APPLICATION NO

	APPLICATION NO.	P19/V1998/RM
	SITE	Land North of Dunmore Road, Abingdon, OX14 1PU
	PARISH	ABINGDON
	PROPOSAL	Reserved Matters Application (Appearance, Landscaping, Layout, Scale) - Residential development for erection of 425 dwellings within 3 phases of the North Abingdon Development: Western Parcel Area A & B and Central Parcel Area A. Associated landscaping and infrastructure works together with additional details as required by conditions attached to outline planning permission (Ref: P17/V0050/O)(as amended by drawings and information received 21 December 2020).
	WARD MEMBER(S)	Margaret Crick Andy Foulsham
	APPLICANT	David Wilson Homes Southern
	OFFICER	Hanna Zembrzycka-Kisiel

RECOMMENDATION

It is recommended that reserved matters are approved subject to the following conditions:

Approved plans

Pre-Commencement Conditions

Submission of Arboricultural Method Statement

Pre-Occupancy or Other Stage Conditions

3. Parking provision before occupancy of each dwelling

4. Acoustic bund: submission of geotechnical details

5. Acoustic bund: full details of drainage and its location

6. Submission of detailed noise mitigation scheme

7. Detailed planting scheme to be approved

8. On-plot landscape details to be approved

9. Details of childrens’ play areas to be approved

Updated landscape management plan to be approved
Maintenance plan for open space and play areas to be approved

12. Lodge Hill Park Area: design and footpath location to be approved

13. Boundary Treatments to be approved

Submission of the verification report for the installed surface water drainage system

15. Detailed lighting scheme to be approved

16. PV scheme to be approved

Post Occupancy Monitoring and Management Conditions

Implementation of landscaping
Garage retention for parking

19. Entrance feature walls

Informatives

Landscape: proposed species
Woodland Management Plan
Public highway works
Thames Water

1.0	INTRODUCTION, SITE LOCATION AND PROPOSAL
1.1	This application seeks approval of Reserved Matters for 425 dwellings across three parcels of the North Abingdon strategic housing site. Outline permission was granted in 2017 under application ref. P17/V0050/O for up to 950 dwellings and associated infrastructure.
1.2	At the time of submission, the application site was partially located in Sunningwell Parish Council. However, following boundary changes in 2019 the site is now wholly located within Abingdon on Thames’ administrative boundary and the application is brought to Planning Committee as Abingdon on Thames Town Council objects to the proposal.
1.3	The reserved matters for consideration are appearance, landscaping, layout and scale. Access is from Dunmore Road and was approved as part of the outline permission.

1.4	Site Location This relatively flat and open field is located at the northern edge of Abingdon. The A34 is located immediately to the north-west of the site and Dunmore Road to the south. To the west is Tilsley Park. A detailed layout plan is attached at Appendix 1 and also illustrated on the image below:
1.5	The Proposal
	The application area covers three parcels: Western Parcel A, Western Parcel B and Central Parcel A, as illustrated on the image below.
1.6	The proposal has been subject to amendments and additional information in revising the design of the scheme and in seeking to address previous technical objections from consultees (e.g. the built form not being compliant with the Design Code and parameter plans approved under outline permission; inadequate quantity and quality of the public open space; location and design of the acoustic bund; inadequate landscaping and tree planting scheme which did not follow the scheme agreed under planning application ref. P18/V1622/DIS).
1.7	The proposal includes 276 private units in a mix of 1 bed & 2 bed apartments, 2 bed, 3 bed, and 4 bed houses, as well as 149 affordable units (35% in accordance with the S106 agreement) comprising 1 bed & 2 bed apartments, 2 bed, 3 bed, 4 bed houses with private gardens and a mix of both affordable rent and shared ownership.
1.8	A detailed layout plan is attached at Appendix 2. The layout is designed with a series of connected streets off a central Spine Road which has tree lined verges and a footway separated from the road and provides four character areas to accord with the approved site Design Code. This document has also established the vision, mandatory principles and design specification for the development which is assessed later in this report.
1.9	Proposed dwellings will be 2 storeys in height with 2.5 and 3 storeys units along the main primary road. Two play areas (LEAP and NEAP) are located to the north-east of the Western Parcel B and within the northern part of Central Parcel A.

2.0	SUMMARY OF CONSULTATIONS & REPRESENTATIONS
2.1	A summary of the latest responses received to the proposal is below. A full copy of all the comments made including those in respect of previous iterations of the proposals can be seen online at www.whitehorsedc.gov.uk

Abingdon on Thames Town Council

Amended proposal

Objection

Reiterate the original reasons given in the original submission and add:

o Housing mix has been changed and does not follow the approved SHMA Mix;

o Ambiguity in the plans illustrating the details of the proposed acoustic bund;

o All buildings shall be constructed to the highest environmental standards;

o Concerns regarding the proposed junction design (access point from Dunmore Road);

o Infrastructure to be provided prior to housing units are occupied;

o Local traffic will be worsened by the proposal;

o Delivery of the proposed uses (within the central part of the allocated site)- there is ambiguity regarding the timescales for these uses to be delivered;

o The proposal will increase pressure upon the local GP surgeries;

Additional reasons based on the amended scheme:

o There is no clear justification for the expansion of the development

o Parking provision is not made at the maximum standard

o Delay on the delivery of the of the play equipment

o There is a risk that a new school may not be delivered, and the Town Council would like to see confirmation that the school will be delivered before the commencement of development;

o A condition restricted the number of occupations before the Lodge Hill interchange is delivered, should be imposed.

