(Public Pack)Agenda Document for Planning and Highways Regulatory Committee, 23/07/2018 10:30

Committee: PLANNING AND HIGHWAYS REGULATORY COMMITTEE

Date: MONDAY, 23 JULY 2018

Venue: LANCASTER TOWN HALL

Time: 10.30 A.M.

A G E N D A

Officers have prepared a report for each of the planning or related applications listed on this Agenda. Copies of all application literature and any representations received are available for viewing at the City Council's Public Access website http://www.lancaster.gov.uk/publicaccess by searching for the relevant applicant number.

1 Apologies for Absence

2 Minutes

Minutes of meeting held on 25th June, 2018 (previously circulated).

3 Items of Urgent Business authorised by the Chairman

4 Declarations of Interest

To receive declarations by Members of interests in respect of items on this Agenda. Members are reminded that, in accordance with the Localism Act 2011, they are required to declare any disclosable pecuniary interests which have not already been declared in the Council’s Register of Interests. (It is a criminal offence not to declare a disclosable pecuniary interest either in the Register or at the meeting). Whilst not a legal requirement, in accordance with Council Procedure Rule 9 and in the interests of clarity and transparency, Members should declare any disclosable pecuniary interests which they have already declared in the Register, at this point in the meeting. In accordance with Part B Section 2 of the Code Of Conduct, Members are required to declare the existence and nature of any other interests as defined in paragraphs 8(1) or 9(2) of the Code of Conduct.

Planning Applications for Decision

Community Safety Implications

In preparing the reports for this agenda, regard has been paid to the implications of the proposed developments on community safety issues. Where it is considered that the proposed development has particular implications for community safety, the issue is fully considered within the main body of the individual planning application report. The weight attributed to this is a matter for the decision-taker.

Local Finance Considerations

Section 143 of the Localism Act requires the local planning authority to have regard to local finance considerations when determining planning applications. Local finance considerations are defined as a grant or other financial assistance that has been provided; will be provided; or could be provided to a relevant authority by a Minister of the Crown (such as New Homes Bonus payments), or sums that a relevant authority has, will or could receive in payment of the Community Infrastructure Levy. Whether a local finance consideration is material to the planning decision will depend upon whether it could help to make development acceptable in planning terms, and where necessary these issues are fully considered within the main body of the individual planning application report. The weight attributed to this is a matter for the decision-taker.

Human Rights Act

Planning application recommendations have been reached after consideration of The Human Rights Act. Unless otherwise explicitly stated in the report, the issues arising do not appear to be of such magnitude to override the responsibility of the City Council to regulate land use for the benefit of the community as a whole, in accordance with national law.

5 A5 18/00615/FUL Old Coach House, Cantsfield Upper Lune (Pages 1 - 5) Road, Cantsfield Valley Ward

Demolition of single storey rear extension, insertion of opening to rear of garage and erection of retaining walls to form access to rear, erection of single storey detached garage with attached workshop.

6 A6 18/00588/FUL 85-89 Penny Street, Lancaster Castle (Pages 6 - 21) Ward Demolition of existing buildings and erection of a 6-storey building comprising use classes A1, A2 and/or A3 at lower ground floor and student accommodation above comprising 58 en-suite bedrooms within seven cluster flats and eight studio apartments and the formation of an enclosed external courtyard with landscaping and refuse enclosure.

7 A7 18/00405/FUL St Thomas Centre, Marton Street, Castle (Pages 22 - 31) Lancaster Ward

Relevant Demolition of existing 2 storey Church Centre building and erection of a replacement 2.5 storey Church Centre building, including single storey lean-to and single storey link to the adjacent Church

and alterations to existing carpark, including creation of steps and resurfacing.

8 A8 18/00543/LB St Thomas Church, Penny Street, Castle (Pages 32 - 36) Lancaster Ward

Listed building application for a single-storey glazed extension to connect the former choir vestry of the church and the proposed replacement Church Centre building, alterations to the former choir vestry including the removal of an existing timber door and replacement with timber-framed partition and the removal of arched windows to the south elevation and replacement with fire escape door, installation of new perimeter security gates adjoining the Penny Street and Marton Street elevations, and alterations to the boundary wall to Victoria Place including the addition of a wrought iron railings.

9 A9 18/00269/FUL Carnforth Business Park, Carnforth (Pages 37 - 46) Oakwood Way, Carnforth and Millhead Ward Erection of office (B1a) and storage and distribution (B8) building with associated parking, access and boundary fencing.

10 A10 18/00637/VCN Site Of Former Filter House, University (Pages 47 - 52) Scotforth Road, Lancaster and Scotforth Rural Ward Erection of two 4-storey student accommodation buildings comprising of 28 6-bed cluster flats (C4) with associated car parking and bin and cycle stores (pursuant to the variation of condition 2 on planning permission 16/00847/FUL for amendments to floor plans and elevations to provide 12 7-bed cluster flats (sui generis) and 14 6- bed cluster flats (C4) including amendments to the fenestration and heights of the buildings).

11 A11 18/00445/VCN Land East Of Railway Line, St Bolton and (Pages 53 - 61) Michaels Lane, Bolton Le Sands Slyne Ward

Erection of 20 dwellings with associated new access (pursuant to the variation of conditions 2, 4, 9, 10, 11 and 13 on planning permission 15/01167/FUL to amend the approved site layout, vary the trigger for the submission of a risk assessment and to vary conditions pertaining to noise mitigation, surface water drainage and landscaping to enable the development to be carried out with submitted details; and remove condition 8 as the revised layout accommodates provision for an easement to the watercourse).

12 A12 18/00169/FUL East Gate Lodge, Keer Holme Kellet Ward (Pages 62 - 71) Lane, Borwick

Change of use of existing bungalow (C3) to a residential care home for children (C2), demolition of existing extensions, erection of a single storey side extension and part single part two storey rear extension with a raised terrace and creation of a new access and parking facilities.

13 A13 18/00756/VCN Former Ridge Hotel Site, 10 Bulk Ward (Pages 72 - 75) Patterdale Road, Lancaster

Erection of two 2-storey buildings comprising of 16 one-bed affordable flats (C3) with associated parking and landscaping (pursuant to the variation of condition 2 on planning permission 17/01572/FUL to alter the finished site and floor levels).

14 Delegated Planning List (Pages 76 - 85)

ADMINISTRATIVE ARRANGEMENTS

(i) Membership

Councillors Carla Brayshaw (Chairman), Helen Helme (Vice-Chairman), June Ashworth, Jon Barry, Stuart Bateson, Alan Biddulph, Eileen Blamire, Dave Brookes, Abbott Bryning, Ian Clift, Jane Parkinson, Jean Parr, Robert Redfern, Sylvia Rogerson and Susan Sykes

(ii) Substitute Membership

Councillors Claire Cozler, Sheila Denwood, Mel Guilding, Tim Hamilton-Cox, Andrew Kay, Geoff Knight and Malcolm Thomas

(iii) Queries regarding this Agenda

Please contact Tessa Mott, Democratic Services: telephone (01524) 582074 or email [email protected].

(iv) Changes to Membership, substitutions or apologies

Please contact Democratic Support, telephone 582170, or alternatively email [email protected].

