1

Planning Appeal -

Full Statement of Case

Erection of a Detached Dwelling and construction of

a vehicular entrance and installation of septic tank

adj to

Bond End Holding (Bourne House),

Bond End, Yoxall, DE13 8NJ.

Planning Application Reference: P/2013/00765

Appeal Reference: APP/

Prepared on behalf of the Appellant

Mr G Williams

2

1. Introduction.

On the 2nd September 2013, East Staffordshire Borough Council refused planning permission for the ‘Erection of a Detached Dwelling and construction of a vehicular entrance and installation of septic tank adjacent to Bond End Holding (Bourne House), Bond End, Yoxall, DE13 8NJ. This Full Statement of Case represents the Appellants case for the Appeal.

The brief for the project had been developed by the current owners of Bond End Holding to redevelop the land previously occupied by, what is locally known as, the Bond End Holding cottages. The new residential dwelling will be occupied by the land owners daughters family with the prime objection of supporting the licensed family show dog judging and breeding activities and to expand holding activities. Additional support is required due to the age and reduced active capability of the owners as most activities are quite physical.

The Holding activities have regularly provided local residents with valuable work experience and many national and international colleagues have made use of the village bed & breakfast and public house facilities.

The owners have lived on the Holding for 17 years and never sought to develop the land in question until such a need for support has arisen.

3

2. Description of Proposal Site & Surrounding Area.

Site History

Bond End Holding, seen below shaded in blue, is located to the south of Yoxall, Staffordshire;

4

The previous residential use of the site can be clearly demonstrated by historic OS maps and the 1847 sale particulars below;

Due to its size and proportions, the proposed site within Bond End Holdings is redundant and can only be used for limited poultry runs. The hedge lines remain as the 1847 map giving the proposed site a distinct enclosed space context detached from the adjacent openness. The proposed site is unsuitable for typical holding animals such as horses and pigs and offers no agricultural crop opportunities. The loss of the proposed site within the holding to residential use would not reduce holding activities.

5

Site Photographs

The farm land to the south of the holding is at low level within the Trent plain falling immediately to the south of the highway. The holding rises northwards, steeply at first in the south east corner and then more gently, with the land to the north of the holding remaining at a near constant level. The holding boundary, in all directions, is hedge lined with limited semi-mature trees.

6

Surrounding Area

The areas immediately surrounding the holding are rural in character with farming land to all boundaries with the exception of the north east boundary which is adjoined by a double storey cement board clad aluminium coating factory with triple storey chimney. The south and east boundaries run in conjunction with the A515 highway.

The holding and proposed site is outside of the village Conservation Area.

The nearest residential neighbour, approximately 135m away, is Beechcroft to the east.

The holding and proposed dwelling is not visible from Trent Bridge Farm.

7

3. Description of Proposal.

The application proposes the erection of a new build 2 storey residential dwelling directly over the location of the previously developed land including aspect, orientation and shape. Although the site is detached from the main holding residence the proposed dwelling will replicate design details and façade materials which will help ensure the overall design of the house is in keeping with its setting and that it remains subservient to the main house. The proportions of the new dwelling will closely reflect those of the original cottages. The historic plan can be scaled to estimate the cottages footprint at 6.6x12m (80m2) and the site at 15x50m (750m2 or 0.075Ha). The proposed dwelling has a footprint of 6.1x13.9m (85m2).

4. Planning Policy.

The planning policy background is set out in the supporting D&A Statement which accompanied the planning application. Whilst the Inspectors attention is drawn to this it is not proposed to repeat the full content here.

8

5. The Case for the Appellant.

The Planning Application was refused on 2nd September 2013 for two reasons;

(Reason) 1. East Staffordshire Local Plan Saved Policy NE1 states that outside development boundaries new development will not be permitted unless it is essential to the efficient working of the rural economy, development otherwise appropriate in the countryside or close to an existing settlement and providing facilities for the general public or local community which are reasonably accessible on foot or by public transport. The National Planning Policy Statement also has at its heart a presumption in favour of sustainable development. The proposed new dwelling would not be essential to the rural economy, does not cater for an established need and would occupy a site well outside any development boundary defined in the Local Plan where the absence of any immediate local facilities would necessitate the use of private motor vehicles as the predominant mode of transport. Consequently, the proposal would not meet any of the above criteria to justify granting permission, nor would it constitute sustainable development, or comply with the requirements to permit isolated rural dwellings as identified in the National Planning Policy Framework (particularly Paragraph 55). The proposed dwelling would therefore constitute an unnecessary intrusion into the countryside to the detriment of the character and appearance of the rural locality and an unsustainable form of development contrary to East Staffordshire Local Plan Saved Policies NE1 and BE1 and the National Planning Policy Framework (in particular Paragraphs 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 17 and 55).