Original proposal

Objection

o Housing mix has been changed and does not follow the approved SHMA Mix;

o Ambiguity in the plans illustrating the details of the proposed acoustic bund;

o All buildings shall be constructed to the highest environmental standards;

o Concerns regarding the proposed junction design (access point from Dunmore Road);

o Infrastructure to be provided prior to housing units are occupied;

o Local traffic will be worsened by the proposal;

o Delivery of the proposed uses (within the central part of the allocated site)- there is ambiguity regarding the timescales for these uses to be delivered;

o The proposal will increase pressure upon the local GP surgeries;

Sunningwell Parish Council

Amended proposal

No comments received

Original proposal

No comments received

St Helen Without Parish Council

Amended proposal

No comments received

Original proposal

No comments received

Radley Parish Council

Amended proposal

No comments received

Original proposal

Objection

· Housing mix has been changed and does not follow the approved SHMA Mix

Residents

27 letters of objection were received during the initial consultation and a further 16 letters of objection in relation to the amendment. The objections and comments submitted for both, original and amended proposals are summarised as follows:

Traffic and Highways

Increased traffic congestion

Deficient junctions to the road network
Traffic light systems slow traffic and create pollution from standing vehicles
This planning application should not be granted until the Lodge Hill Slips have been put in place
The main mode of transport will be by private car
More commitment is needed from the applicant towards sustainable modes of travel
No measures proposed to encourage greater use of public transport such as buses along Dunmore Road and bus lanes on the A34
Turning right onto Dunmore Road is already challenging;
Travel plan is unrealistic
There is deficient junctions to the road network
The proposed T-junctions will add to traffic congestion;
It is totally inappropriate for the main junctions on to Dunmore Road (& Twelve Acre Drive) to have huge wide bell mouths and central refuges,
Difficulties of turning right are not confined to the rush hour hours and will get worse as a result of the development;

Flood Risks

The proposal will increase flood risk
The existing sewer does not have capacity, substantial sewer works will be needed down most of Boulter Drive and then by unspecified routes to a sewer that does have spare capacity

Services/Infrastructure Impacts

This development is isolated from the rest of Abingdon by Twelve Acre Drive which is very busy and difficult to cross, therefore the proposed cycleways within the red-line area may not be utilised;
No consideration given to capacity availability at local schools, shops and GPs
A contribution should be made by the developer to ensure provision of a bus service along Dunmore Road and Twelve Acre Drive linking Abingdon and Oxford
New housing is placing significant pressure on local health services
Cycle routes to Radley station are discontinuous, therefore the residents most likely will use their cars;
The white Horse Leisure centre is already very busy – there should be adequate provision made towards this infrastructure

Design and Layout

The amended scheme brings some improvements (architectural style is much better) but, the height of the houses and block of flats on section D-D (facing Dunmore Road) is a concern;
Is there going to be a path between an adjacent recreation ground and Tilsley Park?
Lack of linkages to local facilities by cycle or walking;
Existing bridleway should be improved and incorporated into the scheme;
Gap between proposed housing and the A34 should be widened to provide better acoustic mitigation, as the bund may not be sufficient;

Other Matters

Loss of green space/green field land
Encroachment into Green Belt is unacceptable and unjustified;
Harmful impact on ecology and wildlife on the site;
Consideration should be given to brownfield sites (e.g. Dalton Barracks) before developing Green Belt land;
Noise impacts for future houses
What other improvements are going to be made for biodiversity?
Where is the biodiversity plan?
Berms with a few trees on them on the northern side of the development next to the A34 are not going to do much to keep traffic noise levels down for the residents.
The reduction in social housing provision is concerning;
It appears that the average house size has increased
The change in housing mix will also serve to increase the proportion of the development site covered by building, parking and other hard standing areas.
This appears to be a case of just flooding people with excessive details in the hope that nobody has the considerable time needed to plough through the numerous documents.
Is the proposed SuDS to be open water or a covered system?
This planning application does not require strict environmental regulations on the housing to ensure they are zero carbon.

