DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE MEETING

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE 9 APRIL 2015 MEMBERS ADDITIONAL PAPERS - INDEX OF DOCUMENTS CIRCULATED AFTER PUBLICATION OF THE AGENDA

1. Speaking Commitment (Page 2)

2. Application 01 – 14/02703/OUT

i. Submissions from Residents Association (Pages 3 to 15) ii. Submissions by Mr R Edwards (Pages 16 to 17) iii. Officer Update (Pages 18 to 22)

3. Application 02 – 14/02385/REM

i. Officer Update (Pages 23 to 32)

4. Application 03 – 14/02383/REM

i. Officer Update (Pages 33 to 41)

5. Application 04 – 14/00158/MKCOD

i. Representations from Residents Association (Pages 42 to 45) ii. Representations from Objector (Pages 46 to 48) iii. Officer Update (Pages 49 to 52)

6. Application 05 – 14/02808/FUL

i. Officer Update (Page 53)

(1)

SPEAKING LIST

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE – 9 APRIL 2015 APPLICATION NO.

TITLE

REQUESTS TO SPEAK IN OBJECTION

TIME ALLOCATED

RIGHT OF REPLY OR SPEAKERS IN FAVOUR

TIME ALLOCATED

14/02703/OUT

Land To The South of, Penn Road, Bletchley

Mr R Edwards

Ms D Witts

Ms R Smith (Residents Association)

Cllr R Graham (B&F TC)

Cllr A Webb (MKC)

Up to 3 Mins

Up to 3 Mins

Up to 3 Mins

Up to 3 Mins

Up to 3 Mins

Mr J Howell (Applicants Agent)

Up to 15 Mins

15/00158/MKCOD3

Newton Leys Primary School, San Andres Drive, Newton Leys

Cllr M McDonald (B&F TC)

Up to 3 Mins

14/02808/FUL Winterhill House, Snowdon Drive, Winterhill

Mr J Wadcock Up to 3 Mins A Hoyle (Applicants Agent)

Up to 3 Mins

(2)

Milton Keynes Council Development Control Committee Meeting to be held on Thursday 09 April 2015

Chair: A Geary and Vice Chairs: White, Exon Councillors: Bint, Brackenbury, Gowans, Lewis, McLean, Petchey

Item 01 Reference: 14/02703/OUT Report Page 72

Land to the South of Penn Road

History of events The first planning application to build housing on the land in question was submitted to the Borough of Milton Keynes Council Planning Committee approximately 20 years ago which was refused by the committee. The application was made by The British Waterways Board now taken over by the Canal & River Trust in 2012 and it was intimated by The British Waterways Board at that time the land would be used as the sludge pit after dredging the canal? Flood Risk This site is close to the River Ouzel and the Manor Fields sports ground which is a recognised flood plain and often flooded after heavy rainfalls. The proposed land for development has been identified as bog land and a pond existed behind the Manor Fields Sports Pavilion and when the Campanile Hotel was built on higher ground the developers provided the drainage for the Manor Fields football pitch which was constantly flooded after heavy rain. Under the introduction of the Flood and Water Management Act 210 County and Unitary local authorities have an obligation set out in the act which was recommended following the Sir Michael Pitt Report which came about after the Sheffield flooding disaster and local authorities are more causios of the thought of building on flood plains? New building of properties in Bletchley Over the last ten years there has been approximately 7,000 new homes agreed for development in Bletchley without the thought of improved highways infrastructure, other than the improvements of four roundabouts. This massive development can only add to existing traffic chaos on the Bletchley highways?

COUNCIL RESOLUTION - 13 OCTOBER 2009 (ITEM 9 CABINET 24 NOVEMBER 2009 Annex A) A Plan for Bletchley and Fenny Stratford That this Council recognises that in and around Bletchley and Fenny Stratford there has been a massive new build initiative of housing and large commercial buildings over recent years and the development of thousands of properties is on-going, but unfortunately it appears that very little thought has been given to the highways, parking provision and drainage infrastructure that is desperately needed to cope with the magnitude of further development. Massive increase in traffic congestion in the Watling Street, Fenny Stratford The Watling Street A5 is the gate way to Bletchley and the in recent years there has been 291 flats houses built in Millward Drive opposite the housing in Saracens Wharf and Penn Road, not with-standing the Canal Wharf Factory Units Site, Campanile Hotel (80 car parking spaces) and in addition Dobbies Garden Centre the largest of its kind in Milton Keynes. All the traffic is in the vicinity of the roundabout junction of the Watling Street, Aylesbury Street and Simpson Road use Staplehall Road as a rat-run to avoid the large B&Q roundabout traffic congestion.

(16)

Planning Application Number: 14/02703/OUT

Land to the south of, Penn Road, Bletchley planning application has been brought before Milton Keynes Council (Planning) Development Control Committee in previous applications and the highways is the bone of contention and where The British Waterways Board application has failed the Canal & River Trust are back with their application, but have not considered the previous Development Control Committee predecessors reasons for refusal and taken into account the additional highways congestion in this location which has become even worst due to over development of properties without consideration given to the improvements in the highways infrastructure.

The planning application is seeking to build a cul-de-sac within a cul-de-sac in Penn Road and most all applications concerning housing estates look for two access/exits.

The access to the proposed site is 4.8 metres for two way traffic in a confined area and turning from one narrow road into another narrow road will create traffic congestion and difficulties with emergency services.

Trust all the previous and present circumstances concerning this application will be taken into account in make the right decision?

Reg Edwards, Secretary The Consortium of Bletchley Residents Association (COBRA)

(17)

Application Number: 14/02703/OUT

UPDATE SUMMARY Outline application for construction of new access road to land South of Penn Road AT Land To The South of, Penn Road, Bletchley FOR Lodge Park Target: 29th January 2015 Extension of Time requested Ward: Bletchley East

Parish: Bletchley & Fenny Stratford Town Council

Report Author/Case Officer: Karen Tate Contact Details: 01908 253238 [email protected] Team Leader: Nicola Wheatcroft Team Leader Strategic Applications Team Contact Details: 01908 252274 [email protected] 1.0 INTRODUCTION

(A brief explanation of what the application is about) 1.1 This report has been prepared to provide an update summary of the

application and to table a correction to the recommended conditions.

1.2 Following the drafting of the Committee report the applicant’s has submitted a statement acknowledging local concerns and confirming the application is made in association with a proposed residential development of the site, which is a residential allocation in the Local Plan. The applicant’s agent has also confirmed that in relation to visitor parking, local residents will not be prejudiced by the proposal or residential proposed development of the adjoining land.