SUSAN PARSONAGE, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, TOWN HALL, DALTON SQUARE, LANCASTER, LA1 1PJ

Published on Wednesday 11th July, 2018. Page 1 Agenda Item 5 Agenda Item Committee Date Application Number

A5 23 July 2018 18/00615/FUL

Application Site Proposal

Old Coach House Demolition of single storey rear extension, insertion Cantsfield Road of opening to rear of garage and erection of retaining Cantsfield walls to form access to rear, erection of single storey Carnforth detached garage with attached workshop

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mrs Diana Sharratt Mrs Erica Wright

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

9 July 2018 Committee Cycle

Case Officer Mrs Kim Ireland

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Approval

(i) Procedural Matters

The proposed development would normally fall within the scheme of delegation. However, Councillor Williamson has requested that the application be referred to the Planning Committee for a decision on the grounds of the proposed materials and the impact upon the Conservation Area, specifically relating to the surrounding trees.

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The property which forms the subject of this application relates to a two storey mid terrace property with an integral garage, which is located on Cantsfield Road in Cantsfield. The terrace has been formed from a converted barn, which is divided into three properties - Old Coach House, Yew Trees and Barn House that are all curtilage Listed as they formed part of the Grade II Listed Cantsfield House. Old Coach House and Yew Trees share an access to the north east of the properties that leads to a shared courtyard to the east of the properties. Old Coach House has an extensive garden to the west of the property with an L shaped dog-leg to the north.

1.2 The site is allocated as a countryside area and is situated within Cantsfield Conservation Area.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The application proposes the demolition of the single storey rear extension, insertion of an opening to the rear of the garage and erection of retaining walls to form an access to the rear, and erection of a single storey detached garage with attached workshop.

2.2 The proposed single storey detached garage with attached workshop is to be sited to the west of Old Coach House. It will be 10.6m in length, 6.3m in width with a gable roof that is 4.3m above ground level. The materials proposed are reclaimed local stone to the east and south elevations, smooth render to the west and north elevations, a natural slate roof, painted timber windows and doors, and vertical timber boarded garage doors.

Page 2 2.3 The proposed garage with attached workshop will be accessed via the courtyard, located to the south east of Old Coach House. There will be new windows and doors installed to the south, east and north elevations. To facilitate the access the existing integral garage will be opened up by inserting an opening to the rear of the garage and removing the existing garage doors. Demolishing the existing single storey rear extension and erecting retaining walls will form the access to the rear. The retaining walls will be finished in reclaimed local stone.

2.4 The proposed internal and external works to the property including the raising of the floor level to part of the first floor, relocation of staircase, insertion and removal of walls, and alterations to and insertions of the windows and doors have been previously approved under 18/00359/LB.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The most recent planning application and listed building application were granted consent this year for a larger scheme. This included the erection of a two storey detached garage with ancillary accommodation. This has been omitted from the pending submission and replaced with a single storey detached garage with attached workshop.

Application Number Proposal Decision 18/00217/FUL Demolition of existing single storey rear extension, Permitted insertion of opening to rear of garage and erection of retaining walls to form access to rear and erection of a 2 storey detached garage with ancillary accommodation

18/00359/LB Listed building application for the demolition of existing Permitted single storey rear extension, insertion of opening to rear of garage and erection of retaining walls to form access to rear, insertion of new windows and doors, including new openings; and internal alterations including raising the floor level to part of the first floor, relocation of staircase, and insertion and removal of walls

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory and non-statutory consultees:

Consultee Response Parish Council No comments received during the statutory consultation period. Conservation No objections, subject to a number of conditions to be applied to the decision. Officer

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 Five pieces of correspondence objecting to the application have been received. The reasons for opposition include the following:

 The scale of the garage is inappropriate;  The materials are not in keeping with the Conservation Area;  The glazed screens to the front of the property and the proposed windows to the rear of the property are unsatisfactory and impinge upon the privacy of the neighbouring property; and  Development to the rear of the existing property is not appropriate in a Conservation Area and it has not been demonstrated that there is a need for the proposal.

6.0 Principal National and Development Plan Policies

6.1 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

Paragraph 17 - 12 Core Principles Paragraphs 67 and 68 – Requiring Good Design Page 3 Paragraphs 131 to 134 – Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment

6.2 Local Planning Policy Overview – Current Position

At the 20 December 2017 meeting of its Full Council, the local authority resolved to publish the following 2 Development Plan Documents (DPD) for submission to the Planning Inspectorate:

(i) The Strategic Policies and Land Allocations DPD; and, (ii) A Review of the Development Management DPD.

This enables progress to be made on the preparation of a Local Plan for the Lancaster District. The DPDs were published on the 9 February for an 8 week consultation in preparation for submission to the Planning Inspectorate for independent Examination. If an Inspector finds that the submitted DPDs have been soundly prepared they may be adopted by the Council, potentially in late 2018.

The Strategic Policies and Land Allocations DPD will replace the remaining policies of the Lancaster District Core Strategy (2008) and the residual ‘saved’ land allocation policies from the 2004 District Local Plan. Following the Council resolution in December 2017, it is considered that the Strategic Policies and Land Allocations DPD is a material consideration in decision-making, although with limited weight. The weight attributed to this DPD will increase as the plan’s preparation progresses through the stages described above.

The Review of the Development Management DPD updates the policies that are contained within the current document, which was adopted in December 2014. As it is part of the development plan the current document is already material in terms of decision-making. Where any policies in the draft ‘Review’ document are different from those adopted in 2014, and those policies materially affect the consideration of the planning application, then these will be taken into account during decision- making, although again with limited weight. The weight attributed to the revised policies in the ‘Review’ will increase as the plan’s preparation progresses through the stages described above.

6.3 Development Management DPD

DM22 – Vehicle Parking Provision DM28 – Development & Landscape Impact DM29 – Protection of Trees, Hedgerows & Woodland DM30 – Development affecting Listed buildings DM31 – Development affecting Conservation Areas DM32 – The Setting of Designated Heritage Assets DM35 – Key Design Principles

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The key considerations in the assessment of this application are:

 General Design and Impact upon the Heritage Asset  Impacts upon residential amenity

7.2 General Design and Impact upon the Heritage Asset

7.2.1 In accordance with the Listed Building and Conservation Areas Act, when considering any application that affects a Listed building, a Conservation Area or their setting, the local planning authority must pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the heritage asset or its setting. This is reiterated by policies DM31 and DM32.

7.2.2 The proposed development has been designed to reflect that of the existing dwelling, particularly in terms of the material palette and therefore the proposed appearance is not considered to be out of character with the surrounding properties. Whilst the proposed works to the existing integral garage will change the appearance of the dwelling, the dwelling is set back from Cantsfield Road and therefore will not result in any adverse visual impacts when viewed from within the street scene and the wider Conservation Area.

