the development equates in footprint to that of the
former power station and other buildings on that site prior to demolition. One B8 unit is
proposed in order to meet the suggested need for large scale distribution buildings at
Regional Logistics Sites.
The proposal includes 4000m2 of ancillary office space. Lorry movements and the unloading
areas are at the south with the car park to the west. The building would be 20m tall.
Additional landscaping and woodland screening is proposed around the site boundary,
particularly to the north and east where new earth bunding is to be provided. The area to the
east of the entrance is said would reflect the approach taken on the BMW site on the
opposite side of Canton Lane.
D:\533579890.doc
A public footpath would be provided along the north-western boundary to link to the north
and in particular to Lea Marston and the Church of St John the Baptist to the north-east. It is
said that this path will complete the Hams Hall footpath network.
Whilst an end-user has not itself been identified, assumptions have had to be made about
job creation by looking at similar developments. It is said that up to 800 full time jobs or part
time equivalents are likely.
Traffic generation impacts have been assessed by the applicant, and it is suggested that
during a day there would be some 520 HGV movements to the site (in and out) and some
1500 movements by light vehicles. These figures, particularly that of the light vehicle
movements would it is said, be mitigated by the introduction of public transport measures
into Hams Hall, and for HGVs through increasing use of the rail freight terminal at Hams
Hall. The applicant concludes that the additional traffic arising from the proposal would have
an inconsequential impact on the capacity of the existing road network. A Green Travel Plan
has not been submitted. Members may feel that the use of rail for freight should be a
particular clause in such a Plan.
A full Environmental Statement accompanies the outline application. This covers matters
such as the potential availability of alternative sites for a proposal of this nature together with
assessment of impacts on the landscape character, bio-diversity factors, the cultural heritage
of the site and its environs, together with impacts on water, air and land quality. Noise
reports are included as are the impact arising from the previous use of the land as a power
station. The Socio-economic impacts of the development on the logistics market, and on
employment generation is also assessed.
A Non-Technical Summary of the Statement is also provided and this is copied at Appendix
D. Copies will be made available to each Board Member at the meeting.
Planning History
The site is part of the former Hams Hall Power Station complex. Demolition took place in
1992 and planning permission was granted in May 1994 for about two-thirds of the complex
to become the Manufacturing and Distribution Park that now exists. That permission
included the rail freight terminal at the south of the Park.
The ‘B’ Power Station site was not included in the original application, and thus fell outside of
the 1994 permission. Whilst there was clearly a case to remove land at Hams Hall from the
Green Belt this did not apply to the B Power Station site. PowerGen, as E. ON UK was then,
wished to reserve the ‘B’ site for future power generation, but no proposals came forward for
this and over time it became clear that this was no longer needed. The site remained in the
Green Belt and untouched by the Hams Hall Park.
A temporary permission was granted for car storage on the ‘B’ site, in respect of the need for
Land Rover to store vehicles, and this permission was succeeded by a seven year consent
for Rover/BMW. It was limited to the transportation of vehicles for BMW/Rover and to that
importation being by rail. The site is no longer used for this purpose as BMW disposed of
Rover Cars and Land Rover. The temporary open use was not considered to compromise
the primary planning purpose of green belt.
D:\533579890.doc
E. ON UK Limited, formerly PowerGen, then sought permission for warehousing and
distribution on the ‘B’ site. That application was withdrawn. However, a subsequent
application was refused in April 2004 on Green Belt grounds, and that there was already
sufficient employment land within the Borough. An appeal was lodged and is to be heard by
Public Inquiry in October 2006. The reason for the delay was that E. ON UK sought to
amend the Local Plan through the submission of objections, with a view of ensuring that the
emerging Local Plan allocated the ‘B’ site for a Hams Hall extension. As this approach
failed, the appeal has been revived.
The current application differs from that refused in 2004 in the following respects:




