From: Llewellyn, Stephen
Sent: 20 February 2013 13:48
To: Taylor, Helen C
Subject: RE: Coombe Bissett Depot site
Importance: High
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
Helen,
I refer to your email below and
in response provide the following comments.
As you are aware, there is a
current planning application relating to the site for the change of use of the
site and erection of 2 dwellings on the lower part of the former depot that was
submitted in June 2008 but which remains undetermined. I have not been
directly involved in the handling of this application, but it is my
understanding that this application has been in abeyance for some time whilst
highway and contamination issues are resolved. In this regard, I
understand that there has been a need to reduce the height of the church wall
on the opposite side of the road to the application site to ensure the
provision of adequate visibility and, secondly, that there has been a need for
contamination investigation works to be undertaken and as a result there is the
need for further investigation to qualify the risk posed by contamination on
the site to the underlying Principal Aquifer and to the nearby River Ebble and
to provide further risk assessment to human health.
Having spoken with Donal Casey I
understand that the further investigative works concerning the contamination of
the site have been carried out but as yet a report of the findings and any
remedial works that may be necessary has not been submitted to the planning
application. I have also taken the opportunity to speak with John Harding
and as he had indicated in his email dated 21st January to Donal
Casey (email was attached to your email) he has advised that further
consideration has been given to the standard that is required for forward
visibility of vehicles turning right into the site. In this respect, he
has advised that when assessing the proposed development in the context of the
Department of Transport’s publication ‘Manual for Streets’ it is accepted that
the standard required for the forward visibility of vehicles turning right into
the site can be reduced and that there is no longer a need for the wall to the
church on the opposite side of the road to be lowered in height.
In terms of the potential for
the development of the site, I am aware that there have been some previous
discussions and that alternative options have been considered. One of
these options related to the entire depot site that includes both the lower
level of the site but also the steep embankment towards the rear of the
site. The submitted layout for this proposed development indicated two
2-storey 4-bed detached dwellings on the lower level of the site with detached
double garages to the front of the dwellings and two large, detached 4-bed
dwellings stepping down the embankment with accommodation over three
storeys. The dwellings on the lower level were to be accessed from
Blandford Road with the rearward dwellings accessed via the steep, single track
of Old Blandford Road. However, I am aware that there were a number of
concerns relating to this proposal that included:
·
The proposed
rearward dwellings, by virtue of their scale and massing (full three storey
gabled elevation) and location stepping down the embankment at the rear of the
site, would appear overly dominant in the landscape. Whilst there are
other properties located on this ridge line, none of these existing properties
are of a comparable scale and massing. As such, the proposed dwellings
would appear unduly prominent and alien to the existing built form in the
surrounding area.
·
The proposed
rearward dwellings would stand at least a storey higher than the dwellings on
the front portion of the site and as such would appear overbearing to those
dwellings and would result in unacceptable overlooking.
·
It is unclear how
the proposed development would fit into the existing pattern of development and
the village’s unique identity.
·
The proposed
detached double garages to the front of the forward dwellings would appear dominant
in the street scene of Blandford Road and would require a significant area of
hardstand to the front of the dwellings.
·
There was concern
about the practicalities of constructing dwellings on the steep embankment at
the rear of the site.
I am also aware that there was a
second scheme for a terrace of 3no 3-bed, 2-storey dwellings that were
indicated to be located on the lower, front portion of the site. However,
having spoken to the planning agent (Paul Stevens) that was involved in drawing
up that scheme he has advised that it was discounted on highway grounds due to
the need for vehicles to be able to enter and exit the site in a forward
gear/direction.
Turning now to offer an
in-principle view on the possibility of delivering dwellings on this site,
firstly I can advise that the site is located within the Housing Policy
Boundary for Coombe Bissett where the principle of new residential development
is accepted. In the absence of any indicative site layout plans, but
having visited the site this morning and having regard to the width of the
terraced dwellings on the adjacent site to the south of the site, it is my
informal opinion that the development of a terrace of 3no terraced dwellings on
the lower portion of the site fronting Blandford Road may be feasible.
However, there are a number of factors and constraints that will need to be
taken into consideration in the design of the site layout that will determine
whether this number of dwellings can be accommodated on the site in a satisfactory
form. In this respect, the following will need to be taken into
consideration:
·
There are a number
of trees located adjacent to the southern boundary of the site and any
development will be required to have regard to the root protection system of
these trees. There is also a vegetated bank to the southern boundary of
the site which restricts the developable width of the site unless this bank is
cut back. However, this will require the existing trees to be removed,
which is likely to be unacceptable, and will create the need for a retaining
structure to be constructed to this boundary that may be visually unacceptable
dependent upon its design.
·
The layout of any
proposed development on this site will need to have regard to the relationship
of the neighbouring properties, particularly “Chalk Pit Cottage” to the north
of the site that contains a number of windows in both its eastern and southern
elevations. In this respect, it is important that careful consideration
is given to the siting of any dwellings so that they do not appear to be overly
dominant in relation to that dwelling, result in a loss of light/overshadowing
or overlooking. There is not an easy solution to these constraints as any
dwellings located towards the front of the site may appear overly dominant and
result in overshadowing of the only private garden area of Chalk Pit Cottage
that is located to the front of the dwelling, while siting the proposed
dwellings further back into the site could result in a loss of
light/overshadowing of the windows in the southern elevation of this
neighbouring dwelling whilst also appearing dominant.
