Southend-on-Sea Borough Council Department for Place! Peter Geraghty Head of Planning & Transport

Transcription

1 Southend-on-Sea Borough Council Department for Place! Peter Geraghty Head of Planning & Transport Our ref: 15/00889/PREAPF Telephone: ext 4848 Your ref: Fax: Date: 3 rd August council@southend.gov.uk Contact Name: Louise Cook DX 2812 Southend Mr P. Harman BGA Architects Kingsbridge House 17/23 Rectory Grove Leigh-on-Sea SS9 2HA! Dear Mr Harman Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) Chaltonholme, 1-3 First Avenue, Westcliff-on-Sea, SS0 8HS I refer to your pre-application enquiry received on 8 th June 2015 and our subsequent meeting on 24 th June The plans to which this pre-application relates are 0-001, 0-002, 0-003, 1-001, and I apologise for the delay in replying this is due to high workloads. The proposal seeks to demolish the existing nursing home (class C2) use and to erect a three storey building comprising 15 flats (6 x 1 bed and 9 x 2 bed). Car parking for 17 spaces to the rear of the building is proposed. In the assessment of any formal planning application for this proposal the Council will take into account the principle of the proposed development, the design, impact in the streetscene, the standard of the proposed accommodation for future occupiers, impact on neighbouring occupiers, traffic and highways issues, sustainable development (including SUDs and renewables) and developer contributions. An application for the proposed development will be determined against the National Planning Policy Framework, Policies KP1, KP2, KP3, CP1, CP3, CP4, CP6 and CP8 of the Core Strategy, the Design and Townscape Guide (SPD1), 2009, Development Management Policies DM1, DM2, DM3, DM7, DM8, DM9, DM11 and DM15 and Planning Obligations: A Guide to Developer Contributions (SPD2). These documents are available to view online on the Council s website. (Other policies may be relevant depending on the particular details submitted). Please note that the Council s emerging Development Management Document (DPD2) was adopted on 25 th July The Council adopted a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Schedule on 23 rd July and took effect from Monday 27 th July The proposed development would be liable to pay a CIL charge. Further details are set out in the Developer Contributions section below Corporate Director for Place: Andrew Lewis Civic! Centre : Victoria Avenue : Southend-on-Sea : Essex SS2 6ER Customer Service Centre: : VAT Regn No !

2 It is understood that the site was formerly used as a nursing home from 1960s until it closed in November It is understood that the site has structural issues and is no longer fit for purpose for use as a nursing home. The site is located on the northern side of First Avenue however, predominantly is read as part of the western side of Crowstone Avenue, immediately to the south of the railway line and adjacent to the sharp bend in Crowstone Avenue/Station Road. The surrounding area is predominantly residential in character. There is no relevant planning history for the site in question. Principle of Development The site is currently vacant however, as discussed above, has been used for approximately 50 years as a nursing home run by a charity. It is understood from our pre-application submission that approximately over 70% of the residents were Local Authority funded however, there has been a significant reduction in Local Authority contracts for care home provision. The site had 33 residents which have been rehomed both inside and outside of the Borough. The site is suffering from structural issues and is no longer fit for purpose. It is recommended that a supporting statement is put together which justifies why the site is no longer fit for purpose as a nursing home. Subject to satisfactory justification, in principle the redevelopment of the site for general residential use is considered to be acceptable. Policy DM9 of the Development Management Document relates to Specialist Residential Accommodation and seeks to limit the further growth of residential care and instead to focus on promoting improvements to existing facilities as well as to support increased care within people s homes. Policy DM3 of the Development Management Document relates to the efficient and effective use of land and states that the Council will support development that is well designed and that seeks to optimise the use of land in a sustainable manner that responds positively to local context and does not lead to over-intensification, which would result in undue stress on local services, and infrastructure, including transport capacity. In terms of the breakdown of the units (6 x 1 bed and 9 x 2 bed), reference is drawn to Policy DM7 of the Development Management Document. The Council will promote the mix of dwellings and preferred affordable dwelling mix set out in Policy Tables 2 & 3 below. It would be preferable to have three bedroom units incorporated within the scheme with suitably sized useable amenity space.