Page 4 7.2.3 The proposed internal works and installation of new windows and doors are thought to have a neutral impact on the designated heritage asset and enable the internal spaces to be better utilised. During the conversion of the barns inappropriate materials and finishes were used. The demolition of the existing single storey rear extension, the opening up of the integral garage, including installation of a new front door and replacing the existing main door and bay window with glazed screening, are thought to be an improvement on the existing dwelling. Furthermore the materials that are proposed to be used are more in keeping with a traditional barn. The location, scale, design and materials of the detached garage is considered to be appropriate in its setting and the driveway and retaining walls are thought to be minor alterations to the existing landscape and will help facilitate the removal of parked cars from the front of the property which currently detracts from the setting of the designated heritage assets. The Conservation Officer has requested further details to be submitted in relation to materials, and it has been agreed with the agent that these details can be conditioned as part of the decision. They will be agreed via a pre-commencement condition, as these details will need to be agreed before the works commence to ensure that the local planning authority is satisfied with the details provided.

7.2.4 The proposed scheme seeks to undertake a series of works to the property in order for the current owner to better utilise the current internal space and provide a detached double garage with attached workshop and parking area. The proposed works are thought to renovate the property and in some parts enhance, including the removal and replacement of inappropriate materials and finishes. It is considered that the proposed partial demolition to the existing garage and changes to the setting of the curtilage Listed building will cause less than substantial harm to the designated heritage asset, but this harm will be mitigated by the enhancements to the dwelling and the setting of the Conservation Area.

7.3 Impacts upon residential amenity

7.3.1 The existing window and front door to the north elevation of the property are proposed to be replaced with a glazed screen. This is to facilitate a larger second bedroom to the first floor and convert the hall to a further bedroom to the ground floor. The front door is to be relocated to the existing integral garage that is proposed to be opened up. The proposed glazed screening will look out onto the courtyard located to the front of the properties, Old Coach House and Yew Trees. The glazed screening will be located 4.3m away from windows located to the ground and first floor of the neighbouring property Yew Trees. However, the proposed glazed screening does not look directly into the neighbouring properties windows and therefore they are not thought to have a detrimental impact upon the residential amenity of either property. Furthermore, it should be noted that this glazed screen was consented earlier this year under planning permission 18/00217/FUL.

7.3.2 The proposed garage is not thought to have a detrimental impact upon the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties. This is due to screening from existing hedges that are sited along the boundaries of the rear garden and the detached garage with an attached workshop is proposed to be sited 17m away from the nearest property of Hall Bank, 32m away from the adjoining property of Yew Trees and 38m away from the property of Cantsfield House. Furthermore, a number of conditions are proposed to be attached to the decision. These include a requirement to retain the hedgerow and trees, and to impose a control of the use of the detached garage, so it shall be retained solely for the housing of private motor vehicles or storage associated with the main dwelling.

7.3.3 The remaining proposed works are not thought to have an impact upon residential amenities, as they involve demolishing the single storey rear extension, insertion of opening to the rear of the existing integral garage and erection of retaining walls to form access to the rear.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 Given the nature of the proposal there are no requirements for a legal obligation.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 In conclusion, the proposed works have been designed and are thought to reflect that of the existing dwelling. The proposed development will better utilise the current internal space and provide a detached double garage with attached workshop and parking area. The proposed works are thought to renovate the property and in some parts enhance it. The proposed works are not thought to have a detrimental impact to residential amenities. This is due to the proposed garage being set a good Page 5 distance away from the properties Hall Bank, Yew Trees and Cantsfield House. The proposed glazed screening does not directly looking into the neighbouring property of Yew Trees and the remaining proposed works do not have a detrimental impact upon residential amenities.

Recommendation

That Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions: 1. Standard 3 year timescale 2. Development to accord to approved plans 3. Sample of materials are to be submitted before any works takes place 4. Retain existing trees and hedges 5. The use of garage restricted

Article 35, Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015

In accordance with the above legislation, the City Council can confirm the following:

Lancaster City Council has made the recommendation in a positive and proactive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development, working proactively with the applicant to secure development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. The recommendation has been taken having had regard to the impact of development, and in particular to the relevant policies contained in the Development Plan, as presented in full in the officer report, and to all relevant material planning considerations, including the National Planning Policy Framework, National Planning Practice Guidance and relevant Supplementary

Background Papers

None

Agenda Item 6 Page 6 Agenda Item Committee Date Application Number

A6 23 July 2018 18/00588/FUL

Application Site Proposal

85-89 Penny Street Demolition of existing buildings and erection of a 6- Lancaster storey building comprising use classes A1, A2 Lancashire and/or A3 at lower ground floor and student LA1 1XN accommodation above comprising 58 en-suite bedrooms within seven cluster flats and eight studio apartments and the formation of an enclosed external courtyard with landscaping and refuse enclosure

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr Bargh Mr Sean Smith

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

10 August 2018 N/A

Case Officer Mrs Jennifer Rehman

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Approval

Procedural Matter

In preparation of reporting this application, the Planning and Highway Regulatory Committee conducted a site visit on Monday 18 June 2018.

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The site that is the subject of this application lies within the defined city centre and includes 87-89 Penny Street, currently known as the Apothecary public house, and 85 Penny Street formly occupied by Swinton Insurance at ground floor level. The upper floor of 85 Penny Street is in residenital use (student accommodation). Both buildings are two storeys in height but of different architectural styles and periods. A small yard area exists where the reuse area is located with an informal passage separating the development site to the neighbouring property (83 Penny Street).

1.2 The site is located on one of the principal corridors within the Lancaster Conservation Area. To the south of the site St Thomas’s Church occupies an elevated position within the street. This is a grade II listed building. Immediately opposite the site and adjacent there are a number of ‘positive buildings’ identified in the Conservation Area appraisal which are considered non-designated heritage assets. The historic buildings within the Conservation Area are predominately 2-3 storeys with domes and spires of public and ecclesiastical buildings puncturing the skyline.

1.3 The site occupies a prominent corner position within a short terrace of development. It has a relatively short frontage to Penny Street extending deeper along Marton Street and crudely has a rectangular plan form covering approximately 530 square metres of brownfield land. The topography of the area rises in a general north-south direction but at the proposed site there is also a steep fall from the back of the site on Marton Street to the lowest part on Penny Street. The fall is approximately 2 metres. The existing buildings are two storey in scale and of contrasting design. The Apothecary building is architecturally poor but is low in scale. The adjoining terrace is of traditional form and scale but its fenestration has been significantly altered and no longer positively Page 7 contributes to the character and appearance of the area. The buildings surrounding the site vary in scale and design with a mixture of Georgian townhouses with ground floor shopfronts, grander Victorian scale buildings and some modern additions to the townscape. The scale and height of buildings notably increase towards the police station and Thurnham Street and the southern end of Penny Street. At the opposite end of the terrace is Cityblock’s first student accommodation building. This is a five storey building on the corner of George Street and Penny Street.

1.4 Surrounding land uses are reflective of the site’s position within the primary shopping area and secondary retail frontage areas. Ground floor accommodation in surrounding buildings is predominately commercial and includes (not exclusive) hairdressers, nail studios, cafes, some financial services/estate agents and takeaways. Most of these buildings have ancillary office or residenital uses above the ground floor uses. There is a public house to the south on the site on the opposite side of Penny Street, St Thomas’s church and church hall on Marton Street and immediately east of the site the city’s main police station.