·
In highway terms,
there is a fundamental requirement that vehicles are able to enter and exit the
site in a forward gear/direction and therefore it is essential that on-site
turning provision is provided, whilst they also require that 2 on-site parking
spaces are provided per 2/3 bed dwelling. This could result in a
significant level of hardstand to the front of any dwellings which may be
visually unacceptable and therefore careful consideration will need to be given
as to how these requirements can be met whilst minimising the amount of hard
surfacing that is created. One solution may be to consider whether the
parking and on-site turning can be provided towards the rear of the site but
this will of course require an access road leading into the depth of the site
and whether there is sufficient width within the site to accommodate this and
three dwellings whilst having regard to the above constraints is questioned.
The feasibility of such a solution would need to be demonstrated on a site
layout plan. In addition, it has been indicated that Highways will also
require a 2m wide visibility splay is provided across the width of the site
measured from the back edge of the carriageway.
Given the above constraints, it
is my informal opinion that it is unlikely that 4no dwellings could be
accommodated on the lower portion of the site fronting onto Blandford
Road. Whether it would be feasible to achieve a terrace of four dwellings
turned at 90 degrees to Blandford Road is difficult to ascertain without the
benefit of a site layout to demonstrate whether this is a viable option.
However, again there are a number of constraints to such a solution, most notably
whether the site is of sufficient width to accommodate vehicular access and
parking, the depth of the dwelling and private amenity space with the dwellings
orientated in this manner.
Finally, having visited the site
this morning, it is evident that the embankment to the rear of the site is very
steep and any plateau/level area of land at the top of this embankment within
the site is very limited. It is my opinion that any proposal to construct
any dwelling(s) against and stepping down this embankment is likely to be
unacceptable due to the likely resultant scale and massing of the dwelling(s)
and their visual impact in the wider landscape. Furthermore, any such
proposal will also require the removal of a substantial number of trees with
the potential consequential loss of ecological habitat and potential
destabilisation of the bank itself. Whilst it did appear that there is a
small plateau area at the top of the embankment where the ground level is a
little more flat (area that wraps around the rear of Chalk Pit Cottage) it is
my opinion that it is highly unlikely that this area is of a sufficient size to
accommodate the footprint of a dwelling and any usable amenity space.
Again, it would require the removal of a large number of trees with the consequences
outlined above. Whether it would be feasible to construct a dwelling in
such a location is also debatable, in my opinion, and would require the expert
advice of a structural engineer. Furthermore, there would be concerns
about the relationship of a dwelling sited in this location with any proposed
dwellings on the lower level of the site and adjacent dwellings in terms of
overlooking and its’ potentially over-dominant presence. If it were
feasible to locate a dwelling in this location, it is my opinion that it is
likely that it would have to be single storey to ensure that it would not
appear over-dominant in the surrounding wider landscape and would be in keeping
with the scale and massing of the surrounding properties that occupy this ridge
line.
I trust that the above comments
are of assistance. Please note, however, that the above is my informal
opinion and is given without prejudice to any decision the Council may make in
respect of any subsequent formal planning application for the development of
the above site.
Regards
Steve
Steve Llewellyn
Senior Planning Officer (South)
Development Services
Wiltshire Council, The Council House
Bourne Hill, Salisbury
SP1 3UZ
Tel: 01722 434659
Email: stephen.llewellyn@wiltshire.gov.uk
Web: www.wiltshire.gov.uk
Follow Wiltshire Council
From: Taylor, Helen C
Sent: 13 February 2013 10:24
To: Llewellyn, Stephen
Subject: Coombe Bissett Depot site
Hi Steve
There is a report going to Cabinet Capital Assets Committee on 19/3/13 for a final decision on whether or not the depot site can be disposed of for affordable housing, or if it will be sold on the open market as originally planned.
Members have asked for some further information to be attached to the report in the form of an email giving an in-principle view on the possibility of delivering 4 small homes on the site from a planning perspective.
I had some discussions with Janet Wallace back in September 2012 about the potential for 4 small dwellings on this site. She was of the view that the main issues were with Highways, and that provided there was enough space on the site for parking and turning, it was likely to be acceptable. The Registered Provider looking at the site has confirmed that would be possible. There was also mention of the visibility splay and the part that the church wall plays in that issue, although Highways have subsequently provided updated feedback confirming that they would no longer have any objections in principle (see email attached).
Are you now dealing with this one again? Would you be able to let me have an email with your in-principle views on the provision of 4 small dwellings on the site? Members are not prepared to consider the disposal of the site for affordable housing without something from planning and highways that indicates the provision of 4 small dwellings would be a possibility. The amended report needs to be finalised by 25/2/13. However, I also need to have received sketch plans from Registered Providers by that date, so some in-principle planning advice is fairly urgent so that I know whether or not it is worthwhile asking them to do some work on sketch plans. Sorry for the short notice – I was only asked for this information yesterday following informal CCAC meeting.
Many thanks
Helen
Helen Taylor
Principal Development Officer
New Housing Team
Wiltshire Council
Bourne Hill
Salisbury
SP1 3UZ
Tel. 01722 434463
Mobile: 07798 858369
Email:
helenc.taylor@wiltshire.gov.uk
Web:
www.wiltshire.gov.uk
Follow
Wiltshire Council