Download Report

Committee Date:
28/05/2015
Application Number:
Accepted:
06/03/2015
Application Type:
Target Date:
05/06/2015
Ward:
Erdington
2015/01554/PA
Reserved Matters
Development
Land off Wilmot Drive/Beechmount Drive/ Rowden Drive, Lyndhurst
Estate and former Normanhurst Cate Home, Sutton Road, Erdington,
Birmingham, B23
Reserved matters application for the erection of 111 2, 3, 4 and 5
bedroom houses with associated open space, ground works, retaining
walls and new roads (phases 2 and 3) associated with outline planning
permission ref:- 2012/07153/PA.
Applicant:
Birmingham City Council
BMHT, Planning and Regeneration, PO Box 28, Birmingham, B1
1TU
BM3 Architecture
28 Pickford Street, Birmingham, B5 5QH
Agent:
Recommendation
Approve Subject To Conditions
1.
Proposal
1.1.
This application is for the outstanding reserved matters (appearance, landscaping,
layout and scale) for phases 2 and 3 of the Lyndhurst residential development.
These phases amount to 111 new dwellings which consists of 85 affordable and 28
private sale units divided as follows:
•
•
•
•
51 no. two bed
49 no. three bed
8 no. four bed
3 no. five bed
1.2.
This application is the second major phase of the redevelopment of the former
Lyndhurst estate in addition to the 141 dwellings either complete or nearing
completion on the previous phases. This application covers various plots of land
generally to the north of phase 1B that is currently on site.
1.3.
The scheme largely proposes to establish or complete street blocks of perimeter
development that provide an active frontage to streets with private gardens behind.
Generally larger properties mark corners, typically being 2.5 storeys, although the
development is largely 2 storey in height. Following a previous amendment to the
masterplan the existing street pattern is largely retained. This phase would deliver
the new public open space that is at the heart of the development measuring 0.68ha
and consisting of both formal and informal play space. In addition, adjacent to the
Page 1 of 9
retained Malcolm Locker Centre a new MUGA and a turfed sports pitch would be
provided.
1.4.
In accordance with the approved masterplan a pedestrian/cycle link from the
development to Chester Road has been included in the proposals.
1.5.
As per previous consents, the layout has been informed by the desire to retain as
many of the existing trees as possible.
1.6.
The proposed dwellings would continue the contemporary take on traditional styling
established by the previous phases with pitched roofs and a limited palette of
materials, with two types of brick the principal choice, although cladding is used to
provide visual interest on some dwellings.
1.7.
As with previous phases in-curtilage parking is largely provided on a 100% basis,
although where opportunities allow additional spaces are proposed. Additional
unallocated visitor/communal spaces are provided across the development, which
would assist both existing and proposed dwellings.
1.8.
An addendum to the Design and Access Statement; a Tree Survey; vehicle tracking
plans and full detailed plans have been submitted in support of this application.
1.9.
The submitted plans have been amended in light of consultation responses from
City Design and Transportation Development colleagues, resulting in a reduction
from 113 units and a change to the proportion of different sized units across the
scheme.
1.10.
Link to Documents
2.
Site & Surroundings
2.1.
The application site consists of the second substantial area of land situated between
phase 1b to the south, the railway line/phase 1a to the west, Sutton Road/retained
tower blocks to the east and properties fronting Chester Road to the north. Site
levels rise from Sutton Road then fall dramatically to the railway. The Grade II listed
Erdington Abbey is situated beyond phase 1B to the south. Erdington District
Centre is situated beyond to the south.
2.2.
There are a number of two storey dwellings within the masterplan area that are to be
retained along with a number of tower blocks including Standley’s Tower in the
north-western corner and four blocks on the Sutton Road frontage.
2.3.
On the opposite side of Sutton Road lie two storey houses and three storey post-war
flatted development.
Site Location
Street view
3.
Planning History
3.1.
21.10.2010 – 2010/04319/PA – Approval – Outline application for up to 316
dwellings, revised highway layouts, new open space, relocated youth centre, new
multi-use games area and the new D1 facility; health centre surgery. All matters
reserved for subsequent approval excluding access.
Page 2 of 9
3.2.
06.12.2012 – 2012/07153/PA – Approval – Minor material amendment to planning
approval 2010/04319/PA for outline application for up to 316 dwellings and reprovision of public open space and playing fields. Omission of relocated youth
centre and new health surgery previously proposed and reduction of minimum onsite playing field re-provision from 0.4 to 0.3ha. All matters reserved for subsequent
approval excluding access. Variation of conditions 24, 34, 35 and 37 and deletion of
conditions 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25 and 26.
3.3.
07.03.2013 – 2013/00204/PA – Approval – Reserved Matters application for the
erection of 26 no. 2, 3 & 4 bed houses (Phase 1A) associated with outline planning
permission 2012/07153/PA.
3.4.
14.06.2013 – 2013/02105/PA – Approval - Reserved matters application for the
erection of 107 no. 2, 3, 4 and 5 bedroom houses and 10 no. 2 bedroom flats with
associated ground works, retaining walls and new roads (Phase 1B) associated with
outline planning permission 2010/04319/PA
4.
Consultation/PP Responses
4.1.
Transportation Development – No objection subject to conditions to be reported.
4.2.
Regulatory Services – No comments.
4.3.
West Midlands Fire Service – Raises no objection and provides specific guidance
with which the scheme must comply such as limiting the distance an engine is
required to reverse.
4.4.
Leisure Services – No objections. The on and off site playing field provision is
satisfactory.
4.5.
Site and Press Notices displayed. Neighbouring occupiers, Ward Members and
Residents’ Associations consulted with four responses received from local
occupiers.