(Reason) 2. East Staffordshire Local Plan Saved Policy T1 states that development will not be permitted where it would unacceptably harm the safe and efficient use of the highway network. The proposed development would result in the creation of an access which would have restricted visibility. This would prejudice the safe and efficient use of the adjoining highway contrary to East Staffordshire Local Plan Saved Policy T1 and the National Planning Policy Framework (particularly Paragraphs 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14 and 17).

9

Rebuttal to these two reasons for refusal will be given under the following headings;

1. Reason 1

a. Development Outside Village Boundary (Policy NE1). b. Detriment of the character and appearance of the rural locality (Policy

BE1). c. Achieving Sustainable Development (NPPF 6, 7, 8 and 9). d. Presumption in favour of sustainable development (NPPF 11, 12 and 14). e. Core Planning Principles (NPPF 17). f. Isolated rural dwellings (NPPF 55). g. Use of private motor vehicles as the predominant mode of transport.

2. Reason 2

a. Creation of an access which would have restricted visibility (Policy T1).

Each sub-reason shall be examined in turn.

Reason 1a) Development Outside Village Boundary (Policy NE1).

The appellant acknowledges that the proposed site is outside of the development boundary. To satisfy Policy NE1 the development is required to fall within one of the following;

1. essential to the efficient working of the rural economy; or 2. development otherwise appropriate in the countryside; or 3. development close to an existing settlement and providing facilities for the

general public or local community which are reasonably accessible on foot, by bicycle or by public transport.

The proposal falls within item 2. ‘development otherwise appropriate in the countryside’ and can be judged positively against the following policy criteria:

(a) The proposed development must not adversely affect the amenities enjoyed by existing land users, including, in the case of proposals for development close to an existing settlement, the occupiers of residential and other property within that settlement.

The site is located in a low density environment close to an existing settlement. The previous use of the site was for residential cottages. The current long rectangle shape of the site provides low usage value and limits Holding activities to chicken coups. Provision of this dwelling and the subsequent family support to the Holding activities will ensure the existing land users maximise further amenities potential and therefore enjoyment. The nearest residential property, Beechcroft, is approximately 135m away.

10

The Appellant spoke with the owners of Beeachcroft, Mr and Mrs Webb, before the Planning Application was submitted. Mr Webb recalled the original cottages and did not have any objections to the application and considered the distance between the site and Beechcroft more than generous to avoid any privacy or noise issues.

The closest building to the proposed site is the metal coating factory and as such will not be adversely affected by the proposal. The factory offers no high architectural or landscape character standards.

(b) The detailed siting of the proposed development and its associated environmental impact are compatible with the character of the surrounding area, and safeguard nature conservation interests.

The Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey submitted to support the Planning Application confirms;

There will be a small amount of hedgerow loss, but none of the trees within the hedgerows will be affected. There will be trees planted in an adjacent field equivalent to 20% of the area of the site.

Removal of grassland and hedgerows may cause minor loss of bat foraging habitat. Severance of hedgerows can affect bat commuting routes. Any increase in general light levels could also affect bat foraging and commuting. The area of new tree planting will provide replacement foraging habitat which compensates for the habitat loss.

No badger setts observed. Loss of grassland, hedgerows and trees may affect birds that use the site

for breeding and foraging by causing a decrease in nesting sites and food resources. Loss of these habitats may directly harm nesting birds if carried out during the breeding season (March to August inclusive). The area of new tree planting will provide alternative foraging and nesting habitat which is a positive impact.

No reptile or GCN’s observed, site is classed as ‘distant’ habitat, and as there is low potential for GCN’s it would be pragmatic to include a further field survey as a Planning Condition.