It is for one building of 70000m2 rather than for two buildings amounting to the
same area;
It is not accompanied by a draft Section 106 Agreement.
It has one main access off Canton Lane rather than two – one from Canton
Lane and one from Edison Road,
It is closer to the northern boundary of the site – ie closer to Lea Marston by
about 100 metres.
Development Plan
a
Regional Spatial Strategy 2004
PA6 : Portfolio of Employment Land
PA8 : Regional Logistics Sites
T10 : Freight.
b
Warwickshire Structure Plan 1996 – 2011
GD3 :Overall Development Strategy
GD6 :Green Belt
GD7 :Previously Developed Sites
T10 : Developer Contributions
T11 : Rail Freight Facilities.
c
North Warwickshire Local Plan 1995
ENV1 : Green Belt.
ENV2 : Development in Rural Areas Beyond the Green Belt
ENV4 : Landscape Improvement
ENV11 : Nature Conservation Enhancement
ENV17 : Environmental Impact of Development
ENV19 : Contaminated Land
ENV22 : Noise
ENV24 : Amenity and Design Considerations
BEM1 : Channel Freight Terminal at Hams Hall
IMP1 : Environmental and Amenity Compensations
IMP2 : Infrastructure Provision
IMP4 : Planning Conditions and Agreements
IMP3 : Environmental and Amenity Trusts
D:\533579890.doc
Other Material Planning Considerations
a
Proposed Modifications to the North Warwickshire Local Plan 2006
CPB
Employment Land Development
CPE
National and Historic Environment
CP1
Green Belt
CP2
Social and Economic Regeneration
CP10
Implementation
CP11
Quality of Development
ENVB
Protection and Enhancement of Natural Landscape
ENVC
Trees and Hedgerows
ENV3
Green Belt
ENV8
Nature Conservation
ENV9
Land Resources
ENV10
Water Resources.
ENV11
Air Quality
ENV12
Energy Conservation
ENV13
Development of Existing Employment Lane Outside Defined
Development Boundaries
ENV14b
Building Design
ENV14c
Access Design
ENV14d
Neighbours Amenities
ECON1
Industrial Sites
ECON4
Managed Workspace/Shared Units
TPT1
Transport Considerations in New Development
TPT2
Traffic Management and Travel Safety
TPT3
Access and Sustainable Travel and Transport
TPT4
Public Transport Improvements and New Facilities
TPT5
Promoting Sustainable Freight Movements
TPT6
Vehicle Parking.
b
Government Guidance
PPS1
Delivering Sustainable Development
PPG2
Green Belts
PPG3
Housing
PPG4
Industrial and Commercial Development and Small Firms
PPS9
Biodiversity and Geological Conservations
PPG13
Transport
PPG23
Planning and Pollution Control.
c
Other Documents referred to by the Applicant
West Midlands Regional Logistics Study 2005
RSS Annual Monitoring Report 2005.
The Policy Background
The primary Planning Policy here is Green Belt and the presumption to refuse planning
permission for inappropriate development. There are a number of other policies, which will
need to be considered.
D:\533579890.doc
The Development Plan and the policies therein carry the most weight and this includes the
North Warwickshire Local Plan as proposed to be adopted. The contents of the two
documents referred to in 7(c) can be considered as background but as any outcomes therein
have not been progressed, let alone considered or included in adopted regional Planning
Policy, they carry little weight. They are Technical and Research papers. They will be
considered by the Regional Planning Body at some stage as part and parcel of the Review
of the RSS. There is no indication of the extent to which they will influence revised regional
policy at this stage.
The Applicant’s Case
This is outlined in a Planning Supporting Statement, which is attached at Appendix E. The
conclusion – section 8 – provides a useful summary, which spells out the ‘very special
circumstances’ that the applicant suggests should warrant a decision by the Council to
override Green Belt policy.
The Main Issues
a)
The Green Belt
The site is in the Green Belt. The proposal is inappropriate in the Green Belt and thus the
presumption is that planning permission should be refused. The onus is on the applicant to
convince the Council that there are very special circumstances of such weight inherent in
this proposal, that this general presumption should be overridden. The circumstances set
out in Section 8 of Appendix E will need to be examined to see if they individually, or
cumulatively provide that overriding weight.
The Green Belt issue is the most significant one in this case, and necessarily the one that
should take priority. Two main questions arise:
The proposal is being advanced by the applicant, as an extension to the
Regional Logistics Site. Is there sufficient weight of Development Plan Policy
and/or other material planning considerations to conclude that his argument
should override Green Belt policy?