3 Design and Impact on the Streetscene The existing building comprises a number of traditional houses which have been extended and converted into a care home which has recently become redundant. The former houses have been linked by a more recent single storey extension. The original older buildings are typical of the area and form a cohesive streetscene with the surrounding properties however there are not heritage assets and, whilst conversion would be an option, the redevelopment of the site for flats would not be out of character with the area generally subject to a high quality and appropriately scaled design. The existing single storey section is of no architectural merit. The proposal shows a series of three linked blocks being three storeys at the southwestern end, three storeys in the middle dropping to two storeys in the north-eastern corner. Generally an element of three storey development of this scale seems reasonable but it is suggested that the height should be relocated to the more prominent north-eastern corner, which terminates the view down Station Road. There should be a more positive relationship to the proportions and key references on neighbouring buildings to the south-west to ensure that the proposal integrates well into the streetscene. There are also concerns regarding the resolution and form of the roof in relation to the wider streetscene which is mostly deeper gables with some flat roofed flatted blocks. It is noted that the layout responds to the irregular shape of the site and is generally acceptable although it is considered that the location of a balcony in the south-west corner has created a rather negative relationship with the building line and eaves of the adjacent property on First Avenue and should be reviewed in any revised proposal. A more forward main line with better proportioned narrower projections would work better. The generous frontage generally however relates well to local character and should enable an attractive landscaped setting to the development which should be to the benefit of the scheme and the wider streetscene. The mature trees to the front of the site are an asset to the site and the wider streetscene and should form an integral part of the landscaping for the site. In terms of design detail, the use of a glazed core to link the blocks is an interesting concept that could provide an interesting focal point for the development provided that it is well detailed and integrated with the overall design but as proposed it seems a little unresolved particularly at roof level where it links two hipped roofs. There is also

4 a concern regarding the section of flat roof to the rear. The roof form generally should be reviewed. Overall it is considered that the proposal is lacking in interest particularly in terms of its fenestration and detailing and needs more refinement in its proportions and roof design. It is considered that the proposal needs much greater articulation and better proportion so that it has a positive relationship to the fine grain and rich detailing of the area albeit in a modern way if desired. There is an opportunity to emphasise the corner to the south-east which sits on the junction of First Avenue and Crowstone Road and to provide a feature in the north-east corner that will form the terminating view from Station Road to the east. Retaining the vehicular access and having a build over in this location is accepted in principle, however this element should not form a dominant feature on the frontage. The proposal will be required to provide 10% of its energy needs from onsite renewables and this should be considered at an early stage to ensure that they can be fully integrated into the design. This is discussed in more detail below. Standard of Accommodation for Future Occupiers Policy DM1 of the Development Management Document requires all development within residential streets and housing development elsewhere to be appropriate in its setting by respecting neighbouring development, existing residential amenities and the overall character of the locality, whilst also achieving a high standard of layout and design. Policy DM3 of the Development Management Document relates to the formation of self-contained flats. This details that purpose-built schemes should avoid over intensive development, whilst conversions should achieve an internal layout which limits noise transmission and provides adequate accommodation standards. The proposed flats will need to meet the Development Management Document indicative residential space standards (Policy DM8) set out in the table below. It appears that all of the proposed units will meet these standards provided the two bedroom units provide 3 bedspaces rather than 4. Internally the layouts seem reasonable although it is noted that living area for the two bed unit is significantly smaller than the 1 bed unit and it is therefore suggested that this is reviewed to be more balanced. It is pleasing to see that the balconies are of a useable size.

5 All flats will need to have a good outlook and receive a satisfactory level of natural light. There is concern that some of the units will be located in very close proximity to the car park and an improved relationship and outlook should be considered here. Notwithstanding this, it appears that the majority of the flats will have an acceptable outlook and level of natural light. Whilst the Council has no set standard for the quantity of amenity space, it is recognised that private outdoor space is an important amenity asset and all new residential units will be expected to have direct access to an area of private amenity space. This space must be functional to cater for the needs of the intended occupants, as set out in Policy DM8 of the Development Management Document. It appears that all units will have private balconies and access to a shared amenity space at the rear (242sq.m). Each of the proposed balconies are approximately 8sq.m in size which, together with the shared amenity space at the rear, provides each unit with an average of 24sq.m of amenity space and is considered acceptable. With regard to the frontage of the site, this would not be considered as private amenity space given its position to the front of the building in the streetscene. The proposed development is sited immediately adjacent to the railway line. An acoustic report will be required to be submitted as part of an application to provide mitigation measures against noise for future occupiers. You may wish to look at 315 Station Road, Westcliff (ref. 15/00669/OUT) as an example. Impact on Neighbouring Occupiers The only neighbouring occupiers likely to be affected by the proposed development are those immediately adjacent to the site (5 and 7 First Avenue). It appears that the proposed building will be sited in line with the rear of no. 5 First Avenue and that the remainder of the building run sharply away from the neighbour. This should prevent the proposed development being overbearing upon this neighbour. From the proposed ground floor plan, it appears that the fenestration on rear elevation will be designed to