1.3 A copy of the letter is attached to this summary as Appendix 1.

4.0 REVISED RECOMMENDATION

(The decision that officers recommend to the Committee)

4.1 It is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the revised

conditions set out below. 5.0 REVISED CONDITIONS

(The conditions that need to be imposed on any planning permission for this development to ensure that the development is satisfactory. To meet legal requirements all conditions must be Necessary,Relevant, Enforceable, Precise and Reasonable )

(18)

1. Approval of the details of the remaining reserved matters pertaining to the development of the site (hereinafter called “the reserved matters”) shall be obtained in writing from the Local Planning Authority before any development is commenced.

Reason: Outline Planning Permission only is granted in accordance with the application submitted and to comply with Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 2. Application for approval of all the reserved matters shall be made to the

Local Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 3. The development hereby permitted shall be begun on or before the

expiration of two years from the date of the approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved.

Reason: To comply with Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. 4. The development shall not be begun until details of the adoptable road

and footways have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall include details of crossovers to existing private drives with access over the road. These drives shall be put in place concurrently with the construction of the access road. The approved access to be laid out and constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In order to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the highway.

5. The development shall not be begun until details of the disposal of surface water from the access road have been approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the works for disposal of surface water shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details within 12 months of the substantial completion of the road.

Reason: To ensure surface water run-off is comprehensively addressed within the design of the highway and to minimise surface water flooding in the locality.

(19)

Appendix to 14/02703/OUT A1.0 RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

(A brief outline of previous planning decisions affecting the site – this may not include every planning application relating to this site, only those that have a bearing on this particular case)

A1.1 98/00270/MK Erection of 30 houses and flats and associated works APP 13.11.1998 10/00789/OUT Outline planning permission for the erection of 48 residential properties with approval for vehicle and pedestrian access, layout and scale being sought WDN 22.06.2010 11/00980/OUT Outline planning permission for the erection of 48 dwellings with approval for access, layout and scale (re-submission of 10/00789/OUT) REF 28.09.2011 14/01960/FUL Construction of new access road between numbers 10 and 11/12/13 Penn Road PCO 14/02703/OUT Outline application for construction of new access road to land South of Penn Road PDE

(20)

SUMMARY and UPDATE

Application Number: 14/02385/REM MAJOR

Erection of 61 dwellings for residential use along with garages, roads, sewers and all ancillary works pursuant to the above Outline Consent, 05/ 00291 MKCOD3 . AT Area 10.1f, Western Expansion Area, Dansteed Way & Watling Street , Milton Keynes Area 10.1f FOR Bovis Homes (Central) Ltd Report Author/Case Officer: Karen Tate Contact Details: 01908 253238 [email protected] Team Leader:Nicola Wheatcroft Joint Team Leader Strategic Applications Team Contact Details: 01908 252274 [email protected] 1.1 This report has been prepared to provide an update summary of the

application in view of its complex nature, updated consultee responses and Status as one of two development applications for housing in Area 10 of the WEA. Since compiling the report amendments and updated consultation responses have been received. This Summary and Update brings matters up to date and should be read in conjunction with the original Committee report. Included are updated recommended conditions and a supporting Statement is Appended from Bovis Homes.

1.2 In the interests of certainty and ease of identifying the application site the address is amended to accord with the parcel references set out in the WEA Design Codes.

1.3 Since compiling the report a final layout submission has been submitted which have resolved outstanding technical issues and has enabled proposed conditions to be amended and updated comments are set out below. Revised recommended conditions are set out elsewhere in this Update.

1.4 Paragraph 1.2 of original report the applicants have requested that it is clarified that the field hedge referenced as being removed was pre-consented and removed by the landowners, Gallagher Estates as part of the serviced parcel preparations and not by the current applicant’s.

1.5 Paragraph 5.4 of the original report confirms that a maximum of 60 units should be achieved across this parcel which is exceeded by 1 unit. The applicant has requested that Development Control Committee is made aware that the over-provision on this parcel is balanced by a slight under-provision on the second application on Area 10.1a & b. It should, however, be noted

(23)

that the WEA masterplan is designed to enable specific character areas to be developed incorporating their own density levels to enable the WEA to incorporate a variety of character areas across the Area. In this case the small scale increase in unit numbers on this parcel is not considered to detrimentally impact on this part of the WEA having regard to the overall acceptability of the proposed development scheme for parcel 10.1f.

1.6 Paragraph 5.6 – 5.7 of the original report assesses the quality of the urban design and compliance with Urban Design Policies and sets out the original assessment of the application. Since the compiling of this Committee report the Urban Designer’s updated comments have been received and his comments are set out below under ‘Updated Consultations.’ His final comments are that final adjustments, including setting back the rear wall of a garage from the Employment Street building line is a positive amendment and the repositioning of one unit (plot 48) in the parking court to form a street frontage with adjoining units (plots 28 and 29) has enabled the rear court to have the appearance of a cul-de-sac, which is supported in urban design terms.

1.7 In relation to the design of the units fronting the Employment Street following negotiations with Bovis Homes and their architects the elevations of these dwellings has been amended to a more distinct and contemporary character and is now considered acceptable and in accordance with the Design Code for the Employment Street streetscape on this parcel in the opinion of the Urban Designer.

1.8 Paragraph 5.9 of the original report advises that for the flatted block, units 42 – 47 the amenity space is provided to the front of the building bounded by a high brick wall. The applicant has confirmed that the boundary treatment for the front of this flat block proposed is a dwarf wall with railings over and that the amenity space extends to 187m,2 although this area is located to the front of the building and jointly comprises the landscaping for the block. The Officer’s previous comments remain as per the original report, although it is noted that the flats are provided with integral balconies and therefore in accordance with the ‘New Residential Development Design Guide’ SPD.

1.9 Paragraph 5.14 of the original report advises that the applicant was not prepared to include physical security measures in accordance with the ‘Secured by Design’ principles required under Condition 33 of outline consent 05/00291/MKPCO. Following the compiling of this report the applicant has confirmed that the development will be designed to accord with both layout security matters (which was previously achieved) but also to include physical safety to each building (physical security) in order to accord with this outline condition. The proposed Secured by Design condition will remain in place in the recommended conditions to ensure the details are submitted and approved by the Council.

C 1.10 Paragraph 5.12 of the original report advised that some matters relating to bin

storage and collection remained to be confirmed acceptable by the Highway Engineer. These are now considered addressed.

(24)

1.11 In terms of sustainability matters the applicant has submitted a Sustainability

Report confirming a 10% reduction in CO2 emissions over baseline Part L 2010 Building Regulations, which is acceptable to meet Local Plan Policy D4 and S106 requirements.