The project will adopt the National Forest planting scheme by planting trees to cover an area equal to 20% of the proposed site (refer to D&A Statement section 6.01).

The siting of the dwelling within the site boundary reflects exactly the location of the previous cottages and therefore does not affect hedge lines, existing trees but is simply located on grassland.

(c) The design of the buildings, structures and materials relate satisfactorily to the proposed site and its setting.

11

The appearance details will reflect the village precedents such as vaulted solider course window heads, corbelled eaves, mixed face brickwork, gutters on rise and fall brackets, small tiles etc. Attention to detail will ensure high design quality (refer to D&A Statement sections 7.01 and 7.02).

(d) Landscaping associated with the proposal takes into account both the immediate impact and distant views of the development.

The site is situated away from the main Holding house and is screened by the original 1800’s hedge boundary. The nearest neighbour is the aluminium coating factory, which is of poor architectural value and is not in keeping with its surroundings, has no facing windows and could be said to lower the character of the area. The house will be set back from the road and will be screened at ground floor level by the hedge row. The outlook from the house will be predominantly north and southwards, to the north is the factory and to the south is open farmland with no other dwellings in view. The existing site boundary hedging and trees will screen the house sufficiently, the colour of the brickwork and roof tiles will match the main Holding house limiting the impact of the newness of the building.

(e) The access roads can accommodate traffic likely to be generated by the proposed development in terms of number, size and type of vehicles whilst meeting the needs of cyclists and pedestrians too.

Upon reviewing the Planning Refusal Reason 2, the Appellant has proposed to modified the site plan and access to utilise the existing Holding access point from the highway (no new access point required).

The existing driveway / courtyard of the Holding is wide and large enough to cater for cars, small delivery vehicles, oil deliveries etc to drive in and drive out without reversing.

The new drive to the proposed site inside of the Holding ownership boundary will be porous and will allow vehicles to utilise the existing access arrangements with no impact to the highway.

Further details, including information on travel frequencies, are provided in the response to Planning Refusal Reason 2 below.

(f) The proposed development provides for adequate access for pedestrians, cyclists and drivers, servicing and parking arrangements, and provision within the site for plant, equipment and the storage of goods and materials.

As point (e).

In addition to positively satisfying Policy NE1 item 2 sub-sections (a) to (f) inclusive, there are two key village development precedents set outside the development boundary of note.

12

1. The Weaverlake Drive development consists of 10 new build 2 storey 4/5 bedroom dwellings. The properties can be considered as inappropriate as they do not satisfy Policy NE1, they are built on vast green field land are not in keeping with the village vernacular and are excessive in layout (currently priced over £1m each!) offering limited village and rural benefits.

2. The Miller Pond development consists of 3 new build 2 storey 4/5 bedroom dwellings. Built in the garden and on the footprint of a demolished property, the site outside the development boundary exceeds the policy net density per hectare minimum requirements. This scheme does offer greater vernacular detailing. These two schemes do show developments outside the development boundary have previously been permitted. Locations of the two sites are demonstrated below;

WEAVER10X NEW2 STOREOUTSID

RLAKE DRIVE W BUILD DWELEY, 4/5 BEDROE DEVELOPME

DEVELOPMENLLINGS

OOM ENT BOUNDAR

NT;

RY

MILLE3X NEW2 STOOUTSIEXCEE

R POND, THE W BUILD DWEREY, 4/5 BEDRIDE DEVELOPMEDS NET DENS

CROFT; LLINGS

ROOM MENT BOUNDASITY PER HEC

ARY TARE

13

14

Reason 1b) Detriment of the character and appearance of the rural locality (Policy BE1).

Design

The Borough Council will approve applications for development which respond positively to the context of the area surrounding the site of the application and in themselves exhibit a high quality of design which corresponds to or enhances surrounding development. Such considerations will apply equally to new development and development which involves the re-use of existing buildings. In considering whether design of development proposals is satisfactory, the Borough Council will have regard to the following factors:

(a) The layout of the development in terms of its circulation routes and arrangement of buildings and how they relate to such factors in the surrounding area.