· Housing mix has been changed and does not follow the approved SHMA Mix;

The Flood Risk Assessment presents contradictory evidence and scopes out fluvial flood risk saying that the site is fully in Zone 1, when small parts of the site are in Zone 2 and 3
There are no measures to ensure this housing scheme meets environmental standards
No consideration given to air quality which will worsen from increased idling traffic

The following issues have also been raised, but these matters were considered at outline stage and were found acceptable:

Increased traffic congestion

Deficient junctions to the road network
Traffic light systems slow traffic and create pollution from standing vehicles
Turning right onto Dunmore Road is already challenging;
The proposed T-junctions will add to traffic congestion;
The proposal will increase flood risk
The existing sewer does not have capacity, substantial sewer works will be needed down most of Boulter Drive and then by unspecified routes to a sewer that does have spare capacity
Loss of green space/green field land
Encroachment into Green Belt is unacceptable and unjustified;
Harmful impact on ecology and wildlife on the site;
Consideration should be given to brownfield sites (e.g. Dalton Barracks) before developing Green Belt land;
Noise impacts for the existing dwellings is inadequately assessed

Comments from North Abingdon Local Planning Group Comments

Generally, the proposals seem designed to improve the quality of the estate and its environment, so NALPG is supportive of that. However, the NALPG raised the following issues:

Amend drainage basin designs to increase public open space - on balance, NALPG supports these proposals
Circular footpath round the estate - NALPG supports the proposal for a circular path around the estate
Changes to the Acoustic Bund next to the A34 - NALPG has some concerns about how land on the A34 side of the bund fence will be maintained
Street typologies and Architectural details - NALPG considers that the 5 tall town houses directly facing Dunmore Road are too intrusive
Houses facing Dunmore Road (Materials) - NALPG is content with the materials planned for these houses. Tiles may be replaced with solar panels in some cases, we expect
Lodge Hill Slip Roads - NALPG supports earlier construction of the south facing slip roads at Lodge Hill. We consider that they should be built as soon as possible.
Affordable Housing - Whilst having some concerns that ‘affordable’ houses can in fact be very expensive, NALPG supports the 35% share on this estate. NALPG also supports the distribution of affordable property across the estate
Tree Planting- NALPG considers that tree planting plans for the main road should be reconsidered
Rights of Way - NALPG considers that more attention should be paid to maintaining the key bridleway to Sunningwell. It would be helpful if the Pegasus crossing could be opened as soon as possible as this is a dangerous place to cross. The Bridleway should be improved to allow all weather access for pedestrians, cyclists and on rare occasions, horses.
Flats - design and materials - NALPG considers that the planned variation in flat block design is a definite improvement to the estate
Sewer system - NALPG still has concerns about the sewage disposal arrangements for the site. Arrangements for the local centre and the housing East of that and beyond the Oxford Road up Lodge Hill are even less clear
Gas main easement - NALPG assumes this easement and the trees will consider to be protected in any plans for the School.

Oxfordshire County Council

Amended proposal

No objection, subject to conditions

Specified Visibility Splays
Garage Accommodation
New Estate Roads
Estate Roads Prior to Occupation of Dwellings

Original proposal

Holding objection

· Site layout

The carriageway section still only details 2 No. typical cross sections and therefore it is unclear what the proposed street dimensions and footways widths are for differing scenarios throughout the site.

Indicative dimensions, particularly in relation to cycle and footways, to be applied to the appropriate plans

· Swept path analysis

The submitted swept path analysis for an 11.6m RCV and 7.9m fire tender have been submitted and together with the submitted indicative school coach swept path analysis in the locality of the proposed school, it can be confirmed that the swept path analysis is considered to be acceptable.

· Parking Provisions

The provision of unallocated/visitor parking spaces, based on the number of allocated spaces serving individual dwellings, was previously considered and accepted. With regard to the on-street parallel parking bays indicated on the layout, these now indicate suitable hard standings behind them and are now considered to be acceptable too.

· Other points

Any proposed trees must not conflict with streetlights and must have a minimum of 10m separation. Trees that are within 5m of the carriageway or footway will require root protection.

The 3rd previously agreed access point serving the proposed school football pitch has been omitted, as indicated on the detailed landscape area (3 of 5) plan (Dwg. No. DE187A-L-004 REV F). A plan illustrating this access point should be submitted.

Housing Officer

Amended proposal

No objection

Original proposal

Objection

- Distribution of affordable houses does not comply with s106 (clusters were more than 15 units)

Drainage Engineer

Further to clarifications submitted to the amended Proposal

No objection

Amended Proposal

Holding objection

· Further information should however be provided on this element to confirm modelled extents and proposed locations of any compensatory flood plain storage required. The information presented should confirm that the proposed layouts submitted can be delivered within the space designated as currently it would appear that there is an unknown constraint associated with space required for flood plain compensation

Original proposal

Holding Objection

· The proposed drainage provision has not been developed in accordance with the requirements, the local standards and the approved Flood Risk Assessment;

· Conveyance features have been omitted and it is not clear from the overall site plan or materials layouts how porous paving will be incorporated;

· A pumping station and substation have been located in one of the key surface water management corridors with SUDS features removed;

· At this stage the layouts should demonstrate that sufficient space has been made available for sustainable drainage in accordance with the requirements of the outline consent and previously approved conditions.