1.5 The site has very good accessibility for pedestrians and cyclists and is well connected to public transport. There are bus stops on King Street, George Street and Common Garden Street with regularly services running between the city centre and the university campuses. The main bus station is around 500m north of the site and the train station circa 650m to the north west. There are also a number of designated cycle routes between the city centre and the two universities. Given the city centre location, access to a range of local convenience stores, doctors surgeries, post offices and other retail/leisure services is very good.

1.6 The site is not located within a flood risk area and is not affected by any other environmental designation, such as nature conservation sites. There are no protected trees to be affected by the development. Whilst the site lies outside the defined Air Quality Management Area it is within its management zone.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The applicant seeks full planning permission for the demolition of the existing buildings and erection of a mixed use six storey building. The building shall comprise 3,450 square feet of A1, A2 and A3 space to the lower ground floor with student accommodation above comprising 58 en-suite bedrooms within seven cluster flats and eight studio apartments (66 bedrooms in total). The cluster flats range in size from five to ten bedrooms per flat.

2.2 The layout is broken down as follows:  Lower ground floor comprises A1/A2/A3 use with main entrance off Penny Street incorporating separate access and passage to the north side of the building to formalise access to the adjoining property and refuse area for the commercial space.

 Upper ground floor comprises the main entrance to the student accommodation off Marton Street with office space, cycle storage, laundry, plant room and a nine-bedroom cluster flat. Access to the landscaped courtyard and refuse areas is available off this floor. A passageway is also incorporated to the east side of the building to enable suitable access for refuse collection.

 Levels 1 and 2 comprises one ten-bedroom and one seven-bedroom cluster flat per floor.

 Level 3 comprises one ten-bedroom and one five-bedroom cluster flat.

 Level 4 comprises 8 studio apartments.

Access to all floors is via a central stairwell and lift shaft. Externally a landscaped courtyard is proposed to provide amenity space to complement the student accommodation.

2.3 The design of the building effectively creates two distinct building forms as it responds to the contrasting building characters on Penny Street and Marton Street. The front part of the building facing Penny Street is four storeys high extending to five storeys including the roof level. This element will be finished in an ashlar stone. The rear part, which forms the main building block on Marton Street, is five storeys high extending to 6 storeys with the roof level included. The height of Page 8 the building at the back of the site on Marton Street (including the top floor) is approximately 15 metres. This increases to circa 16 metres towards the front of the main building block on Marton Street. At the corner of the proposed building on Penny Street, at its lowest point, the building is approximately 11.5m high.

2.4 The building shall be finished in high quality materials including natural ashlar and split-faced stone, white render and a bronze effect cladding to the upper floor. Full height windows are proposed to all the accommodation, which shall be painted powder coated aluminium windows with deep recesses and feature side panels to the bedrooms facing Penny Street and Marton Street. Glazed curtain walling to the living rooms is proposed with an external horizontal louvre system forming a key architectural feature to the Marton Street elevation. A small landscaped amenity courtyard is proposed to the north side of the building. Cycle provision is proposed internally within the main site entrance. Internal and external refuse storage is proposed for both the commercial and residential elements of the proposal.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The applicant has undertaken pre-application consultation with the local planning authority about this proposal. The applicant sought level 3 advice which involves a Member Engagement Forum where ward Councillors, representatives from Planning Committee and a representative from the Civic Society (or Parish Council) can attend and participate in discussions. The pre-application process has been extensive and generally positive, with the developer responding to initial concerns over the scale of the development early in the process. Except for this pre-application enquiry, there is no other relevant planning history to consider as part of the determination of this proposal.

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory and non-statutory consultees:

Consultee Response County Highways No objections subject to conditions to control traffic management to ensure existing on-street parking is not compromised during construction, the provision of a construction method statement and provision of cycle storage. Environmental No objections subject to the imposition of conditions relating to land Health Service contamination, noise mitigation as set out in the submitted report, use conditions controlling the commercial ground floor operations to that applied for, hours of use conditions together with conditions securing details of any necessary ventilation/extraction systems, hours of construction condition and scheme to prevent and control dust emissions during construction. The Air Quality Officer has indicated that cycle storage should be increased Lancaster Civic No objections to the principle of the demolition of the existing building but raise Society concerns over the height of the development and recommend that it should be a storey lower. Conservation Team The conservation team raised an initial objection to the proposal claiming the development appeared to be of a greater scale to that considered acceptable at the pre-application stage. The increase in scale was considered to have a harmful impact on the setting of the adjacent designated and non-designated heritage assets and the significance of the Conservation Area. The conservation team also raised concerns over the excessive use of split face natural stone to the building façade. The applicant has responded to the concerns raised with the submission of subtle amendments to the scale of the development involving a slight reduction to the overall height to the building, changes to the roof level to create a more subservient design and an increase in the use of ashlar stone to the Penny Street elevations. The Conservation team no longer objects to the development. They recognise that whilst there will be a degree of harm caused by the height of this building, this has been mitigated and outweighed by the innovative design and complementary use of natural materials which are sympathetic to the surrounding built heritage. Page 9 Several conditions are recommended including details of the external facing materials, roofing details, window/door, louvres, security screens and gates, external lighting, signage, flues and vents and boundary treatments. Lancashire No objections to the demolition of the buildings subject to a programme of Archaeology archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation (WSI) with Advisory Service formal archaeological evaluation carried out post demolition. During the (LAAS) determination of this application an initial WSI has been submitted and approved by LAAS. The development must be carried out in accordance with this WSI requiring a further WSI for the archaeological evaluation and final reporting. An appropriately worded condition should be imposed in the event permission is granted. LAAS had commented on the initial desk-based assessment and noted some inaccuracies and incorrect assumptions of the site’s historical interests. LAAS comment that they do not intend to comment on design but suggests that the assessment downplays the impact of the size of the new building which could easily be seen as too tall and overpowering to the retained 83 Penny Street and lower buildings on the opposite side of Penny Street. Historic England No observations – under relevant statutory provisions they do not need to comment on the proposal. Lancaster Comments received indicating that the students occupying the adjacent flat should University (LUSU) not be negatively affected by the development during their 2018/2019 term. University of No comments have been received within the statutory consultation period or at the Cumbria time of compiling this report. If comments are submitted a verbal update will be (Accommodation provided. Officer) Lancaster and No objection. The Chamber offers full support for the development; is grateful for District Chamber of the developers continued investment in the city recognising such development Commerce increases footfall and spend and urges the City Council to grant planning permission. United Utilities No comments have been received within the statutory consultation period or at the time of compiling this report. If comments are submitted a verbal update will be provided. Lead Local Flood No comments have been received within the statutory consultation period or at the Authority time of compiling this report. If comments are submitted a verbal update will be provided. Lancashire Fire No objections – standard advice relating to Part B5 of Building Regulation’s Service concerning access and facilities for the Fire Service. Lancashire No objections but recommends the development is designed to Secured by Constabulary Design standards and recommends a number of measures to reduce the risk and fear of crime including window/door specifications, installation of CCTV and installation of appropriate lighting

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 At the time of compiling this report, 3 letters of objection have been received. A summary of the main reasons for opposition are as follows:

 Need for student accommodation - indicating the city has enough accommodation for students;  Loss of the existing bar or business;  Heritage impacts - comments suggest that the conservation area should be conserved and not altered; the proposal fails to fit in with the 2 and 3 storey buildings on Penny Street; at 6 storeys high the development is completely inappropriate; precedent of other tall buildings on Penny Street should not be seen as a reason for allowing even taller buildings which already spoil the historic environment.