The new dwelling will mirror strong facing gable ends, this will form a direct face to face link between the two sites. As with the main holding house, the new dwelling will have its main elevations facing north and south with the main building axis running east to west parallel to the highway. The new access route from the main Holding house to the proposed site is a simple extension of a current Holding circulation route. The extended route will be finished in a porous material.

(b) How elements of any open spaces, both hard and soft, in the proposed development relate to each other, the proposed buildings, the characteristics of the site and the surrounding landscape's character and appearance.

The vast majority of existing hedges and all the trees are to be retained thus retaining the existing character. Soft landscaping, similar to the main Holding house‘s formal garden, is proposed within the retained hedge line to a domestic scale and appearance, very little of this landscaping will be seen from the highway. Hard finishes directly outside the proposed dwelling will be Marshall Heritage Riven paving or similar approved.

(c) The density and mix of the development in relation to its context and the uses to which the development will be put.

Item AreaExisting site area 750m2 (0.075ha) Proposed site area 750m2 (0.075ha) Footprint of historic cottages (approx, scaled off historic plan)

80m2 (0.008ha)

Proposed footprint of new two storey residential dwelling

85m2 (0.0085ha)

Therefore the density of the holding = 2 dwellings per 1.795ha. This is significantly under the LA’s Policy maximum ratio.

15

(d) The massing of the development in terms of the shape, volume and arrangement of the building or buildings in relation to the context of the development.

In addition to the text provided for point (a), one of the D&A Statement key drivers is to re-instate the original character to the site and this includes proposing a dwelling shape and volume similar to the original cottages. The footprint of the original cottages sat neatly within the hedged boundary without impacting on Holding activities, the application doesn’t propose to alter this relationship.

(e) How the height of the proposed development relates to the height of surrounding development and any vistas, views or skylines.

D&A Statement sections 5.01 and 5.02 explain the simple logic determining the proposed ridge height. The dwelling will sit above the flood plain facing south towards the River Trent overlooking no properties; similarly, when viewed from the north the dwelling will only be visible from the factory. Beechcroft to the east sits deep behind a mature tree and hedge line and is separated from the site by the A515 and further hedge lines. No negative feedback has been provided regarding the height of the proposed dwelling, the Appellant wished to emphasise that suggestions to the height plus other design considerations will be welcomed and incorporated.

(f) What materials will be used within the development and how they interrelate with each other, their immediate context and any traditional materials used in the area.

D&A Statement sections 7.01 and 7.02 demonstrate the clear intent to develop a property that pays respect to the main Holding house materials and details and those of the village.

(g) The detailing and construction techniques to be used in the development and how they interrelate with each other, and relate to the immediate and overall context.

As point (f).

(h) Adverse impacts on the immediate and general environment in terms of emissions and other impacts and any use of techniques or mechanisms to reduce those impacts.

The property will be designed using PassiveHaus principles to reduce energy consumption and benefit from energy capture via exchangers and solar glazing therefore emissions generated for energy production will be significantly lower than similar sized properties. D&A Statement section 7.03 expands further on this subject.

(i) The extent to which the design of the development takes into account the safety of users and reduces the potential for crime to occur in accord with s. 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998.

16

With the revised scheme omitting the direct highway access security is enhanced, the main Holding house provides good passive surveillance. As detailed in D&A Statement section 8.02, the property will benefit from a traditional building alarm consisting of external door and window contacts and room movement sensors and security movement activated external lights. Intercom facilities will be provided between the proposed dwelling and the existing Holding access point.

Reason 1 c). Achieving Sustainable Development (NPPF 6, 7, 8 and 9).

(Paragraph 6) The purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development. The policies in paragraphs 18 to 219, taken as a whole, constitute the Government’s view of what sustainable development in England means in practice for the planning system.

This Statement will not address Paragraph 6 as it is an all-encompassing statement on sustainable development within the Planning System as a whole. The application fully embodies the sustainability approach promoted by the NPPF and, although not technically a requirement, adoption of the Nation Forest Planting Scheme.