Environment Agency (EA)

Amended proposal

No objection

Subject to any conditions or informatives that were imposed to Outline Planning Permission being taken into account/implemented

Original proposal

No objection

Subject to any conditions or informatives that were imposed to Outline Planning Permission being taken into account/implemented

Highways England

Amended proposal

No objection, subject to the following conditions:

· Prior to the commencement of construction of the proposed bund, geotechnical submissions (in accordance with DMRB Standard CD622) relevant to the construction of the 3m high earth bund and 2m fence (set out on drawing A216-RM-65 Revision 5) shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority (in consultation with Highways England and requiring certification by Highways England).

· Prior to the installation of any drainage systems in relation to proposed bund, full details of drainage and its location shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority (in consultation with Highways England). The development shall thereafter be undertaken in strict accordance with the approved details prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted and retained in accordance with the agreed specification. No surface water shall be permitted to run off from the proposed bund on to the Strategic Road Network or in to any drainage system connected to the Strategic Road Network. No drainage connections from any part of the development hereby permitted may be made to any Strategic Road Network drainage systems.

Original proposal

Holding objection

· Highways England are unclear as to the location of proposed noise bund and we are therefore unable to assess if there is likelihood of any impact/risk to the safe and efficient operation of the A34.

Thames Water

Amended proposal

No objection

Waste

· Thames Water are aware of some network constraints in the vicinity of the proposed development. We are however confident that should the planning application be approved, any investigations to understand the network performance in more detail and if required, associated upgrades can be delivered in time to serve the development. We will therefore not be seeking a planning condition relating to foul water network matters.

Water

The application indicates that SURFACE WATER will NOT be discharged to the public network and as such Thames Water has no objection, however approval should be sought from the Lead Local Flood Authority. Should the applicant subsequently seek a connection to discharge surface water into the public network in the future then we would consider this to be a material change to the proposal, which would require an amendment to the application at which point we would need to review our position.

Original proposal

No objection

Waste

Water

· The application indicates that SURFACE WATER will NOT be discharged to the public network and as such Thames Water has no objection, however approval should be sought from the Lead Local Flood Authority. Should the applicant subsequently seek a connection to discharge surface water into the public network in the future then we would consider this to be a material change to the proposal, which would require an amendment to the application at which point we would need to review our position.

Countryside Officer

Further to clarifications provided on the amended proposal

No objection

Amended proposal

Clarification needed on discrepancies amongst the submitted plans

Original proposal

Holding Objection

· CEMP: a specific Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) for biodiversity should be submitted (condition 39, subsections J and K), detailing all of these measures in one coherent document, is submitted to address this requirement;

· BEP: It is recommended that plan is amended to specific whether or not the feature will be refugia wood pile, or hibernacula rubble pile. This detail should be provided.

· LEMP: The landscaped areas of the development site have been diminished, with a reduction in quantity and quality. The landscaping proposals, and therefore associated detail contained within the LEMP, need to be revisited in light of the feedback provided and amended accordingly.

· Watercourse Protection Plan:

Further detail, including cross sections and structural drawings of the bridges/culverts used in the vehicular and pedestrian crossings of the watercourse will need to be provided, in addition to construction methods statements for these features.

- Details and suitable mitigation should be provided to minimise impacts of the development in, over and directly adjacent to the watercourse.

Landscape Officer

Amended proposal

No objection, subject to conditions

Details Childrens’ Play areas to be submitted
Detailed planting to be submitted
Detailed on-plot landscape to be submitted
Acoustic bund: barrier to be installed along the area with slopes 1:2.5
Updated landscape management plan to be submitted (summarising the planting plans)

Original proposal:

Holding objection:

· Wider Layout: In numerous places the RM scheme extends housing development outside Residential development parameter area

· Areas of this RM development extend into the wider areas of POS at the corners of the site.

· RM scheme extends development closer to an already narrow corridor area of POS parallel to the eastern side of the retained woodland block (plot 194 northward).

· RM scheme pushes development westward towards the A34, reducing amount of POS. The proposed footpath is now predominately located at bottom of acoustic bund slope, meaning the only available POS is isolated small areas between the footpath and the development area, considerable reducing the usability of the space, the majority of the open space is now road verges.

· RM scheme pushes development southward, reducing amount of POS in areas the proposed footpath now abuts the development area. This southern corridor of POS considerable reduced in width and the usability

· Area of POS are blocked both visually and physically by the placement of substation at their entrance. The location of the proposed pumping station also detrimentally impacts on the accessibility and character of the POS.

· Play area: The proposed application changes the style of play provided on site. Details of the play areas and associated POS where covered as part of P18/V1622/DIS Condition 16- Development Delivery Strategy and also with the Outline DAS these details should be applied to the site.

· The RM scheme pushes the NEAP back into boundary vegetation and over an easement.

· SUDS: The RM scheme proposes a series of highly engineered basins. The outline and P18/V1622/DIS SUDS proposed basins and swale which integrated into design of POS.

· Housing Layout: The proposed planting scheme along the spine road is different to that proposed as part of the P18/V1622/DIS Condition 16- Development Delivery Strategy.

· The Outline DAS contains different types of streets; however it is hard to pick up the differences in the submitted RM application.

· Throughout the scheme, with the exception of the spine road very few street trees have been proposed.