There have also been 4 letters of support received, including representations from Lancaster BID and St Thomas’s Church. A summary of the main reasons for support are as follows:  that the proposal is an excellent idea and will add vitality to a rather bland area of the city;  the proposal will make use of empty units;  added investment in the city should be supported; Page 10  the design is tasteful and in keeping with the architectural landscape of the area, and;  the church look forward to welcoming new students into their church.

6.0 Principal National and Development Plan Policies

6.1 Paragraph 12 and 14 – Presumption in favour of sustainable development Paragraph 17 – Core Principles Section 1 (paragraph 18-22) – Building a strong, competitive economy Paragraph 23 - Ensuring the vitality of town centres Section 4 (Paragraphs 29-41) – Promoting sustainable transport Paragraph 50 – Delivery a wide choice of high quality homes Paragraphs 56, 58, 60, 61, 64 – Good design Paragraph 69 – Promoting healthy communities Paragraph 123/124 – Noise/air quality Section 12 (paragraphs 128, 131 – 134) – Conserving and enhancing the historic environment Paragraph 141 – Recording information relating to the historic environment

6.2 Local Planning Policy Overview – Current Position At the 20 December 2017 meeting of its Full Council, the local authority resolved to publish the following 2 Development Plan Documents (DPD) for submission to the Planning Inspectorate: (i) The Strategic Policies and Land Allocations DPD; and, (ii) A Review of the Development Management DPD.

6.3 Development Management DPD (DM DPD) DM1 – Town Centre Development DM2 – Retail Frontages DM5 – The Evening and Night-time Economy DM20 – Enhancing Accessibility and Transport Linkages DM21 – Walking & Cycling DM22 – Parking Provision DM23 – Transport Efficient and Travel Plans DM31 – Development affecting Conservation Areas DM32 – Setting of Designated Heritage Assets DM34 – Archaeological features DM35 – Key Design Principles DM36 – Sustainable Design DM37 - Air Quality DM38 – Development and Flood Risk DM39 – Surface Water Run-Off and Sustainable Drainage DM46 – Accommodation for Students Appendix B – Car Parking Standards Appendix D – Purpose Built and Converted Shared Accommodation Page 11 Appendix F- Studio Accommodation

6.4 Lancaster District Core Strategy (adopted July 2008) (CS)

SC1 – Sustainable Development SC2- Urban Concentration SC4 – Meeting the District’s Housing Requirement SC5 – Quality in Design

6.5 Other Material Considerations National Planning Practice Guidance Lancaster Conservation Appraisal (2013) and City Centre Character Area 3 and Dalton Square Character Area 4; Planning Advice Note 4: Tall Buildings (Historic England, 2015); The Setting of Heritage Assets, 2nd Ed, Planning Advice Note 3 (Historic England, 2017); Noise Policy Statement for England

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The main considerations with the application are as follows;

 Principle of mixed use town centre uses/student accommodation scheme;  Design considerations;  Heritage considerations;  Standard of accommodation and amenity considerations;  Highway considerations;  Biodiversity;  Noise and air quality.

Principle of mixed use student accommodation 7.2 The site is located within the defined city centre boundary within the primary shopping area (PSA) as set out in the adopted DM DPD. DM1 of the DM DPD clearly states that proposals for town centre uses within the defined town centre boundary will be supported. It equally states that proposals for residential development within town centres will be considered favourably provided they are above ground floor level and do not restrict the maintenance of an active street frontage, particularly in designated retail frontages.

7.3 Penny Street forms the main north-south route through the primary shopping area and is largely pedestrianised. The proposed site is at the southern end of Penny Street just outside the pedestrianised area and therefore enjoys a secondary retail frontage allocation. This allocation offers greater flexibility in terms of the type of town centre use that could be accommodated at the lower ground floor level of the proposed building. Policy DM2 confirms that in secondary retail frontages any ‘A’ class use is considered acceptable. The applicant seeks permission for either A1 (retail), A2 (financial and professional services) or A3 (restaurant and cafes) uses within the lower ground floor commercial space of the development.

7.4 The existing building (87-89 Penny Street) previously operated as a bar and music venue. It is understood that the bar has now closed. The use of the existing building as a bar and music venue has its benefits and would support the city’s evening economy. The Council acknowledges that evening activities provide a fundamental part of maintaining a strong and successful town extending vitality beyond normal working hours, making town centre more attractive places to live and work. However, there must be a careful balance made so that evening uses are complementary to other town centre and residential uses. Whilst the loss of a further bar/music venue from within the city could be judged a negative aspect of the proposal, given there are no explicit policies within the development plan which seek to protect and retain such uses, the amount of weight that can be afforded to this aspect of the proposal is limited.

7.5 Whilst the proposal results in the loss of one town centre use (bar and music venue) it proposes another type of town centre use as well as the student accommodation above. It is acknowledged that a retail use at ground floor will be quite different to an A3 use, particularly in relation to contributing to the evening economy, but nevertheless the proposal would still support and enhance the commercial offer in the city. The student accommodation aspect would also enhance the vitality Page 12 in the area through increased footfall and spending, all of which are considered benefits of the proposal.

7.6 Turning to the principle of student accommodation, the Council’s housing policy states that student accommodation forms an important component of Lancaster’s housing market and that their needs must be addressed through the overall housing strategy. The Council also recognises that the provision of student accommodation in the city centre can also help make a positive contribution to the mix of uses in the city centre to support its overall vitality. The proposed scheme is within the city centre boundary and therefore serves as an appropriate and sustainable location for student accommodation. Lancaster University and the University of Cumbria are both easily accessible from the centre via sustainable travel modes (cycling and bus services), which is an essential criterion when assessing student schemes.

7.7 Considering the above, there are no policy objections to the use of the lower ground floor of the building for either an A1, A2 or A3 use with residential development above. This proposal fully accords with the requirements of DM1 and DM2 of the DM DPD.

Design Considerations 7.8 One of the core land-use planning principles set out in the NPPF is always to secure high quality design. Planning policy at both the national and local level attaches great importance to the design of the built environment recognising that good design is a key aspect of sustainable development and place making. Both paragraph 58 of the NPPF and local planning policies SC5 of the CS and DM35 of the DM DPD stress the need for development to respond and reflect the identity and character of an area; have regard to local distinctiveness such as the scale, massing, appearance and use of materials of the surrounding built environment, and; for development to be visually attractive. Planning policy does not preclude innovation, so long as development positively contributes to a place and integrates new development into the built and historic environment sympathetically.