(Paragraph 7) There are three dimensions to sustainable development: economic, social and environmental. These dimensions give rise to the need for the planning system to perform a number of roles:

● an economic role – contributing to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type is available in the right places and at the right time to support growth and innovation; and by identifying and coordinating development requirements, including the provision of infrastructure;

This dimension is directed typically towards larger multi-dwelling and commercial schemes, however, although limited in its contribution, there is no doubt the proposed windfall benefit scheme will bring economic benefits to the village and county. The social benefits highlighted below naturally provide economic benefits for the village and its amenities (also listed below).

● a social role – supporting strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations; and by creating a high quality built environment, with accessible local services that reflect the community’s needs and support its health, social and cultural well-being; and

The permanent introduction of the Holding owners daughter family to the village will reinforce the families 17 year relationship with the area and will ensure continued support of local amenities such as the village shop, butchers, nursery and primary school. The owners granddaughter currently attends Humpty Dumpty nursery in the east of the village and will go to St Peters Primary School when she turns 5 and then will move onto John Taylor High in Barton-under-Needwood for her GCSE’s. The attendance at the nursery has generated many great new family friends whom regularly meet in the local public houses. The whole of the Holding daughters family

17

are registered at Yoxall Health Centre in the village. The family is very much part of the village social and economic scene.

● an environmental role – contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; and, as part of this, helping to improve biodiversity, use natural resources prudently, minimise waste and pollution, and mitigate and adapt to climate change including moving to a low carbon economy.

This scheme addresses the environmental impacts with great sensitivity. The Appellant included a Phase 1 Ecological Survey with the original application which confirmed the scheme would have very limited impact. The application has clearly identified enhancement of the site and a return to its original use as an important driver and as such; has assessed village material precedents, avoided the flood risk zone, utilises rainwater harvesting, utilises off-site SIPS approach to reduce waste, adopts Passivehaus principles, utilise north facing natural daylight, incorporates heat recovery, promotes air tightness and low u-values. The application will adopt the National Forest Planting scheme which will provide replacement foraging and nesting habitat which will more than compensate for any habitat loss.

(Paragraph 8) These roles should not be undertaken in isolation, because they are mutually dependent. Economic growth can secure higher social and environmental standards, and well-designed buildings and places can improve the lives of people and communities. Therefore, to achieve sustainable development, economic, social and environmental gains should be sought jointly and simultaneously through the planning system. The planning system should play an active role in guiding development to sustainable solutions.

The responses to Paragraph 7 above demonstrate that the scheme does positively connect the three sustainability dimensions seamlessly together and that they are indeed mutually dependant.

(Paragraph 9) Pursuing sustainable development involves seeking positive improvements in the quality of the built, natural and historic environment, as well as in people’s quality of life, including (but not limited to):

● making it easier for jobs to be created in cities, towns and villages;

● moving from a net loss of bio-diversity to achieving net gains for nature;

● replacing poor design with better design;

● improving the conditions in which people live, work, travel and take leisure; and

● widening the choice of high quality homes.

The scheme addresses all the above points, specifically the net gain in bio-diversity with a high quality well designed property. However, the main key driver is to improve the condition in which the current Holding owner and owners daughters

18

family live and work. Being on-site and closer to all the well-used village amenities, in particular the nursery and school, will enable this to occur.

Reason 1 d). Presumption in favour of sustainable development (NPPF 11, 12 and 14).

(Paragraph 11) Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

Appendix A of the original Planning Application D&A Statement provides a detailed review of all relevant Structure Plan and Local Plan policies. Particular attention is drawn to the review of Policy H3 and its associated Policies NE7, H6 and BE1.

(Paragraph 12) This National Planning Policy Framework does not change the statutory status of the development plan as the starting point for decision making. Proposed development that accords with an up-to-date Local Plan should be approved, and proposed development that conflicts should be refused unless other material considerations indicate otherwise. It is highly desirable that local planning authorities should have an up-to-date plan in place.

The current Local Plan is close to being obsolete with the imminent introduction of the New East Staffordshire Local Plan (current preferred option dated July 2012). Yoxall have chosen to develop a Neighbourhood Planning Policy, no details are available to review. However, upon review of the proposed new Local Plan Strategic Policies, it is clear that the windfall requirement for Yoxall for the plan period will increase to 40 dwellings, see section 5.142. This section also indicates that the development boundaries will be reviewed, thus making the current boundaries flexible and a significant point to consider when reviewing this case.