· The proposed species for street trees and hedgerows do not follow the Outline DAS.

· There are numerous places through the scheme, were parking areas are not satisfactory broken up and are bookended with unsoften rear garden walling.

Forestry Officer

Amended proposal

No objection, subject condition

Detailed Arboricultural Method Statement

Original proposal

Holding objection

· The proposed layout has significantly reduced the areas of open space limiting the opportunity for a high quality a landscaped scheme to be achieved.

· No detailed arboricultural information has been provided relating to the impact of the proposal.

· A comprehensive arboricultural method statement (AMS) is needed, detailing suitable tree protection measures across the site.

Natural England

Amended proposal

No objection

Original proposal

No observations

Urban Design Officer

Amended proposal

No objections

Original proposal

Holding objection

· The RM layout plan does not follow the approved parameter plans;

· Built form encroach into the areas of POS;

· Clusters and distribution of Affordable Housing should be revisited;

· The design and character of the spine road should follow the details approved in the Design Code

· Position of street lights and trees should be revisited;

Crime Prevention Officer (Thames Valley Police)

Amended proposal

No objection

Original proposal

No objection

Environmental Protection Team (Noise)

Amended proposal

No objection, subject to condition

· No development shall take place until a scheme to protect the new dwellings from traffic noise has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority

Original proposal

No objection subject to condition

Subject to the full implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the acoustic report.

Air Quality Officer

Amended proposal

No objection

Original proposal

No objection

Contaminated Land Officer

Amended proposal

No observations

Original proposal

No observations

Conservation Officer

Amended proposal

No objection

Original proposal

No objection

Waste Management Team

Amended proposal

No observations

Original proposal

No objection

Please ensure that all access paths between the bin stores and the collection vehicles (particularly between parking spaces eg plots 294-302) are wide enough to accommodate the bulk bins.

Oxfordshire Clinical Commissioning Group and Partners at the Long Furlong Medical Centre

Amended proposal

Objection

· The proposal could result in an extra 1,020 patients. There needs to be extra financial support (s106/CIL) for the Abingdon Central PCN practice expansion plans.

Original proposal

Objection

The large scale of housing across the district is placing extra pressures on overstretched GP services.

SGN Plant Protection Team

Amended proposal

No comments received

Original proposal

No objection, draw attention to the gas supply infrastructure in vicinity of the site.

Community Infrastructure Officer

The outline application was pre-CIL and we have a S106 Agreement in place. Unless a S73 or FUL application is submitted there will be no CIL to pay.

3.0

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

3.1

P18/V0846/PEJ – Officer advice (30/10/2020)

Reserved Matters submission for 425 dwellings from outline planning approval (P17/V0050/O). Development parcels western area A, B and central area.

P19/V1607/DIS - Approved (15/07/2019)

Discharge of Condition 20 - Archaeological programme of work to be agreed to application P17/V0050/O.

P19/V1374/DIS - Approved (11/06/2019)

Discharge of condition 19 Archaeological Written Scheme of Investigation on application ref P17/V0050/O

P18/V1622/DIS - Approved (28/05/2019)

Discharge of conditions on application ref. P17/V0050/O: 16 - Development Delivery Strategy; 17 - Housing Delivery Document; 18 - Phasing Plan; 30 - Super-fast Broadband Strategy; 31 - Community Employment Plan; 37 - Travel Plan and Travel Information Pack; 47 - Air Quality Monitoring. (As per amended documents and plans submitted on 1 May 2019 and 22nd May 2019)

P18/V0021/PEM - Officer advice (26/04/2018)

Development of a new two storey Marston's family pub and restaurant with associated access, parking and landscaping within the Local Centre area of the approved outline planning application (P17/V0050/O).

P17/V0050/O - Approved (27/10/2017)

Outline application (with all matters reserved except for principal means of access to the highway) for residential development of up to 900 dwellings and 50 retirement homes (use class C3), together with a local centre, (including: 2.2HA site for a 1.5fe primary school, community hub, care homes comprising up to 80 beds, children's nursery, public house/restaurant, retail and other services (use classes A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, B1, C2, D1 and D2) public open space, recreation areas and sports pitches (including sports pavilion and multi-use games area) play areas, acoustic bund with fencing, and associated infrastructure including roads, sewers and attenuation ponds (As amended by drawings and information accompanying agent's letter dated 2 May 2017)

4.0

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.1

The original application (P17/V0050/O) was supported by an Environmental Statement that can be viewed on the Council’s website (www.whitehorsedc.gov.uk). The Environmental Statement is considered comprehensive, with the main issues discussed where relevant in this report. The Statement includes the following assessments:

1. Chapter One – Introduction

2. Chapter Two – Methodology

3. Chapter Three – The Existing Site

4. Chapter Four – Site Alternatives

5. Chapter Five – The Proposed Development

6. Chapter Six – Planning Policy

7. Chapter Seven – Socioeconomic

8. Chapter Eight – Transport

9. Chapter Nine – Air Quality

10. Chapter Ten – Noise

11. Chapter Eleven – Hydrology and Flood Risk

12. Chapter Twelve – Ecology

13. Chapter Thirteen – Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment

14. Chapter Fourteen – Summary of Impacts

15. Non-Technical Summary

The development proposed by this application is considered to fall within the ambit of the ES and no further addendum is required.