The most important attributes of Green Belts are the extent to which they
prevent the merging of Urban development and maintain openness. The
applicant argues that this site should be treated as previously developed land,
and that this should override any openness argument. Indeed at the Public
Inquiry into the Local Plan the applicant argued that the site should be
considered on its own as an Annex C “exception” site. The Inspector was not
persuaded to do this. The site has remained open since 1992, and it can be
argued that in addition to preventing the merging of urban areas it also
provides an increased level of openness around the present Hams Hall
Distribution and Warehousing Park. The question here for the Council is to
address which argument carries the greater weight.
D:\533579890.doc
b)
Sustainability
The site is outside of any defined settlement or development boundary and thus by definition
in an unsustainable location. It is however, adjacent to a Warehouse and Distribution Park,
which has a rail connection, an operative rail freight terminal, a railway station, and a new
public bus service, which will link to Coleshill. It is certainly not as remote as some
employment sites in North Warwickshire. However is this argument, one of relative
sustainability, sufficient to outweigh the presumption of refusal?
The applicant is relying on the presence of transportation as the sole means of rebutting the
sustainability arguments, without proposing other measures to reduce impacts, or indeed to
enhance public transport and public access to those facilities still further. Is there a case for
looking for further mitigation and enhancement measures such as further traffic calming in
the surrounding villages; the enhancement of public bus provision, access and routing into
the site through the surrounding villages. Should the applicant be required to demonstrate
use of rail freight in the interests of sustainability?
c)
Mitigation of Impacts
(i)
Physical Impacts
A full Environmental Statement by the applicant has been undertaken, and the impacts
arising from the proposal under a series of factors have been identified by the applicant.
The Board will wish to be satisfied that those impacts have been correctly identified and
weighted, or indeed if others have been omitted. At this stage, and without the responses
coming from the Council’s consultees on these matters, a number of key areas need to be
highlighted:

What will be the visual impact of this large building, particularly when seen
from the north, and the high land to the east?

What will the noise impact be, particularly on the villages of Lea Marston and
Whitacre Heath, and more particularly on the residential units that are closest
to the site?

Will the lighting on the site and within the buildings have an impact?

Are there adverse impacts on air quality that cannot be mitigated?

Will such a large development have adverse impacts on the ecology of the
site and its environs?
(ii)
Socio-Economic and Business Impacts
From a local economic perspective, Economic Development officers support the principles of
sustainable development. Where jobs development can be justified the Borough should aim
to be less dependent upon the warehousing and distribution sector. A wider range of skills
and jobs is needed with related training and pay levels in order to raise local aspirations and
meet local needs. Additionally, smaller and more flexible business units have been called
for to contribute to a more sustainable local economy and in which to encourage more
entrepreneurship, start-ups and localised growth. Moreover, levels of unemployment in this
part of the Borough are low and have been for some while, and the majority of employees
D:\533579890.doc
working at Hams Hall travel from outside of the Borough. How will this proposal impact on
this background, or assist in promoting the Borough’s economic objectives?
d)
Section 106 Matters
There is no draft Section 106 Agreement accompanying this planning application. The
applicant argues that there are no adverse impacts that need mitigation or compensatory
measures through such an Agreement. The Local Plan includes a number of policies, which
seek to mitigate the loss of countryside and openness. Members are invited to consider this
matter.
In this respect perhaps the greatest consideration should be mitigation and compensation for
the loss of the present open land should members decide, in due course, that permission
should be granted. Additionally, the matters raised in paragraphs 10.3, 10.4 and 10.5 will
need to be addressed. Members are reminded that should the Council decide to grant
planning permission the case will be referred to the Secretary of State because this is a
major departure application, which includes inappropriate development in the Green Belt.
Conclusion
At this stage Members are requested to acquaint themselves with the site, the main
elements of the proposal, the Development Plan background and the appellant’s case.
Additionally, the Board is asked to agree the main issues that it will wish to consider at
determination stage, and whether there is anything in addition to those identified herein.
A site visit can be arranged if Members agree, and it is anticipated that a determination will
be made at the next meeting of the Board in July.
Sustainability
The sustainability issues are covered above in the report.
Recommendation to the Board
a
That the Board recognises the main issues outlined in this report as
being material to the determination of this application, together with
others as may be agreed by the Board, and
b
That a site visit be arranged prior to determination of this application.
c
That without prejudice, Members consider matters that should be
included within a Section 106 Agreement in the event that this
application is supported by the Council.
D:\533579890.doc
BACKGROUND PAPERS
Local Government Act 1972 Section 100D, as substituted by the Local Government Act,
2000 Section 97
Planning Application No: PAP/2006/0284
Background
Paper No
1
Author
Nature of Background
Paper
Date
NONE
Note:
This list of background papers excludes published documents which may be referred to in the report,
such as The Development Plan and Planning Policy Guidance Notes.
A background paper will include any item which the Planning Officer has relied upon in preparing the
report and formulating his recommendation. This may include correspondence, reports and documents such as
Environmental Impact Assessments or Traffic Impact Assessments.
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc
D:\533579890.doc