Section 5.143 states

‘These villages will benefit from a very small amount of housing to meet local needs, support village life and ensure that the local population has flexibility in housing choice. Abbots Bromley and Yoxall receive a slightly higher figure to reflect that they are larger villages and remote from Burton and Uttoxeter and so they perform a role within a larger rural hinterland. We would encourage growth to be organic and in response to local needs and for a number of windfall opportunities to come forward rather than through one windfall opportunity. We would encourage brownfield windfalls in preference to greenfield windfalls but recognise that in such rural locations it is not always possible to achieve brownfield development.’

This scheme is a clear windfall opportunity arisen direct from a long established village family providing economic, social and environmental benefits.

19

(Paragraph 14) At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking.

For plan-making this means that:

● local planning authorities should positively seek opportunities to meet the development needs of their area;

● Local Plans should meet objectively assessed needs, with sufficient flexibility to adapt to rapid change, unless:

–– any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or

–– specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted.

For decision-taking this means:

● approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and

● where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out‑of‑date,

granting permission unless:

–– any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or

–– specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted.

We believe that the schemes benefits do outweigh any perceived adverse impacts when assessed holistically in light of previous permitted precedents and the forthcoming Local Plan demand for homes within the village.

Reason 1 e). Core Planning Principles (NPPF 17).

(Paragraph 17) The 12 core planning principles.

We believe that the scheme addresses the 12 core planning principles, especially principle numbers 1 to 8 inclusive. And that the information provided within this document supports the appeal accordingly. Particular attention is drawn to principle number 8 which seeks to; encourage the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed (brownfield land), provided that it is not of high environmental value’.

20

Reason 1 f). Isolated rural dwellings (NPPF 55).

(Paragraph 55) To promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. For example, where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby. Local planning authorities should avoid new isolated homes in the countryside unless there are special circumstances such as:

● the essential need for a rural worker to live permanently at or near their place of work in the countryside; or

● where such development would represent the optimal viable use of a heritage asset or would be appropriate enabling development to secure the future of heritage assets; or

● where the development would re-use redundant or disused buildings and lead to an enhancement to the immediate setting; or

● the exceptional quality or innovative nature of the design of the dwelling.

Such a design should:

–– be truly outstanding or innovative, helping to raise standards of design more generally in rural areas;

–– reflect the highest standards in architecture;

–– significantly enhance its immediate setting; and

–– be sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area.

The scheme, although outside the village boundary is by no means an isolated home. It will become an integral part of the Holding helping to maintain Holding activities for the Holding owner whilst ensuring the village amenities are readily utilised by the three generations of the same family. The village has a number of properties outside the village boundary, several have been granted Planning Permission with less perceived benefits that are offered by this scheme.

The architecture of the house has been carefully considered and rather than attempt to make an extravagant statement with contemporary materials the details have been selected to reflect the village vernacular to reinstate the original character established by the cottages that previously stood on the site.

21

Reason 1 g). Use of private motor vehicles as the predominant mode of transport.

The following table explains how the use of a motor vehicle will be reduced, not increased, when the Holding owners daughters family reside in the proposed dwelling;

Distance travelled from current dwelling: Known (regulated) weekly travel destination Distance Two daily return trips to the Holding to assist with Holding activities (14 x 5) 70 Two daily return trips to Yoxall nursery (10 x 7) 70 Total 140

Distance travelled from proposed dwelling: Known (regulated) weekly travel destination Distance Two daily return trips to the Holding to assist with Holding activities (now on-site, walking) 0 Two daily return trips to Yoxall nursery (10 x 2) 20 Sub Total Reduction (a) 120 Any return journey from the proposed dwelling towards Lichfield or Burton will be 4 miles less, therefore, conservatively this could equate to; 4 shopping or similar return journeys (8 x 2) 16 5 commuting to work return journeys for the Holding son-in-law (10 x 2) 20 Sub Total Reduction (b) 36 Total Weekly Reduction (a) + (b) 156

Based on 47 week working year, the total mileage reduction would be (47 x 156) = 7332 This equates to a car carbon footprint of 2.49 tonnes of CO2e (using carbonfootprint.com)

Once the Holding owners granddaughter moves up to St Peters Primary School the return car journeys to the nursery will be omitted and the journey to the primary school will be on foot, thus reducing the use of a motor vehicle even further.