5.0	MAIN ISSUES
5.1	The main issues for consideration in this application are: The principle of development Reserved Matters Density Layout Scale and Appearance Landscape and Open Space Residential amenity Affordable housing and housing mix Flood risk and drainage Traffic and highway safety Biodiversity
5.2	The principle of development Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires planning applications to be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The development plan for this case comprises of the Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2031 Part 1 (the LPP1) and the Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2031 Part 2 (the LPP2). There is no neighbourhood plan for Abingdon on Thames and no other Neighbourhood Plan covers the site.
5.3	The principle of up to 950 dwellings on this site with access to Dunmore Road is established through the extant outline planning permission (P17/V0050/O) and the allocation of the site for housing in the LPP1.
5.4	Reserved Matters
	Policy CP37 of the LPP1 states that new development must demonstrate high quality design that responds positively to the site and its surroundings, creating a distinctive sense of place through high quality townscape and landscaping that physically and visually integrates with its surroundings. It sets out further design criterion for streets and movement, green infrastructure, social inclusion and safe communities, climate change resilience and that development must be visually attractive, with scale, height, massing and materials appropriate to the site and surrounding area. Policy CP38 of the LPP1 sets out more detailed design criterion required for strategic and major development sites.
5.5	Density
	Policy CP23 of the LPP1 requires a minimum net density of 30 dwellings per hectare (dph) unless local circumstances indicate that this would have an adverse effect on the character of the area, highway safety or the amenity of neighbours.
5.6	The proposed densities are compliant with the density parameter plan approved by the Outline application and achieve housing to be designed to a density appropriate for the location and vary from lower density areas of up to 30dph at the edges of the development to 40 dph and above in the central, more urbanised part of the larger allocation. Officers consider this is acceptable and compliant with Policy CP23 of the LPP1.
5.7	Layout The proposal responds positively to the Local Plan policies and Design Guide with a mix of house sizes and types and these comprise a mix of detached, semi-detached and terraced town houses and some flats. These are arranged in connected blocks with clear fronts and backs.
5.8	There is a clear hierarchy of the connected streets including cycleways and footways. The streets are connected with focal points, and with corner plots that adequately ‘turn’ the corners. There is enclosure and passive surveillance of streets and open spaces due to the orientation of dwellings fronting streets and those at the edges fronting the open spaces.
5.9	Access to the site is provided via Spine Road that runs through the centre of the development, with appropriate landscaping and mature trees along it.
5.10	There is variation in the set back of dwellings many with front gardens. There remains scope for tree planting in the streets with hedges defining front gardens. The proposal is considered to comply with core Policy CP37 of the LPP1 and the Design Guide Principles.
5.11	Scale and Appearance
	Policy CP38 of the LPP1 requires proposals for housing allocation sites to be accompanied by a site-wide design strategy. This was contained in the Design Code and the design statement approved under the outline application. It analysed the existing built environment near the site to provide inspiration and to help shape a locally distinctive development. It is considered that the proposal responds positively to these principles.
5.12	Scale is defined by the PPG as “the height, width and length of each building proposed within the development in relation to its surroundings”. The heights of dwellings are up to 12m (3-storeys flats). House spans are between 9m and 11m with frontages ranging between 6.5m and 11.2m. These are considered a reasonable reflection of development south of Dunmore Road. The scale of development is acceptable.
5.13	The design parameters for this site sought green edges to the western and northern parts of the site with development being of a more dispersed and lower density. Higher density development is primarily within the central parts of the developed areas (and along the Spine Road). This approach allows for softening landscaping and appropriate setbacks from the roads.
5.14	In order to minimise the visual impact of new development, additional areas of buffer planting have been provided to reinforce the existing woodland blocks and hedgerow corridors and provides integrated SUDS system along the southern site boundary. These areas of additional green spaces would also provide the ecological resources as well as would serve as the informal public open space.
5.15	The design and appearance of the development reflects the elements of traditional architectural features as well as offers the elements of modern and contemporary architecture. Likewise, the palette of materials proposed to be used during construction includes both traditional and contemporary building materials.
5.16	The house types have reasonably balanced elevations, which vary from character area to character area. Some dwellings have projecting gables and dormer windows. Some of these dormer windows are of a contemporary design and provide aesthetical breaks in the elevations. Entrances to houses directly face the street and are clearly visible in the public realm. The scale and form of entrances relate to their function
5.17	The proposal is considered to comply with core Policies CP37 and CP38 of the LPP1 and the Design Guide including Principles DG28, DG29, DG31, DG32, DG35 and DG36.
5.18	Landscaping and Open Space
	Policy CP44 of the LPP1 confirms that key features that contribute to the nature and quality of the district’s landscape will be protected from harmful development, and where possible enhanced. Where development is acceptable in principle, proposals will need to demonstrate how they have responded to landscape character and incorporate appropriate landscape proposals. Policy DP33 of the LPP2 requires major development to provide 15% of the site as public open space.
5.19	Further to the initial objections raised by the Landscape Officer a set of amended plans has been submitted for further assessment. As originally submitted the proposal did not accord with the Design Code and parameter plans approved at outline. This has been now addressed by the amended plans.