7.9 Before considering the merits of the design and appearance of the proposed building, it is worth noting that the existing buildings are not of architectural merit nor are they aesthetically pleasing. The Marton Street elevation is inactive and bland and does little to positively contribute to the character and appearance of the area. As a consequence, there are no objections to the loss of these buildings as clearly such will create an opportunity to significantly enhance the townscape character in this area

7.10 The scheme has been designed through consultation with Officers (and Members and the Civic Society through our level 3 pre-application service) and has therefore positively evolved over time with initial concerns over the scale, design and appearance of the development being addressed early. The initial proposal tabled was for a 7-storey building with several design features being heavily influenced by the applicant’s Cityblock 4 development.

7.11 Whilst Officers consider the applicant’s Cityblock 4 development a positive addition to the townscape, concerns were initially raised over the risk of standardising the developments which would not only detract from the high-quality design and uniqueness of the applicant’s other development but would diminish the city centre’s diverse and fortuitous townscape character. Further constraints that have influenced and challenged the design of the development have been the difference in levels due to the topography of the area and addressing and responding to contrasting built forms and characters between Penny Street and Marton Street. Penny Street is predominately low-rise (ranging between 1.5 and 3 storeys high in the immediate vicinity of the application site) whilst Marton Street (and Thurnham Street) accommodates grander scaled buildings, such as the police station and St Thomas’s Church and church hall.

7.12 The applicant has sought to address these earlier concerns and has amended the proposal to better respond to the scale of surrounding buildings and has created a design which has its own identity and character to enable it to positively contribute to the city’s diverse architectural interest. Whilst the building will be taller than the buildings immediately neighbouring it, the stepped massing of the building and the subservient roof top level will mitigate the height of the building.

7.13 With regards to the building design, the proposal takes strong references to the local vernacular with the fenestration supporting strong vertical alignments and repetitive patterns (reflective of historical fenestration). The proposed use of natural materials also supports the local character and Page 13 appearance of the area. The Penny Street elevation which forms the lowest part of the development at 4 storeys (rising to 5 storeys), shall be finished in a natural ashlar stone, which will return subtly around the side elevations. Along Marton Street the stone will switch to a softer split-face natural stone returning around the east elevation (facing the police complex).

7.14 The Marton Street elevation is long and as a block has a horizontal massing. To break this up a section of the elevation above the main student entrance will be glazed with a horizontal louvre system. This feature is a positive addition to the design of the scheme and helps reflect the verticality of the surrounding built form. The north elevation shall be finished in a white render to create a light and airy courtyard environment. This is considered acceptable given that this elevation will not be highly visible. Windows shall have a deep recesses and will be powder coated aluminium complemented by a cladded side panel. The upper floors shall be set back from the main walls and are proposed in a bronze effect cladding so as to blend with the darker tones of the roofscape and create the sense of a more light weight, subservient addition to the height of the building. Overall, the design has been well considered and will positively contribute to the built environment. On this basis, it is considered compliance with development plan policy SC5 of the Core Strategy and DM35 of the DM DPD and paragraphs 17 and 58 and 60 of the NPPF.

Heritage Considerations 7.15 The NPPF states that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage assets, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. Similarly, the local planning authority in exercising its planning function should have regard to s66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 which states “in considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as the case may be, the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses”. Similarly, section 72 “requires that in the exercise of planning duties special attention shall be paid to the desirability of preserving and enhancing the character or appearance of Conservation Areas”. Paragraph 132 of the NPPF seeks to express the statutory presumption set out in s66(1) and s72 of the 1990 Act. How the presumption is applied is covered in the following paragraphs of the NPPF, though it is clear that the statutory presumption is to avoid harm. The exercise is still one of planning judgment, but it must be informed by the need to give significant weight to the desirability to preserve the heritage asset.

7.16 Paragraph 131 of the NPPF requires local planning authorities in determining planning applications to take account of the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significate of heritage assets; the positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainable communities; and the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. It is accepted that great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation, though this is clearly proportionate to the level of significance. This is reiterated by Policies DM31 and DM32 of the DM DPD, with Policy DM31 setting out that alterations and extensions within Conservation Areas will only be permitted where it has been demonstrated that:

 Proposals respect the character of the surrounding built form and its wider setting in terms of design, siting, scale, massing, height and the materials used; and,  Proposals will not result in the loss or alteration of features which contribute to the special character of the building and area; and,  Proposed uses are sympathetic and appropriate to the character of the existing building and will not result in any detrimental impact on the visual amenity and wider setting of the Conservation Area.

7.17 Policy DM32 relates to the setting of designated heritage assets which recognises that the significance of a heritage asset can be greatly affected by development that could occur within its setting. The application has been supported by a heritage assessment which despite some inaccuracies noted by LAAS, satisfactory describes and assesses the historical environment and the significance of designated and non-designated heritage assets and provide an understanding of the potential impacts the development would have on the asset’s significance. This is compliance with paragraph 128 of the NPPF.

7.18 The proposal is situated in Lancaster Conservation Area and will impact several designated and non-designated heritage assets. It is located within the City Centre Character Area. The Conservation Area was designated for its Roman and Medieval origins and the mixture of Georgian Page 14 townhouses with ground floor shopfronts and grander Victorian scale buildings with eclectic architectural revival styles. The use of natural stone is a significant feature of the area. The hilly topography also provides important views within and across the Conservation Area which supports and frames important Listed buildings. The proposed site is located in the heart of the city where there are a number of important civic buildings that punctuate the street form and feature in street vistas. The area is dominated by streets lined by active buildings of various ages reflecting the incremental changes over time. The fortuitous design of the buildings along Penny Street and tis diversity adds to the significance of the Conservation Area. Development should not seek to diminish this character and should positively contribute to it.

7.19 The initial scheme presented to Officers at the pre-application scale was considered to have a significant adverse impact on the significance of designated heritage assets, particularly in relation to the setting of the adjacent church and the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The initial scheme was seven storeys high and six storeys (in stone) on the Penny Street frontage. This had a significantly overbearing impact on the low-rise development of Penny Street. The initial design also took too many influences from the applicants other development at the top of Penny Street. A couple of iterations of the development evolved during the pre-application stage with a gradual lowering of the scale and massing of the development, together with alterations to the design and use of materials to ensure the building had its own identity, to resolve earlier heritage and design concerns raised by Officers. The scheme presented at the Member Engagement Forum was supported by those Members that took part in the discussions including a representative from the Civic Society.

7.20 The scheme presented has been reduced further during the determination of this application in order to better reflect the sketches submitted at the pre-application stage (mainly in relation to the visuals), and to enable the proposal to integrate more sympathetically with the surrounding built and historic environment. This is in response to the Civic Society’s objection to the application and the initial comments from the Conservation Officer. The overall scale of the development (i.e. the number of floors) has not altered and therefore the development remains a tall building within the Conservation Area. Its stepped massing front to back has helped improve the relationship with the low-rise development opposite and the increased set back and re-design of the roof level helps align the building with the surrounding rooflines in views up and down Penny Street. In certain views the top floor of the building will project above the rooflines but the impact is not considered significant.