6 be kept to a minimum to prevent overlooking and loss of privacy to properties in First Avenue. However, in the absence of rear elevations, I am unable to assess further/provide further comment. Traffic and Transport Policy T11 of the Borough Local Plan states that In considering planning applications for development (including changes of use) the Borough Council will require the provision of off-street car parking spaces. Appendix 6 of Policy DM15 of the Development Management policies are minimum requirements for residential parking and are set out in the table below: 17 off-street car parking spaces are proposed to serve the development which exceeds the above minimum standards. The layout of the proposed car park appears to be acceptable in terms of manoeuvrability and each space should measure 2.4m wide x 4.8m deep. In terms of traffic movement and levels of activity, you may wish to provide some information regarding the proposed levels of traffic movement from the site in comparison to the former use as a 33 bed nursing home. However, this does not necessarily need to be a full transport assessment. Policy DM15 (Appendix 6) requires one secure covered cycle space per dwelling. It should be demonstrated that the cycle storage will be large enough to accommodate the required number of spaces and can be satisfactorily be accommodated on site. Adequate refuse storage will need to be provided on site and incorporated within the design of the development. It will need to ensure that it is of adequate size to serve the number of flats proposed. A Council waste contractor would not collect from a private area (i.e. inside the building) therefore, alternative arrangements would need to be made and indicative details of waste management should be submitted as part of any formal application. The Council s Waste Management Guidance can be found online using the link below: guidance_for_developers_oct_2014.pdf.

7 Sustainable Development Paragraph 97 of the NPPF states that Local Authorities should promote energy from renewable sources. Policy KP2 of the Core Strategy states that all new development proposals should demonstrate how they will maximise the use of renewable and recycle energy, water and other resources. The policy states that at least 10% of the energy needs of new development should come from on-site renewable options. Further details should be submitted as part of any planning application to show how this would be achieved and incorporated within the design of the proposed development. With regard to SUDs, details must be submitted with the application. Your attention is also drawn to Policy DM2 of the Development Management Document which requires the following:

8 Developer Contributions CIL charging has commenced on Monday 27 th July Full details can be found online at: On adoption of a Charging Schedule, the Council will also be publishing a revised Supplementary Planning Document in relation to Planning Obligations; and this document can be found online at: frastructure_levy_cil/3 A nominal CIL rate of 60 per square metre is required for the proposed development which is located in Zone 3. As per all residential proposals of this size, 20% affordable housing is required as set out in Policy CP8 of the Core Strategy. The following affordable housing units are required: As indicated in Policy DM7 a tenure mix of 60/40% (60% rented and 40% intermediate housing) would be required. You would need to ensure that any proposal complies with the CIL charging schedule and I would also refer you to the Council s Planning Obligations SPD which can be found online using the link below. This document details the procedure for completing planning obligations in terms of the level of information required for formal submission: 394/planning_obligations_a_guide_to_s106_and_developer_contributions_spd_2 With regard to viability, should you seek not to make the required S106 contributions, a viability assessment would be required and if an external financial assessment is required, we would require an undertaking to pay our reasonable costs which we would first discuss with you. Summary There is no objection in principle to the redevelopment of the site however, it is recommended that three bedroom units should be incorporated within the mix of the units provided in attempt to satisfy Policy DM7 of the Development Management Document, although it is recommended that such unit which could be occupied by a family would need its own private garden area and this would need to be incorporated within the design of the proposed development. There is no objection in principle to the size or scale of the building however, it is considered that the design of the proposed development currently lacks interest and greater reference should be drawn to the streetscene. The three storey element should be restricted to the northern part of the site.

9 Planning Application Documents The national requirements for submission of the application/s for full planning permission are set out on our website at: application_forms_and_checklists Therefore, in accordance with National and Local requirements, the following information would be required to validate an application: Full planning application forms Notice(s) Location Plan Site Plan Existing and proposed elevations Existing and proposed floorplans Existing and proposed streetscenes Correct fee Design and Access Statement Supporting Planning Statement, including information in respect of traffic movement. Viability Assessment (if required) Planning Obligations Draft Heads of Terms See SPD2. Sustainability Appraisal/Energy Statement, including SUDs details. Acoustic report Recycling/Waste Management Strategy Affordable Housing Statement. Details of Landscaping CIL Additional Information Requirement Form You are advised that the development hereby approved is likely to require approval under Building Regulations. Our Building Control Service can be contacted on (01702) or alternatively visit our website for further information. I trust this information is of assistance to you. Should you have any queries in respect of the above, please feel free to contact me. Please note that these are the views of an officer and are made without prejudice to any formal decision of the Council on this matter. Yours sincerely Louise Cook Planning Officer, BA Hons, MA, MRTPI!