5.20	The submitted plans indicate the provision of public open space will now meet this requirement. The proposal includes a number of linear green urban spaces that vary in scale and the proposed use with all areas of Public Open Space being readily accessible by walking and cycle routes with secure cycle parking proposed at the play areas.
5.21	It is considered that the location and amended quality and quantity of the public open spaces and the proposed green corridors would enhance the overall quality of the proposal and would increase the opportunities for formal and informal recreation.
5.22	The proposal aims to deliver a variety of native species if a form of trees and hedgerows. The proposed SUDS is considered to be adequately integrated into the overall design and the wider landscape scheme. The SUDS system would serve a dual function of being a part of the drainage scheme as well as by providing a habitat network for species and a residential amenity space (outside of peak rainfall).
5.23	It has been agreed with the Landscape Officer that the design and the exact details of the LEAP and NEAP can be secured by conditions as there is adequate space available for their provision within the proposed layout of the development.
5.24	The proposal therefore complies with the Policy CP44 of the LPP1, Policy DP33 of the LPP2 and Principle DG37 of the Design Guide.
5.25	Residential Amenity
	Policy DP23 of the LPP2 seeks to ensure that development proposals demonstrate that they will not result in significant adverse impacts on the amenity of neighbouring uses when considering both individual and cumulative impacts in terms of loss of privacy, daylight, sunlight or outlook, or through noise disturbance.
5.26	Noise pollution The site is affected by noise pollution from the A34. A number of mitigation measures was identified at the outline stage. One of those mitigations was an acoustic bund, that would be located along A34. The council’s environmental protection team, the landscape officer and Highways England initially objected to the location and design of the proposed acoustic bund. As a result of these objections its design has been revised, together with an updated noise assessment.
5.27	Dwellings are set back from the A34 (c.30-40m), in line with the approved Design Code and the parameter plans. The proposed green corridor provides a visual buffer between the housing and the highway.
5.28	As illustrated on the amended plans approximately 25m of the green corridor along A34 will now consist of a suitable acoustic bund, which is “softened” by additional woodland planting, an informal, linear public open space along with the tree and shrub planting. The informal footpaths will meander through this green corridor, connecting to other footpaths and cycleways to create circular recreational routes through the development envisaged at the outline stage.
5.29	The environmental protection team, landscape officer and Highways England no longer objects to the amended scheme. Officers consider the bund is acceptable subject to conditions requiring further detail on its construction and timing of delivery.
5.30	The noise mitigation conditions require a detailed specification for the acoustic fence, acoustic facade treatments and protection of amenity spaces in order to demonstrate that the findings from the Environmental Statement on noise are achieved and to ensure noise mitigation is provided prior to the occupation of any dwelling affected by noise.
5.31	Officers are satisfied that the amenity standard within the new development are acceptable in line with the Design Guide. Officers consider that the proposal (as amended) is compliant with Policy DP24 of the LPP2.
5.32	Affordable Housing and Housing Mix Affordable Housing The s106 agreement accompanying the outline permission contains a mix of dwelling sizes and floor areas for affordable housing. The proposal accords with the s106 and is therefore satisfactory. Affordable housing is evenly distributed within the site and accords with the requirements of Policy CP24 of the LPP1.
5.33	Market housing and mix Policy CP22 of the LPP1 expects the market housing mix to be in accordance with the council’s current Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) unless an alternative approach can be demonstrated to be more appropriate through the Housing Register or where proven to be necessary due to viability constraints.
5.34	It has been raised in the Abingdon Town Council’s comments and objections received from residents that the housing mix does not accord with the SHMA nor the mix agreed at outline stage.
5.35	An alternative housing mix to SHMA was agreed at the outline stage. Condition 5 of the Outline Planning Permission secured the following for the wider site: · 5.5% one bedroom · 16.3% two bedrooms · 43.7% three bedrooms · 34.5% four (or more) bedrooms
5.36	In order to secure compliance with this mix of housing across the whole site, a further pre-commencement condition (Condition 17) was imposed at outline stage that required a submission of a Housing Delivery Document (HDD). This document was submitted and agreed under application ref. P18/V1622/DIS in May 2019 and demonstrates how the scheme accords with the agreed mix and illustrates the exact distribution of both market and affordable housing across parcels of development within the site. Further to that, condition 17 requires every Reserved Matters application containing residential dwellings to be accompanied by an updated HDD. This is to allow flexibility on mix between parcels as the site is designed and developed.
5.37	The layout proposed in this application originally sought to vary the location of some of the units set out in the HDD. However, following amendment the overall housing mix across these three parcels has been retained to accord with that previously approved in May 2019 including total numbers, and the provision of dwellings that meet the requirements of Cat M4 (2) and Cat M4 (3) (former Lifetime Homes standard). The housing mixes for both market and affordable housing is set out in the table below:
5.38	The proposed changes are considered acceptable as they are in line with Condition 17 of the outline permission, which allows for the revised HDD to be provided with each reserved matters application.
5.39	The sizes of the houses meet the adopted space standards and are compliant with Policy DP2 of the LPP2. Further to that 10% of the proposed dwellings meets the Category M4 (2) and Category M4 (3) (former Lifetime Homes standard).