1.12 Conclusion The revisions submitted to the application are considered to show commitment by Bovis Homes to resolving a number of the criticisms of the proposal by Officer’s and this Summary and Update report acknowledges and confirms these improvements.

1.13 The application site is the first of two development proposals to come forward on Area 10 and the current application, parcel 10.1f is located on an entrance into the wider WEA, opposite the Employment Area. The site comprises a small parcel in comparison with other parcels and is therefore more constrained in terms of the range of urban design approaches that can be applied here.

1.14 The proposed development largely accords with the Design Code and the deficits identified in the main Committee report have, in relation to a number of issues, now been resolved. The remaining outstanding matters are not considered to be so fundamental as to warrant a substantive objection at Officer level.

1.15 In relation to parking provision there is an over-provision of parking spaces, both allocated and visitor and provision is included for front parking to the Employment Street properties, which are served by a rear parking court. The majority of properties are provided with on-plot parking and where parking courts have been provided the amount of tandem parking has been limited, which is considered acceptable and in compliance with the Design Code and New Residential Development Design Guide. All but 6 dwellings are provided with direct frontage to a road.

1.16 On balance the application is considered acceptable and recommended approved subject to appropriate conditions set out below.

UPDATED RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS

(The conditions that need to be imposed on any planning permission for this development to ensure that the development is satisfactory. To meet legal requirements all conditions must be Necessary, Relevant, Enforceable, Precise and Reasonable ) 1. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to affect or vary the conditions

imposed on outline permission reference 05/00191/MKPCO dated 15th October 2007 which shall continue in full force and effect, save insofar as they are expressly varied by any conditions imposed hereby.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt

(25)

2. The scheme for parking and manoeuvring areas indicated on the submitted plans shall be laid out prior to the initial occupation of the relevant plots hereby permitted and that area shall not be used thereafter for any other purpose.

Reason: To enable vehicles to draw off, park, load and unload and turn clear of the highway to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the adjoining highway. 3. Notwithstanding the submitted schedule of materials no development

beyond slab level shall take place before revised details and samples of all external materials (including windows and doors) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance of the development and in accordance with Policy D2 of the Milton Keynes Local Plan.

4. No development beyond slab level shall be undertaken until such time as

a lighting scheme to demonstrate how all private drives and parking courts will be lit to the BS5489 standard shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The lighting scheme shall include details of what lamps are being proposed, a lux plan showing maximum, minimum, average and uniformity levels, details of means of electricity supply to each lamp and how the lamps will be managed and maintained in the future. The approved lighting scheme shall be fully implemented prior to the first occupation of any dwelling served by that parking court or private drive and maintained for the life of the development.

Reason: In the interests of safety and amenity in accordance with Policy D1 of the Milton Keynes Local Plan. 5. No development beyond slab level shall be undertaken until such time as

a report detailing how Secured by Design accreditation will be achieved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and a copy of the certification confirming the achievement of Secured by Design accreditation for each dwelling shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of that dwelling.

Reason: In the interests of reducing crime and disorder in accordance with Policy D1 of the Milton Keynes Local Plan. 6. Notwithstanding the submitted landscaping details, no development

beyond slab level shall be undertaken until a revised landscaping scheme is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, to include hard and soft landscaping details. The scheme shall show the numbers, types and sizes of trees and shrubs to be planted and their location in relation to proposed buildings, roads, footpaths and drains and

(26)

associated hard surfacing details. All planting in accordance with the scheme shall be carried out within twelve months of commencement of development. Any trees or shrubs removed, dying, severely damaged or diseased within two years of planting shall be replaced in the next planting season with trees or shrubs of such size and species as may be agreed by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the appearance and character of the area and to minimise the effect of development on the area. 7. Notwithstanding the submitted details, no development beyond slab level

shall be undertaken until such time as details of the refuse and recycling and bike stores for the apartments and how they will be lit and locked shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of that apartment and shall thereafter be maintained for the purpose of refuse and recycling anf bike storage and used for no other purpose.

Reason: To ensure that there are adequate bin/bike stores facilities to serve the apartments. 8. Unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the

development shall be carried out in accordance with the Sustainability Statement dated 28 January 2015. The scheme shall be implemented in full prior to occupation of each dwelling.

Reason: To ensure that the development complies with the Council's objective for Sustainable Development in accordance with Policy D4 of the Adopted Local Plan: 2001-2011. 9. Prior to the commencement of the development details of the site waste

management strategy to be implemented by the contractor throughout the construction process shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved measures shall be implemented and use throughout the whole of the construction process until the development is completed.

Reason: To minimise construction waste and encourage the reuse or recycling of waste materials in line with the requirements of Policy D4 of the Milton Keynes Local Plan 2001-2011.

10. No development beyond slab level shall be undertaken until a report

detailing how 10% of materials (by value) will be sourced from reused or recycled sources shall be submitted to the Council for approval. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason: To ensure the sustainable use of materials in line with the requirements of Policy D4 of the Milton Keynes Local Plan 2001-2011.

(27)

11. Prior to the commencement of the development, and before any

equipment, machinery or materials are brought on to the site for the purposes of the development, all existing trees and hedges on or adjacent to the site including adjacent to the eastern boundary (Dansteed Way) shall be protected by fencing in accordance with BS:5837:2012. The protected areas shall be kept free of all construction, construction plant, machinery, personnel, digging and scraping, waterlogging, changes in level, building materials and all other operations, personnel, structures, tools, storage and materials. All protective measures shall be maintained until all equipment, machinery and surplus materials have been removed from the site.

Reason: To protect the existing landscaping on the site. 12. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority no

development shall take place beyond slab level until details of all estate roads, private drives and footways not approved under 08/01289/MKPCR (or amending consents) to include highway drainage measures have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and laid out and constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In order to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the highway and of the development. 13. No development beyond slab level shall be undertaken until details of

bird and bat boxes including the provision of boxes on buildings within the development hereby approved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted details shall include a timeframe for the installation of the boxes. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In order to achieve biodiversity enhancements in accordance with policy NE3 of the Milton Keynes Local Plan 2001 – 2011 14. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning

(General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking, re-enacting or modifying that Order), no external or internal alterations shall take place to any carports and car barns hereby approved without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: to ensure that alterations are not carried out which would make the carports and car barns unavailable for parking purposes, thereby eroding the parking facilities on the development in accordance with Policy T15 of the Local Plan. 15. No building or other site works likely to cause nuisance to occupiers shall

be carried out before 8am or after 6pm Mondays to Fridays nor before 9am or after 1pm on Saturdays or at any time on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

(28)

Reason: To limit the detrimental effect on adjoining occupiers by reason of noise and disturbance. 16. Notwithstanding the submitted details, no development beyond slab level

shall be undertaken until such time as details and samples of the surface treatment and appearance of non-adopted roads, shared private drives and parking courts shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local Planning Authority. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory appearance of the development. 17. Notwithstanding the submitted details no development beyond slab level

shall be carried out until details and samples of boundary and dwarf walls, piers, capping and external colour and finish to the railings have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The boundary treatment shall be provided for each dwelling prior to the occupation of that dwelling. Where hedges form the front boundary to a plot they will have a maximum mature height of 750mm.