4.6.
One resident questioned whether the flats on Beechmount drive are to be
demolished, a further resident questioned whether there are plans to open up the
junction of Old Bell Road, Rowen Drive and Beechmount Drive in order to
encourage traffic flows and reduce accidents. A further resident raises concerns
about the proposed adopted parking areas on Rowden Drive and considers that
existing residents should be provided with adequate parking and footway crossings
should be provided. Finally one resident is pleased with the new houses and fully
supports the development and would like the opportunity occupy one of the new
dwellings.
5.
Policy Context
5.1.
Birmingham Unitary Development Plan 2005; the submission draft Birmingham
Development Plan; Places for Living (2001) SPG; Car Parking Guidelines (2012)
SPD; and the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.
6.
Planning Considerations
BACKGROUND
Page 3 of 9
6.1.
This application covers phases 2 A-D and 3 A-C. Phase 1A towards the rear of the
wider site is complete and occupied; phase 1B is in the advanced stages of
construction with a number occupied. The only phase of development without an
application for detailed consent is phase 4 which is reserved for a landmark scheme
of approximately 52 residential apartments on the Sutton Road frontage.
6.2.
Therefore, the principle of the development has been established by the previous
outline planning permissions. The development is in general accordance with the
previously approved master plans and represents a refinement of the development
proposals as additional detail has been added.
DESIGN
6.3.
The proposed design represents an evolution of the approved masterplan and a
continuation of the previously consented phases. The scheme would continue to
provide both vehicular and pedestrian connectivity through the site and beyond with
an appropriate hierarchy of streets throughout the development.
6.4.
This largely two-storey development is of an appropriate scale to its context, with
opportunities to highlight corners/junctions or responding to level changes taken
through the introduction of limited 2.5 and 3 storey properties.
6.5.
The design of the properties as a continuation of the previous phases is appropriate
and acceptable. The previous phase of this development is high quality and
significantly enhances the character and appearance of the area when compared
with the previous development that occupied the site. The use of red brick and slate
coloured roof also respects the wider context. Safeguarding conditions in relation to
materials and boundary treatment are attached to the outline consent.
6.6.
My City Design Officer supports the amended proposals.
6.7.
I therefore consider the design of the proposals acceptable.
AMENITY
6.8.
Regulatory Services have no comments on this phase of the development. In terms
of the amenity of local occupiers the development would not overlook or overshadow
existing properties. The development is largely in accordance with Places for Living
separation guidelines. I note Plot 91 is not compliant in terms of its relationship with
the existing neighbouring property however given the limited scale of this building
and the easterly orientation I consider this relationship acceptable on balance.
6.9.
Turning to the amenity of future residents, the development offers relatively spacious
accommodation with the majority of rear gardens well in excess of Places for Living
guidelines. The perimeter block layout provides security to the rear, with exposed
boundaries secured by quality brick walls.
6.10.
I therefore raise no amenity-based concerns.
TREES / LANDSCAPING
6.11.
As with the previous consent, the development seeks to retain as many trees as
possible. The Tree Survey has been updated in light of the latest development
proposals. This demonstrates that the majority of the trees on the site (of which
there are more than 300) will be retained. Generous verges and the location of the
Page 4 of 9
new public open space allow for the retention of key trees. Opportunities to
introduce new tree planting and landscaping are taken where possible, with a
substantial number (over 40) of new trees proposed within front gardens and
incidental landscaping space. I therefore raise no arboricultural concerns.
HIGHWAY MATTERS
6.12.
Transportation Development raises no objections to the amended proposals subject
to the imposition of suitable safeguarding conditions. I concur with this
recommendation and consider that the proposals show a safe and practical highway
layout, with sufficient space to service the proposed development (e.g. refuse
vehicles). I do not consider the proposals to remove permitted development rights
preventing future occupiers from converting their garages to living space as
reasonable and note the very limited number of garages within the scheme.The
overall parking levels are acceptable and the amended plans have addressed any
earlier issues of clustering of larger units with limited provision. The proposals strike
a balance between providing sufficient parking and landscape quality through the
provision of front gardens. Limited stopping up of existing highways is required in
order to facilitate the proposed layout and an appropriate resolution is attached.
6.13.
I therefore raise no highway-based concerns subject to a suitable condition requiring
details of the proposed pedestrian link to Chester Road.
7.
Conclusion
7.1.
This application is in accordance with the parameters established at outline stage
and the relevant policy context. The proposals represent a continuation of the high
quality design delivered in phase 1 and will deliver a genuine transformational
impact for this area. I therefore recommend that planning permission is granted
subject to suitable safeguarding conditions.
8.
Recommendation
8.1.
That no objection be raised to the stopping up of parts of Beechmount Drive,
Banners Grove and Rowden Drive with a realigned highway layout, and that the
Department for Transport (DFT) be requested to make an Order in accordance with
the provisions of Section 247 of the Town and Country Planning Act.
8.2.
And that approval be granted subject to the following conditions:
1
Requires the scheme to be in accordance with the listed approved plans
2
Requires the prior approval of the pedestrian link details
Case Officer:
Nicholas Jackson
Page 5 of 9
Photo(s)
Figure 1 – Along Wilmot Drive from Sutton Road – Phase 1B on the left
Page 6 of 9
Figure 2 – From Malcom Locker looking south
Page 7 of 9
Figure 3 – Site of Phase 3C
Page 8 of 9
Location Plan
This map is reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her
Majesty's Stationery Office © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or
civil proceedings. Birmingham City Council. Licence No.100021326, 2010
Page 9 of 9