Public transport is also very accessible to the proposed site, bus stops are only 50m away providing direct links to Lichfield and Burton.

22

Reason 2) Creation of an access which would have restricted visibility (Policy T1).

The Appellant acknowledges that the proposed vehicle access point is close to a corner on the A515. On this basis, the Appellant proposes to alter the access route to the site and utilise the current Holding access point. The current access point allows vehicles to enter and exit the Holding at the location of the main Holding house without the need for reversing and has vision splays over and above the minimum Highways requirements. The current Holding courtyard is block paving and can accommodate delivery vans, oil deliveries etc with ease. A route to the north of the Holding formal garden and across the north edge of the middle field will lead directly to the proposed site. The new track will be a single width track of 3m formed in porous tarmac / concrete. The revised proposal is as follows:

We also note that the Highways Department have now installed Max 30mph’ signs on this corner as it is unsuitable for any faster speeds.

23

6. Summary.

Need – to provide a dwelling for the daughters family of the aging owners in order to support current Holding activities.

Previous use of land – residential (extracts of historic plans demonstrate this fact), and not currently fit for holding activity.

Design – vernacular, suitably scaled, proportionate and in context to the surroundings.

Impact – Zero to neighbours, nearest being an aluminium coating factory.

Sustainability – Passivehaus principles, SIPS, soakaways, rain water harvesting, heat recovery, reduced vehicle travel (working on site and walking to school).

Policy – Meets and satisfies Local Plan requirements, includes significant sustainable approach as promoted in NPPF.

Economy – The holding business would maintain its marketing value to the village, continue to offer work experience positions whilst visiting colleagues make the most of the village facilities.

Ecology – No loss of trees, embrace National Forest planting scheme by planting trees although not required to.

Location – Not within village conservation area, not within flood plain, not within Green Belt zone.

24

7. Conclusion.

Although the current application site is beyond the development boundary, it is clear that the site forms part of Bond End Holding.

The site should be considered on its own merits as a brownfield development opportunity that performs well against the sustainable development objectives identified NPPF and local policies.

The current Planning Policies seek to restrict but not eliminate development outside development boundaries that is appropriate in the countryside. It is important to note that the Local Plan includes objectives to make the most effective use of land by maximising the re-use of previously developed land. This is an important material consideration and the proposal is sufficient as a windfall site in its-self to outweigh reliance on the insufficient provisions identified in ESBC Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment which only identifies one greenfield site, ref 350, beyond the village development boundary for 25 dwellings. The proposal would make a contribution to the housing provision of the Development Plan and should therefore reduce the need to locate other housing on greenfields outside the develop boundary or in the countryside. This is particularly relevant at a time when the Local Plan is being reviewed.

The proposal would satisfy the requirements detailed in the NPPF that provide a presumption in favour of residential development on previously developed land. The site is accessible to jobs, shops and services and is well served by public transport. There is sufficient capacity in existing facilities and infrastructure to support a single residential development in this location. The site can make a valuable contribution to supporting local services and facilities ranging from shops to schools. There are no physical or technical constraints that would preclude development of the application site.

The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed development has been informed by, and is sympathetic to, landscape character and quality, and that it will contribute to landscape enhancement and shows proper regard of the relationship of the site to its surrounding area.

The previously developed land, defined as “land is that which is or was occupied by a permanent structure (excluding agricultural or forestry buildings) would not have a harmful impact on the quality of the landscape, the reinstatement of the cottage would return the landscape and character to the approach to the village to its original feel and appearance and would echo the developments on other approaches into the village from the east and specifically from the north on the A515 which incidentally has a significant number of roadside properties outside the village boundary.

Adequate justification has been submitted to demonstrate that the proposal would not constitute inappropriate development and does not have a significant adverse

25

effect on neighbours, the environment, the landscape character, local amenities and appearance of the locality. The proposal would not result in additional traffic which would be harmful to the A515 traffic and public safety.

The councils reasons for refusal are not justified and the inspector is respectfully requested to allow this appeal and grant planning permission.