Reason: To protect the appearance of the locality and safeguard the privacy of neighbours and to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the highway. 18. No development beyond slab level shall be undertaken until such time as

details of surface water drainage from the site including proposed outfall calculations are submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The drainage works shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details before the development is first occupied.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory drainage of the site.

(29)

UPDATED CONSULTATION RESPONSES 1.0 UPDATED CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Comments Updated 8.04.2015

1.1 Local Plan-Sustainability Officer The updated Sustainability Reports satisfy the requirements of Policy D4 and it would be useful for the SAP reports to clarify the carbon savings are accurate provided as annexes to the Sustainability Report. Recommends the standard D4 Policy condition. Included as the recommended condition.

1.2

Tariff Manager With regard to the tenure split to the affordable housing it is agreed that this will be agreed on a phase by phase basis with an overall spilt over the whole Bovis parcels which will achieve 30% affordable housing.

1.3

The proposed split of affordable rent and shared ownership appears an improvement over a previous tenure split of social rent, shared ownership, low cost and reduced cost. Over the two applications the overall tenure split is 226 total affordable units comprising 90 affordable rent and 136 shared ownership.

1.4 Highways Development Control Amended highways and parking details are acceptable and there are no highway objections to the proposed development.

1.4 Urban Design “Plots 53 and 56 are still missing ground floor windows (based on

street scene drawings). This has been agreed to be amended at pre-application.

It would have been better in urban design terms (and this was discussed at pre-app) that access to the northern rear parking court should be taken off the employment street through a ‘bridged unit’ (and hence make it feel more private) rather than where shown. This would also avoid the blank wall of a garage facing the employment street. The applicant has however compensated for this through ‘tightening the access to this parking court making it feel more private. The set back of the garage from the predominant building line does also mean it is subservient within the street scene (which is a positive).

If unit 02 or 03 had been omitted this may have allowed more convenient parking to the side (rather than located in a rear court). This would have also reduced the size of this rear court.

The previous concern about the houses within the rear parking court behind the apartment block has been addressed with unit 48 now

(30)

facing this access street. Together with units 28 and 29 they form a street frontage and make this rear court feel more like a public cul-de-sac.

The elevational treatment of the employment street now has a more distinct and contemporary character and is now considered acceptable

Despite these concerns I consider the application acceptable when assessed against urban design policy.

(31)

SUMMARY and UPDATE

Application Number: 14/02385/REM MAJOR

Erection of 121 dwellings for residential use along with garages, roads, sewers and all ancillary works pursuant to the above Outline Consent, 05/ 00291 MKCOD3 . AT Area 10.1a & b, Western Expansion Area, Watling Street , Milton Keynes FOR Bovis Homes (Central) Ltd Report Author/Case Officer: Karen Tate Contact Details: 01908 253238 [email protected] Team Leader: Nicola Wheatcroft Team Leader Strategic Applications Team Contact Details: 01908 252274 [email protected] 1.1 This report has been prepared to provide an update summary of the

application in view of its complex nature, updated consultee responses and Status as one of two development applications for housing in Area 10 of the WEA. Since compiling the report amendments and updated consultation responses have been received. This Summary and Update brings matters up to date and should be read in conjunction with the original Committee report. Included are updated recommended conditions and a supporting Statement is Appended from Bovis Homes.

1.2 In the interests of certainty and ease of identifying the application site the address is amended to accord with the parcel references set out in the WEA Design Codes.

1.3 Since compiling the report a final layout submission has been submitted which have resolved outstanding technical issues and has enabled proposed conditions to be amended and updated comments are set out below. Revised recommended conditions are set out elsewhere in this Update.

1.4 Paragraph 5.8 of original report the applicants have commented that in their opinion the scheme is compliant with the Design Code and the applicant states ”we believe our scheme is modern in its styling along the City Street.” This issue is addressed in the original Committee report.

1.5 Paragraph 5.9 of the original report advises that the parking court internal boundaries are sub-divided by 1.8 metre ‘close boarded fencing’. The applicant has advised that following advice from the Crime Prevention Design Advisor this is now proposed as lower height 1.5 metre close boarded fencing with 300mm trellis on top.

(33)

1.6 Paragraph 5.10 & 11 relating to proposed materials and design and conflict

with the Design Code. The applicant has commented “I believe, and as supported by your urban designer, that through negotiation with the Council we have applied suitable contemporary materials along the prescribed key areas highlighted in the design code.”

1.7

Whilst the redesign of the appearance and design of the City Street has been amended to accord more fully with the requirements of the Design Code to achieve a contemporary streetscape, including materials it remains the view that improvements in the range of materials proposed could be achieved through further discussions with Bovis Homes. A materials condition is therefore recommended to enable this issue to be satisfactorily resolved through post consent negotiations.

1.8 Paragraph 5.12 of the original report advises that minimum residential amenity areas i.e. private gardens do not achieve, in some cases, the minimum length of 10 metres for family sized units unless the plots are wide. The applicant has commented that the final revisions for the development have increased rear garden sizes and a range of rear garden sizes are included in the scheme to enable purchaser choice. The scheme has been amended to increase the rear garden lengths to the dwellings fronting the City Street and overall, where possible adjustments have been undertaken to achieve, as far as possible, the ‘New Residential Development Design Guide’ 10 metre private amenity length requirement other than on wide plots where a shorter lengths may be considered acceptable. In this case, although some shortfalls remain the most constrained rear garden lengths to the City Street properties have been increased by 1 metre to a more acceptable length. Whilst there remains a technical non-compliance position within parcels 10.1a & b it is considered that on balance the adjustments made in the final submission plans are sufficient to enable an ‘on balance’ acceptance of the rear gardens arrangement across the site.