5.40	Flood Risk and drainage
	Core Policy 42 of theLPP1 seeks to ensure that development provides appropriate measures for the management of surface water as an essential element of reducing future flood risk to both the site and its surroundings.
5.41	The outline application was supported by a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) that showed the vast majority of the site lies within Flood Zone 1, the area at least risk of flooding. A small part of the western parcel falls within Flood Zones 2 and 3.
5.42	The drainage engineer initially raised an objection and requested further information to be provided to confirm modelled extents and proposed locations of any compensatory flood plain storage required can be achieved within the layout proposed.
5.43	The amended plan and an updated drainage technical note have been submitted which demonstrates that the proposed flood storage can be delivered within the space designated. The drainage officer is satisfied with the proposals and it is concluded the proposal accords with core Policy 42 of the LPP1.
5.44	Traffic, parking and highway safety
	Access to Dunmore Road and traffic generation matters were considered reasonable at outline stage and this application is not an opportunity to reconsider this matter. A financial contribution was secured towards providing the southern slip roads at the Lodge Hill A34 junction and to upgrade the local transport.
5.45	Vehicular access is from Dunmore Road. Forming the access arrangements leads to some loss of semi-mature trees on the southern boundary of the application site whilst other mature and semi-mature trees along that boundary are to be retained. This aspect of the proposal was considered and agreed at the outline stage and will not be re-considered under current reserved matters.
5.46	Encouraging walking and cycling has been a central theme in designing the different types of streets within the development. A comprehensive network of footpaths, cycleways and bridleways have been integrated into the development to ensure access to public open space, local facilities and the wider countryside.
5.47	Across the site, a full network of dedicated cycleways and footways links the key facilities of the site, reducing the need to travel by car. A continuous footpath and cycle path also link the proposal with Tilsley Park. The proposal makes provision for a footpath and cycleway link through to the south western edge of the development, to link in with the footpath route within the grounds of Tilsley Park. A section 106 contribution have been made to facilitate the upgrading of the footpath through Tilsley Park to provide a consistent surface including a cycleway.
5.48	The Transport Engineer has initially objected to the proposal as there were several design issues that required further work to be submitted to the Local Highway Authority for consideration. Further to the submission of the amended plans the initially raised objection has been removed. Subject to the recommended conditions there are no objections to this proposal on highway grounds.
5.49	The proposal provides a total of 877 of allocated parking spaces and 52 of unallocated parking spaces which is acceptable. Whilst on-plot parking exceeds parking standard requirements, the highway officer does not object to the amount and distribution of parking spaces. Parking standards allow exceptions to secure appropriate design and on plot parking can accommodate visitors as well for occupant of the respective dwellings. This amount of parking is considered acceptable.
5.50	Taking all of these matters into account it is considered the proposal is acceptable in highway terms and accords with Policies CP35 and CP37 of the LPP1.
5.51	Biodiversity
	Policy CP46 of LPP1 requires development to avoid losses in biodiversity and actively seeks net gains.
5.52	The Countryside Officer initially objected to the proposal and requested additional information to be submitted for further assessment. The objections related to a lack of a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) for biodiversity; landscaped areas of the development site being diminished for biodiversity enhancement from that envisaged at outline stage and lack of detail and suitable mitigation to minimise impact over and directly adjacent to the watercourse.
5.53	Further to the initial objection raised by the Countryside Officer, a set of amended plans and additional documents have been submitted. The requested cross sections and structural drawings have been prepared and the discrepancies identified by the Countryside Officer have been addressed. The seating spaces within the Lodge Hill Park area have been relocated, so they no longer are within the 10m buffer zone. It is considered in the Officers opinion that the concerns raised by the Countryside Officer have been satisfactorily addressed.
5.54	As such, officers are satisfied that subject to conditions the development accords with Policy CP46 of the LPP1.

6.0	CONCLUSION AND PLANNING BALANCE
6.1	This application has been considered in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
6.2	The principle of up to 950 dwellings on this site and means of access from Dunmore Road have been established through the grant of outline planning permission in 2017 (ref. P17/V0050/O).
6.3	The proposal provides an acceptable housing mix with the houses and layout being acceptably designed in accordance with the Local Plan policies, the s106, and the council’s Design Guide, the site Design Code and parameter plans.
6.4	There are no unreasonable impacts for existing local residents and future residents can be reasonably protected from traffic noise.
6.5	The proposal is considered to accord with development plan policies and consequently a recommendation of approval is made.