7.21 The most notable impacts of the development will be viewed looking west on Marton Street where the scale of the development appears rather overbearing in relation to the scale of the smaller buildings opposite the site on Penny Street. The impact is exacerbated due to the site topography as the smaller Penny Street buildings are at a lower elevation. Another uncomfortable relationship relates to the retained terraced building which will be nestled between the existing student accommodated block to the northern end of the terrace and the proposed development. This retained building is a traditional 2.5 storey stone under slate building, which is identified as a non- designated heritage asset. This building does not benefit from a particularly positive setting at present given the condition and appearance of the existing buildings. The development will improve the character and appearance of the terrace as a whole and therefore the setting of this retained building but the increase scale does have an adverse impact.

7.22 Whilst the redevelopment of the site is considered acceptable, policy DM31 of the DM DPD recognises that where proposals involve the loss of buildings within a Conservation Area, the redevelopment of the site should proceed immediately after. The reasoned justification for this approach is to avoid the risk of buildings being demolished and sites being boarded up for long periods of time resulting in harmful impacts to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. In this case, it is contended that a boarded up site would be far more harmful to the significance of the Conservation Area than the buildings retained. Whilst the applicant has intentions to implement the consent if the development is approved, there may be circumstances outside the control of planning which prohibit the redevelopment of the site. Subsequently, if permission is granted a condition is recommended to ensure a building contract is in place for the redevelopment of the site before the buildings are demolished.

7.23 In conclusion, it is accepted that the proposed development will result in a change to the Conservation Area and the setting of adjacent heritage assets but this change, on balance, is not considered to cause significant harm. There will be a degree of harm caused by the height of the Page 15 building in certain views, but such has been partly mitigated by the innovative design and complementary use of natural materials which are sympathetic to the surrounding built environment. The Council’s Conservation Officer no longer objects to the development (following the submission of amendments) and recommends a number of conditions to secure the development is constructed to a high quality. Members are advised that whilst the development is taller than the immediate buildings surrounding it (except for the police station), the scale, massing, design and appearance of the development will deliver a high quality building which will complement the diverse character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The development will revive this prominent corner site and create a more active frontage along Marton Street, which is currency very weak. This therefore has the benefit of improving the setting of the neighbouring Listed church despite the increase in scale of development. On balance, the development is considered compliant with national and local heritage related planning policy and can be supported on this basis.

7.24 Archaeology The application has been supported by an archaeological desk-based assessment and a written scheme of investigation for building recording. Whilst Lancashire Archaeology Advisory Service (LAAS) comment on some inaccuracies and failings in the submission, they do not object to the development and specifically do not object to the demolition of the existing buildings. LAAS considers that the site has the potential for earlier buried remains to have survived possibly of Roman, Medieval and Post medieval dates and therefore recommends a written scheme for investigation (WSI) and appropriate post-demolition archaeological investigations to be conditional of any grant of planning permission. A WSI for the building recording of 85 Penny Street has already been submitted by the applicant following comments from LAAS. This has been agreed and accepted by LAAS and should be incorporated in an appropriately worded archaeology condition. Such a condition is considered reasonable and necessary given that the evidence available, which suggests that the site lies close to a significant Roman cremation cemetery which flanks Penny Street that is also known to form the line of a Roman road running between Preston and the Roman fort at Lancaster. This approach is compliant with paragraph 141 of the NPPF and policy DM34 of the DM DPD.

Standard of living Accommodation 7.25 The Development Management DPD contains adopted standards with respect to room sizes for both studios and cluster flats. The scheme as presented proposes 8 studio apartments on the top floor of the development. These studio rooms exceed the Council’s standards in terms of space, outlook and natural light. The cluster flats range from 5 and 10 bedroom cluster. The standard is generally for these to have no more than 6 bedrooms. The applicant has developed previously in the City where similar arrangements have been provided for and therefore is would be reasonable to provide a more flexible approach to the policy standard in this regard.

7.26 The Council’s adopted position is for bedrooms within cluster flats to be 11 sqm. The proposed bedrooms are between 12.5sqm and 14.8 sqm and have adequate outlook and natural light. Those bedrooms facing north will still benefit from a satisfactory form of outlook due to the floor levels which are generally above the height of the neighbouring building and are set away from the boundary by 5m. The only two bedrooms which conflict with the standards set out in DM46 and the associated appendices, relate to rooms 5 and 6 on the upper ground floor plan. These two rooms have their only windows directly onto the private landscaped courtyard, which will form a communal amenity space. Their outlook will be more pleasant than other rooms but the level of privacy will be reduced. The two rooms that don’t strictly comply with our policy expectations would not render the whole development unacceptable. The communal living accommodation is proportionate to the size of the cluster flats and benefit from glazed curtain walling to provide an adequate standard of light and outlook. On balance and overall, the standard of accommodation is considered acceptable and can be supported.

7.27 The proposed development sits within an urban environment where street patterns and buildings forms heavily influences the nature, scale and position of new development. Planning policy requires planning to secure a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of buildings and land. The scheme will secure a good standard of amenity for future residents. Whilst the site is surrounded by many town centre uses it is envisaged that the upper floors of surrounding development, mainly on Penny Street, could be in residential use. For new development policy requires interface distances to be 21m between habitable windows and 12m where habitable windows face blank walls or non-habitable windows. Due to the pattern and form of the existing built environment and the associated densities around the site these standards cannot be met. Page 16 Policy does account for this noting that these standards may not always be acceptable and regard should be given to site circumstances.

7.28 The interface distance across Penny Street is around 11m. The buildings immediate opposite the site are particularly low-rise between 1.5 and 2 storeys high. Therefore the erection of a significantly taller building opposite these smaller buildings will have some impact, mainly in terms of outlook and light. However, it is accepted that the interface distances cannot be increased because such would adversely affect the townscape qualities of the area. The submitted proposal seeks to resolve initial concerns about the impact on amenity (at the pre-application stage) by a reduction to the scale of the development towards the front of the site (Penny Street) and stepping the massing up Marton Street. This will not entirely remove the impacts but, on balance, will sufficiently mitigate the potential overbearing impacts of the development and would not render neighbouring properties unsuitable for residential occupation. A further negative aspect of the proposal is the impact the development would have on the neighbouring first floor flat (83 Penny Street), which is occupied also for student accommodation. The neighbouring property comprises a three-bedroom student flat with a small living space to the rear. A window over the bulkhead on the elevation facing the development site will be obscured by the development. This window provides some light to an open plan kitchen and living area. It is not the only window to this living space. The neighbouring land owner has confirmed they have no objection to the proposal and that there are works to be carried out on this property which seek to block the side window (under separate party wall negotiations) and install a good sized roof light to enable sufficient natural light to this accommodation. Whilst this is by no means ideal, given the neighbouring accommodation benefits from other windows facing away from redevelopment site and the adjacent land owner is in support of the proposal (and has separate agreements in place to secure an additional roof light) it is unlikely that this negative aspect of the proposal would outweigh the benefits of the scheme.

Highway Considerations 7.29 Due to the site’s highly accessible location and the nature of the proposed use, the development once operational will not adversely affect the safe and efficient operation of the local highway network. The commercial ground floor use of the development will be serviced like many of the existing town centre uses in the centre of the site. The proposed student accommodation does not include any parking facilities. The only times where there could be impacts on the network are at the beginning and end of each academic year during drop-off and pick-up. Cityblock operates a pick up/drop off system which requires students to book a specific time slot. This controlled approach should prevent significant congestion and will therefore not have a detrimental impact on the local highway network. The Highway Authority has raised no objections to the principle of the redevelopment of the site for a mixed use retail/student accommodation proposal.