1.9 Paragraph 5.17 of the original report advises that the applicant was not prepared to include physical security measures in accordance with the ‘Secured by Design’ principles required under Condition 33 of outline consent 05/00291/MKPCO. Following the compiling of this report the applicant has confirmed that the development will be designed to accord with both layout security matters (which was previously achieved) but also to include physical safety to each building (physical security) in order to accord with this outline condition. The proposed Secured by Design condition will remain in place in the recommended conditions to ensure the details are submitted and approved by the Council.

C 1.10 In terms of sustainability matters the applicant has submitted a Sustainability

Report confirming a 10% reduction in CO2 emissions over baseline Part L 2010 Building Regulations, which is acceptable to meet Local Plan Policy D4 and S106 requirements.

(34)

1.12 Conclusion The revisions submitted to the application are considered to show commitment by Bovis Homes to resolving a number of the criticisms of the proposal by Officer’s and this Summary and Update report acknowledges and confirms these improvements.

1.13 The application site is the first of two development proposals to come forward on Area 10 and the current application, parcel 10.1a & b is located on a City Street which the Design Code identifies as an important entrance to the wide WEA and one which is expected to have a modern contemporary appearance, which is considered achieved following final urban design revisions which have been negotiated with Officers.

1.14 The proposed development largely accords with the Design Code and the deficits identified in the main Committee report have, in relation to a number of issues, now been resolved. The remaining outstanding matters are not considered to be so fundamental as to warrant a substantive objection at Officer level.

1.15 In relation to parking provision there is an over-provision of parking spaces, both allocated and visitor, and provision is included for front parking to the Employment Street properties, which are served by a rear parking court. The majority of properties are provided with on-plot parking and where parking courts have been provided new on street parking bays along the City Street have been negotiated with the applicant and Gallagher Estates (who have responsibility for delivering the main highway infrastructure on Area 10) additional on street parking bays to the front of the City Street properties. This will necessitate an alteration to the Highway infrastructure reserved matters approval but has been negotiated with the Highway Engineer in terms of their location to ensure visitors can park to the front of these properties.

1.16 On balance the application is considered acceptable and recommended approved subject to appropriate conditions set out below.

UPDATED RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS

(The conditions that need to be imposed on any planning permission for this development to ensure that the development is satisfactory. To meet legal requirements all conditions must be Necessary, Relevant, Enforceable, Precise and Reasonable ) 1. Nothing herein contained shall be deemed to affect or vary the conditions

imposed on outline permission reference 05/00191/MKPCO dated 15th October 2007 which shall continue in full force and effect, save insofar as they are expressly varied by any conditions imposed hereby.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt 2. The scheme for parking and manoeuvring areas indicated on the

submitted plans shall be laid out prior to the initial occupation of the

(35)

relevant plots hereby permitted and that area shall not be used thereafter for any other purpose.

Reason: To enable vehicles to draw off, park, load and unload and turn clear of the highway to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the adjoining highway. 3. Notwithstanding the submitted schedule of materials no development

beyond slab level shall take place before revised details and samples of all external materials (including windows and doors) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory appearance of the development and in accordance with Policy D2 of the Milton Keynes Local Plan.

4. No development beyond slab level shall be undertaken until such time as

a lighting scheme to demonstrate how all private drives and parking courts will be lit to the BS5489 standard shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The lighting scheme shall include details of what lamps are being proposed, a lux plan showing maximum, minimum, average and uniformity levels, details of means of electricity supply to each lamp and how the lamps will be managed and maintained in the future. The approved lighting scheme shall be fully implemented prior to the first occupation of any dwelling served by that parking court or private drive and maintained for the life of the development.

Reason: In the interests of safety and amenity in accordance with Policy D1 of the Milton Keynes Local Plan. 5. No development beyond slab level shall be undertaken until such time as

a report detailing how Secured by Design accreditation will be achieved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and a copy of the certification confirming the achievement of Secured by Design accreditation for each dwelling shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of that dwelling.

Reason: In the interests of reducing crime and disorder in accordance with Policy D1 of the Milton Keynes Local Plan. 6. Notwithstanding the submitted landscaping details, no development

beyond slab level shall be undertaken until a revised landscaping scheme is submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, to include hard and soft landscaping details. The scheme shall show the numbers, types and sizes of trees and shrubs to be planted and their location in relation to proposed buildings, roads, footpaths and drains and associated hard surfacing details. All planting in accordance with the scheme shall be carried out within twelve months of commencement of

(36)

development. Any trees or shrubs removed, dying, severely damaged or diseased within two years of planting shall be replaced in the next planting season with trees or shrubs of such size and species as may be agreed by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To protect the appearance and character of the area and to minimise the effect of development on the area. 7. Notwithstanding the submitted details, no development beyond slab level

shall be undertaken until such time as details of the refuse and recycling and bike stores for the apartments and how they will be lit and locked shall be submitted to and be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved scheme shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of that apartment and shall thereafter be maintained for the purpose of refuse and recycling and bike storage and used for no other purpose.

Reason: To ensure that there are adequate bin/bike stores facilities to serve the apartments. 8. Unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the

development shall be carried out in accordance with the Sustainability Statement dated 28 January 2015. The scheme shall be implemented in full prior to occupation of each dwelling.

Reason: To ensure that the development complies with the Council's objective for Sustainable Development in accordance with Policy D4 of the Adopted Local Plan: 2001-2011. 9. Prior to the commencement of the development details of the site waste

management strategy to be implemented by the contractor throughout the construction process shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved measures shall be implemented and use throughout the whole of the construction process until the development is completed.

Reason: To minimise construction waste and encourage the reuse or recycling of waste materials in line with the requirements of Policy D4 of the Milton Keynes Local Plan 2001-2011.

10. No development beyond slab level shall be undertaken until a report

detailing how 10% of materials (by value) will be sourced from reused or recycled sources shall be submitted to the Council for approval. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme.

Reason: To ensure the sustainable use of materials in line with the requirements of Policy D4 of the Milton Keynes Local Plan 2001-2011.

11. Prior to the commencement of the development, and before any

(37)

equipment, machinery or materials are brought on to the site for the purposes of the development, all existing trees and hedges on or adjacent to the site including adjacent to the northern and western boundaries shall be protected by fencing in accordance with BS:5837:2012. The protected areas shall be kept free of all construction, construction plant, machinery, personnel, digging and scraping, waterlogging, changes in level, building materials and all other operations, personnel, structures, tools, storage and materials. All protective measures shall be maintained until all equipment, machinery and surplus materials have been removed from the site.

Reason: To protect the existing landscaping on the site. 12. Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority no

development shall take place beyond slab level until details of all estate roads, private drives and footways not approved under 08/01289/MKPCR (or amending consents) to include highway drainage measures have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and laid out and constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In order to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the highway and of the development. 13. No development beyond slab level shall be undertaken until details of

bird and bat boxes including the provision of boxes on buildings within the development hereby approved shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted details shall include a timeframe for the installation of the boxes. The development shall thereafter be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In order to achieve biodiversity enhancements in accordance with policy NE3 of the Milton Keynes Local Plan 2001 – 2011 14. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning

(General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking, re-enacting or modifying that Order), no external or internal alterations shall take place to any carports and car barns hereby approved without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason to ensure that alterations are not carried out which would make the carports and car barns unavailable for parking purposes, thereby eroding the parking facilities on the development in accordance with Policy T15 of the Local Plan. 15. No building or other site works likely to cause nuisance to occupiers shall

be carried out before 8am or after 6pm Mondays to Fridays nor before 9am or after 1pm on Saturdays or at any time on Sundays or Bank Holidays.

To limit the detrimental effect on adjoining occupiers by reason of noise and

(38)

disturbance. Reason: To limit the detrimental effect on adjoin occupiers by reason of noise and disturbance. 16. Notwithstanding the submitted details, no development beyond slab level

shall be undertaken until such time as details and samples of the surface treatment and appearance of non-adopted roads, shared private drives and parking courts shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local Planning Authority. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure the satisfactory appearance of the development. 17. Notwithstanding the submitted details no development beyond slab level

shall be carried out until details and samples of boundary and dwarf walls, piers, capping and external colour and finish to the railings have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The boundary treatment shall be provided for each dwelling prior to the occupation of that dwelling. Where hedges form the front boundary to a plot they will have a maximum mature height of 750mm.

Reason: To protect the appearance of the locality and safeguard the privacy of neighbours and to minimise danger, obstruction and inconvenience to users of the highway. 18. No development beyond slab level shall be undertaken until such time as

details of surface water drainage from the site including proposed outfall calculations are submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The drainage works shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details before the development is first occupied.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory drainage of the site.

(39)

UPDATED CONSULTATION RESPONSES 1.0 UPDATED CONSULTATION RESPONSES

Comments Updated 8.04.2015

1.1 Local Plan-Sustainability Officer The updated Sustainability Reports satisfy the requirements of Policy D4 and it would be useful for the SAP reports to clarify the carbon savings are accurate provided as annexes to the Sustainability Report. Recommends the standard D4 Policy condition. Included as the recommended condition.

1.2

Tariff Manager With regard to the tenure split to the affordable housing it is agreed that this will be agreed on a phase by phase basis with an overall spilt over the whole Bovis parcels which will achieve 30% affordable housing.

1.3

The proposed split of affordable rent and shared ownership appears an improvement over a previous tenure split of social rent, shared ownership, low cost and reduced cost. Over the two applications the overall tenure split is 226 total affordable units comprising 90 affordable rent and 136 shared ownership.

1.4 Highways Development Control Amended highways and parking details are acceptable and there are no highway objections to the proposed development.

1.4 Urban Design “Considerable discussion took place around improving the city street elevation in line with the design code requirement and in my opinion this has now got a much stronger character through the more contemporary approach taken. Given the constraints of the site (primarily no access being permitted off the city street) previous urban design concerns have now been addressed or diminished to the extent that I have no urban design objection to the application.”

(40)

NEWTON LEYS RESIDENTS’ ASSOCIATION

Milton Keynes Council Civic Offices 1 Saxon Gate East Central Milton Keynes MK9 3EJ

3 April 2015

Written Representations 15/00158/MKCOD3| Newton Leys School

We refer to the above planning application. We support the development of the school however would like to make the following representations on behalf of the community.

This matter was discussed at our January meeting, and we have subsequently conducted a survey of the residents living in Newton Leys prior to responding.

Newton Leys School will be very much welcomed by the community, and there is strong support for the school, however based upon the initial planning documents, we do believe, there are some issues that should be addressed in the design of the school.

Entrance to the school

It is noted from the plans that there will be separate entrances for staff and parents/pupils and these will both be located in San Andres Drive. In the Newton Leys Masterplan Design Code, San Andres Drive is a ‘Primary Street’.

Some residents who have purchased homes on San Andres Drive were informed that the school would have more than one entrance, and the access for vehicles would also be from a side road.

We understand that the ‘Secondary Street’ that adjoins the western edge of the school will be in Phase 5. We are concerned that there is no access on this side of the school premises particularly as there is a greater amount of residential houses and development on this side of the school, and therefore people would be more likely to walk to the school from these areas.

Milton Keynes Council should be proud of the strategies it has to encourage people to walk or cycle. These have been planned into the Newton Leys development, however as can be seen from the phasing plan attached, 75% of the development is west of the school site. The nearest other footpath is via Jubilee Lake, which has no street lighting meaning that during late autumn and winter, it is unlikely to be used as a route to school.

(42)


The matter of an additional entrance was brought up during consultation, and it was subsequently suggested that any demand would be related to Phases 4,5 & 7 of Newton Leys which are not developed as yet, this is not true – 75% of the development in would benefit from this entrance, including Phase 2 which is largely completed. Failure to put a rear entrance into the school will lead more people to drive to the school, something the Council has been trying to plan against!

We understand that Taylor Wimpey North Thames are currently preparing a planning application for Phase 5 and that this would be see houses being built within two years.

We would prefer that a condition was placed that upon School that a rear entrance should be provided within a five year period.

Operating Hours

The school has asked for operating hours for Education of 0700-2100 Monday to Friday and 0800-1800 on Saturdays and Community use: 1500-2100 Monday to Friday.

Whilst we welcome the school, there is concern that the site will be open every evening until 9pm. Newton Leys has one of the highest birth rates in Milton Keynes and many residents close to the school site have very young children. Newton Leys as a development is very quiet, and therefore a sudden increase in the number of vehicles late at night may be a nuisance and disturb children’s bedtimes.

There are also some concerns that opening the school for community use will have a detrimental impact on the community facilities that are being provided as part of the s106 planning obligations for Newton Leys. The Residents’ Association is very keen that the community hall will be sustainable, and will generate enough income – Allowing the local school to compete against the community hall as a venue for events would not be in the interest of Newton Leys.

We understand that the Planning Officer intends to recommend a condition on the school operating hours ‘Should the School Hall (main or small) be used by members of the public for social functions/community uses no activity will take place beyond 21:00 hrs Monday to Saturday and at no time on any Sunday or Bank Holiday’ These hours are actually longer than the School has requested. The application asks for permitted hours of 0800-1800 on Saturdays, and therefore any condition should reflect this. If the council wishes to change this, they should secure this change separately.

We would like to see a condition limiting the permitted hours on Saturday evenings as per the original application.

We would like to see a condition limiting the number of evening events that could happen at the school per year.

We would also like to see a condition that there can be no amplified sound audible outside the school building after 7pm.

(43)


School Safety Zone

We note the Planning Condition ‘Prior to the first use of the development hereby permitted the signage, road markings and physical measures forming the School Safety Zone and shown indicatively on drawing no. BU469T-04A shall be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and no part of the school shall be brought into use until the approved School Safety Zone scheme has been implemented in full.’ We would ask the Council to note that this condition would not be enforceable because not a single road in Newton Leys has been adopted since development commenced.

Multi Use Games Area

We would ask the Council to note that there is no time limit on the use of the Multi Use Games Area, and this would better protect local residents if it were recommended.

Yours faithfully,

Ethan Wilson Chair

(44)


School Entrances

Community would prefer a rear entrance to the School

(45)

Written Representations against Newton Leys School I want to make it clear that I have no objections against the provision of Newton Leys School. It will be a valued resource to the community, and many of my friends and neighbours currently have to school their children outside of Newton Leys, and even outside Milton Keynes. I have noticed from the landscape drawings that the Council plant to place 3 x 3-‐5metre high trees right at the end of my garden. The plans do look confusing in that there appears to be a line indicating my fence is closer to my house than it is. However, my fence is directly adjacent to the Newt fence in their plan. Perhaps this was not reflected in the original plans provided to Milton Keynes Council on which they have based the school designs. I was hoping that this was actually a mistake to do with the plans, and could be be resolved and contacted Glenn Oldfield who is the Project Lead for the Council who had some discussions with the relevant providers. I did not want to have to submit an objection against the school, however I did not get a response prior consultation close period, and therefore I felt I had no option but to submit an objection. I would ask the Committee to note that although the school will be surrounded by houses, there are only 4 houses, (and according to the plans, there will only ever be 4 houses) that border the school. These are 3, 4 & 5 Aruba Close and 23 San Andres Drive. My home is one of these houses. All of the other houses will be physically separated from the school by a primary or secondary street. The trees The school landscape plans wish to see 2 Prunus Avium (Bird Cherry) Heavy Standard (3-‐4 metres high) and 1 Betula Pendula (Silver Birch) Selected Standard (2-‐3 metres high) immediately adjacent to my garden fence. Prunus Avium is a deciduous tree growing to 15–32 m (50–100 ft) tall, with a trunk up to 1.5 m (5 ft) in diameter. It is often cultivated as a flowering tree. Because of the size of the tree, it is often used in parkland, and less often as a street or garden tree due to the potential size. Betula Pendula is a deciduous tree, typically reaching 15 to 25 m (49 to 82 ft) tall (exceptionally up to 31 metres (102 ft)), with a slender trunk usually under 40 cm (16 in) diameter. These trees are more suited to planting in gardens as they take up much less space. Impact of light The sun rises at the front of my house, and sets on the rear, this means that I get light in my living area and my garden until really late in the evening. It will now set behind the school when built. Whilst I am sad to lose the beautiful views that I have, I have always known that a School would be built behind my home.

(46)

I am already going to be impacted by the changes to the light, because of the high birth rate at Newton Leys, Milton Keynes Council have increased the places by 50%, rising from a 420 place school to a 630 place school. This now means what was more than likely going to be a single storey building has now been increased to a two storey school. I have accepted that the school is beneficial to our community as a whole, and that I am unlikely to see the beautiful sunsets that I currently do. I am not averse to trees, immediate adjacent to my house, I have beautiful old Willow trees. However, these were built into the design to ensure that they do not have an impact on the houses in our Close. I have always protected my rear garden. Taylor Wimpey told me that my plot had a tree designated within it, and I refused to have this planted on my property, which they confirmed they would no longer plant. I came home from work one evening to see that Taylor Wimpey had let themselves into my locked garden and planted a Sorbus Acuparia, which over 20 years could grow to 15 metres high and 5 metres in diameter. Upon complaint to Taylor Wimpey, they removed a tree from my garden straightaway. I would obviously be very concerned if I were to lose even more sun due to these trees in the landscape plan. I notice that the landscape design has actually been very sympathetic to the neighbouring properties (except for this corner) and so I wonder whether this is actually a mistake. I understand that if the Trees were planted, O would have rights to possible enforcement action under The Trees and High Hedges Act 2005 as there are;

• 2 or more trees or shrubs over 2 metres high above ground level and which may act as a barrier to light; and

• where reasonable enjoyment of part or all of a property, including a garden or part of a garden, is being adversely affected by a tree or high hedge that is situated on neighbouring land; and

• where the land which is being adversely affected is a domestic property. The landscape plan According to the landscape plan, my home is the only home affected by this landscape plan. The rear of the gardens for all of the other adjoining homes will be planted with 81 Symphoricarpos albus, a species of flowering plant in the honeysuckle family known by the common name Snowberry. I did not understand why my home was the only home selected to have such concentrated planting of high trees adjacent to my garden. It is clear from reviewing the plans submitted that the landscape plans do not accurately reflect the garden, which has been conveyed to me.

(47)

It would appear from the landscape plan that my garden fence is in line with the side of my house. This is not the case, it extends at least 2.5 metres from the side of my house and is immediately adjacent to the newt fence protecting Slad Farm Pond, which is a protected public open space. There are 91 trees to be located on the school site, and only 4 of those trees will border a neighbouring residential property. Three of those trees will be at the end of my garden. The remaining tree will be adjacent to a gable wall of a property. I feel that the only property that is affected is my own. I’ve enclosed my own plan so you can see. The Taylor Wimpey plan really demonstrates it clearly (My property is shown on the Taylor Wimpey plan as Plot 35) Engagement with the Developer I discussed this matter with Glenn Oldfield of Milton Keynes Council after my objection was placed with the Council. He listened and after consideration he was happy to see the trees relocated elsewhere so my garden would not be affected. This was referred to the planning department, who discussed the matter with the landscape architect and the view of the planning department is that these trees should not be moved “as they have to be accommodated somewhere”. Furthermore “the trees do not have large canopies and therefore will not block as much light”. I disagree with the viewpoint of the landscape architect; there is more than enough provision for trees both within the School site, and Newton Leys as a whole. Planning process The planning report put before you states ‘The planting is to be provided throughout the site and there have some queries raised with regards to impact upon nearby residential properties. It has been assessed however that the type, scale and density of the planting is appropriate for biodiversity, amenity value and privacy. In the long-‐term, should any of the planting require maintenance this would be managed by Council Officers.’ The word ‘query’ does not accurately reflect that the basis for the landscape plan was not an accurate plan, and that an objection has been made to the Council. In a discussion with regards to the plan, the planning officer confirmed that the advice of the Landscape Architect has been sought. However, they were not able to respond to my point on whether this was a desktop review or if the Landscape Architect has been out to my property to see how it would be affected. I really would rather not have had to make the formal representation to this meeting, however I am left with no choice other than to do so. Ethan Wilson

(48)

Construction of 630 place (3 form entry) primary school and 39 place nursery with associated car parking, hard and soft play areas, sport pitches, accesses and other external works AT Newton Leys Primary School, San Andres Drive, Newton Leys FOR Milton Keynes Council Target: 23rd April 2015 Ward: Bletchley East

Parish: Bletchley & Fenny Stratford Town Council

Report Author/Case Officer: Katy Lycett Contact Details: 01908 252313 [email protected] Team Leader: Nicola Wheatcroft Team Leader Strategic Applications Team Contact Details: 01908 252274 [email protected]

Minor changes are proposed to the report:

1. Please disregard the plan shown on page 148. 2. Paragraph 5.16 should read that the School Hall will not be permitted to be

used after 21:00 hrs to be in-line with Condition 16. This was the time originally requested on the application forms and is considered to be an appropriate time in order to limit the impact on neighbouring amenity.

3. Condition 20 should read that BREEAM ‘very good’ will be achieved instead of ‘excellent.’ This standard has been previously agreed through the Newton Leys Design Code. The revised condition will read:

‘The development shall be carried out in accordance with the details contained in the submitted BREEAM Assessment Report and a post completion certificate indicating that BREEAM Very Good has been met shall be forwarded to the Local Planning Authority prior to the occupation of the development. Reason: In the interests of sustainability and in accordance with Policy D4 of the Milton Keynes Local Plan.’

4. Condition 15 is a duplication of Condition 7. Condition 15 is therefore to be omitted.

5. Submitted external material samples have been assessed and agreed in-line with Urban Design Officers. These will be secured via the Decision Notice for completeness.

6. Condition 17 will be altered to read ‘…and shall not be used or occupied by any external organisation or group’. The revised condition will read:

The Multi Use Games Area (MUGA) shall be used only by pupils and staff of the School and shall not be used or occupied by any external organisation or group.

(49)

Reason: To protect the amenity of nearby residential properties and occupiers.

7. Condition 13 shall continue ‘The approved Management Plan shall be implemented prior to first use, and any works required thereafter maintained.’ The revised condition will read:

Prior to any construction work above ground level a Biodiversity Impact Assessment and a Biodiversity Enhancement Scheme and Management Plan shall be developed and submitted to the Local Planning Authority for approval. The approved Management Plan shall be implemented prior to first use, and any works required thereafter maintained. Reason: To protect and maintain the Mainline Rail Wildlife Corridor. In addition, draft conditions from the Environment Agency will be available to Members at the meeting in order to cover any issues relating to the Flood Risk Assessment.

(50)

Response to Written Representation (late paper) from Newton Leys Residents Group

1. Entrance to the School This application has been assessed and is deemed to be acceptable in terms of vehicle and pedestrian movements. The suggestion of an additional condition is not considered to be appropriate. 2. Operating Hours The attached condition limiting the hours of use for the School Hall are deemed to be appropriate for this location. The suggested condition of limiting the number of evening events would be difficult to monitor. 3. School Safety Zone This condition is appropriate and can be enforced. 4. Multi Use Games Area An attached condition restricts the Multi Use Games Area being used by pupils and staff only. As a result no further restrictive conditions are deemed to be necessary.

(51)

Response to Written Representation (late paper) from Resident The Council Tree Officer has provided further comments on the above queries and has provided the following observations and two further conditions have been drafted for consideration: The is an error on the planting plan in relation to the trees in question; The plan shows the two trees closest to the boundary of 3 Aruba Close as Bird Cherry, which is Prunus padus not Prunus avium as stated on the planting plan schedule (despite the obvious name association). In Britain the common name for Prunus avium is the Wild Cherry. The dendrologist A. Mitchell gives three potential heights for trees; the height expected to be attained in reasonable growing conditions at 10 and 20 years, then the ultimate height possibly attained in the better areas by the tallest trees of the species. For Prunus avium the heights are 8m, 14m and 30m, so it is somewhat larger than Prunus padus Bird Cherry the heights of which are 5m, 10m and 15m. This indicates that Prunus padus, the Bird Cherry would be the more suitable tree for the location. Because there will be tree related encroachment / overhanging issues in the future when planting next to boundaries and as there is room to position these trees further from the boundary, I think this should be done; a minimum of a 2.5 to 3 metre standoff should be allowed for. The Silver Birch heights are given as 8m, 18m and 26m. The Birch is light canopied tree that gives dappled shade so it should not create too much of a shading issue. Shading generally of 3 Aruba by the proposed trees will be confined to the late afternoon and evening only as they are to the west-northwest of the property. On the whole and with the minor changes I have suggested, I do not think the proposed tree planting will cause any significant problems and will soften the view over the built form to the west. Additional Conditions x2

1. Prior to any construction work above ground level full details shall be provided showing the two trees currently marked as 2 PA HS closest to properties in Aruba Close being changed to Prunus Padus species and not Prunus Avium.

Reason: to ensure that the amenity of properties nearby is not jeopardised by the proposed landscaping scheme.

2. Prior to any construction work above ground level full details shall be provided showing the two trees currently marked as 2 PA HS closest to properties in Aruba Close with a 2.5 to 3 metre standoff away from the site boundary.

Reason: to limit any tree related encroachment/overhanging issues.

(52)

Change of use from office (use class B1) to health and fitness centre (use class D2)

AT Winterhill House, Snowdon Drive, Winterhill

FOR Xercise4Less

Target: 11th February 2015 Ward: Central Milton Keynes

Parish: Campbell Park Parish Council

Report Author/Case Officer: Katy Lycett Contact Details: 01908 252313 [email protected] Team Leader: Nicola Wheatcroft Team Leader Strategic Applications Team Contact Details: 01908 252274 [email protected] Due the submission of further information and a query relating to the validity of the application on behalf of the adjoining tenant it is requested that this item is withdrawn from this Committee Agenda and deferred until the next available meeting in June or July. This is to enable the application to be amended to reflect the current use of the building more accurately and to allow re-consultation to take place.

(53)

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE MEETING

Documents

Transcript of DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE MEETING