7.30 The construction phases of the development are, however, more likely to affect the operation of the local highway network and as such a construction management plan condition is recommended by the Highway Authority. Given the constrained nature of the site, the importance of maintaining appropriate traffic flows through the gyratory and retaining sufficient on-street parking provision, Officers understand the Highway Authority’s recommendation for this condition, but ultimately the Highway Authority has its own powers to enforce such matters.

7.31 Cycle parking provision is proposed as part of this development however the level of provision is considered low. The plans indicate storage for only 4 bicycles for the whole development. Appendix D of the DM DPD, which relates to the standards for purpose building shared accommodation, indicates that cycle parking should be based on one space for every resident. The Council’s Air Quality Officer echoes this requirement in light of the enhanced cycling aspirations for the city as part of wider strategic and emerging plans. The Highway Authority has not objected to the level of cycle provision. In the circumstances, a more balanced approach should be adopted given very good access to public transport as an alternative mode for transport. Officers therefore recommend a condition is imposed to secure a scheme for cycle storage that exceeds the four spaces offered as part of the proposal and is reasonable and consistent to other schemes permitted. It is anticipated that the number of spaces will not exceed 10.

Biodiversity Considerations 7.32 The National Planning Policy Framework is clear that pursuing sustainable development includes moving from a net loss of biodiversity to achieving net gains for nature [paragraph 9], and that a core principle [paragraph 17] for planning is that it should contribute to conserving and enhancing the natural environment. In addition to the policy guidance set out in the Framework, there is a statutory Page 17 duty for local planning authorities to seek to minimise impacts on biodiversity and as such it is an integral part of policy and decision making, in particular protected species and their habitats. The presence of protected species is a material consideration in the determination of a planning proposal.

7.33 The application has been accompanied by a preliminary bat survey report in an attempt to address the above policy requirements in relation to biodiversity. The Council has a statutory duty in relation to assessing the implications of development proposals on the conservation status of protected species under European legislation. Officers are also aware of the Woolley judgement (Woolley v Cheshire east Borough Council and Millennium Estates Ltd [2009] EWHC 1227), which states that “it is not sufficient simply to be aware of the presence of bats, a planning authority also has to be satisfied that effective mitigation measures can be put in place before planning permission can be granted and it is necessary for the decision make to be satisfied that such mitigation measures achieved the desired result”. The Woolley Judgement reaffirms the advice contained within the Bat Conservation Trust guidance and Natural England’s standing advice.

7.34 The submitted bat report clearly recommends that bat activity surveys should be carried out in order to assess whether the buildings are being used by bats. At this stage Officers have insufficient information to assess the impact of the proposal on protected species and to ensure the proposal would not lead to a breach of the Habitat Regulations and the favourable conservation status of the bat populations will be maintained. The applicant has advised that these surveys are in the process of being completed and will be submitted along with a report in advance of the Committee meeting. If the surveys and report conclude the development would not adversely affect protected bat species, and Members are satisfied with all other considerations, permission could be granted. If the reports are not conclusive and the impact on protected bat specifies needs further assessment, Officers will seek delegation back to the Planning Manager to address this outstanding matter. A verbal update will be provided.

Noise and Air Quality 7.35 The application has been supported by an appropriate noise assessment to ensure the site is suitable for residential use given its city centre location. This report concludes that the local noise environment is dominated by road traffic. The Council’s Environmental Health Officer is satisfied that the assessment is satisfactorily robust and that internal sound levels recommended within the British Standard (BS8233) can be achieved. To achieve appropriate noise levels within the living room and bedrooms glazing and ventilation mitigations measures are stipulated in the assessment. Such are recommended to be conditions to ensure ‘lowest observed effect levels’ in respect of noise for future occupants.

7.36 The submitted noise report does not assess the likely noise impacts associated with the proposed ground floor commercial use. That said, the proposed uses are not particularly unneighbourly uses, particularly the A1 and A2 uses. In the case of an A3 use occupying this space, a condition is recommended to secure details of the hours of operation and details of any ventilation and extraction system to enable the local planning authority to assess and ensure the manner in which the potential A3 ground floor use operates is compatible in amenity terms with the first floor residential accommodation. This approach is consistent with paragraph 123 of the NPPF which recognises the use of conditions as a suitable mechanism to avoid and minimise other adverse impacts.

7.37 The proposed site lies outside the Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) but given the site’s close proximity to it an Air Quality Assessment (AQA) has been submitted. This confirms that the pollutant levels at the site will be below the air quality objectives and therefore would be suitable for residential use. The development is a car-free development which means that there will be no adverse impact to the AQMA (through traffic generation and associated emissions). The assessment has been reviewed by the Council’s Environmental Health Officer who has accepted the conclusions of the AQA and has raised no objections to the proposed development. The construction stages of the development has the potential affect air quality locally. This is acknowledged in the report and sets out a number of mitigation measures relating to dust control, but this is covered by other legislation so no planning controls are required.

7.38 Other matters relating to drainage and contaminated land are material considerations. A preliminary risk assessment has been carried out which concludes that the site is not a significant risk to require detailed site investigation pre-determination. A site investigation condition is recommend if permission is granted. With regards to drainage, the applicant proposes to connect to the existing Page 18 main sewer for both foul and surface water as per the existing situation. There is little alternative in the proposed location. At the time of compiling this report, United Utilities and the Lead Local Flood Authority have not commented on the application. Given the site is not located within a flood risk area, it is contended that a foul and surface water drainage scheme is capable of being addressed by condition and that such would need to be a pre-commencement condition (but post-demolition). A verbal update will be provided if comments are received from the statutory consultees before the Committee meeting.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 There are no planning obligations to consider as part of this application.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 The proposed redevelopment of the site for a mixed use retail/office/café at ground floor and student accommodation above will significantly enhance the vitality for this part of the city centre as well as contribute to our housing needs. It also provides a very sustainable location for students to live. The development offers a great opportunity to regenerate a prominent corner plot within the Conservation Area which currently contributes little to its overall significance with a development of quality. The standard of accommodation is acceptable and in most cases exceeds the policy requirements. Where there are minor negative impacts to neighbouring residents, the need for the design of the development to conform to the townscape character outweighs such impacts. The design of the development has evolved through consultation with the local planning authority and whilst the building will dominate certain views and buildings within the Conservation Area, it is considered that the overall impacts are not significant and that the impacts have been mitigated by virtue of the quality of the design. On balance, and subject to the applicant resolving the outstanding ecology matters, Members are recommended that the application can be favourably considered.

Recommendation

Subject to the ecology matters being satisfactory resolved, that Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard 3 year timescale 2. Development to be carried out in accordance with approved plans 3. Building contract to be in place for the redevelopment of the site before commencement of demolition (pre-demolition) 4. Site investigation for contamination (post-demolition) 5. Archaeology condition (in accordance with submitted written scheme of investigation with further investigation and reporting post demolition) 6. Drainage condition (post-demolition) 7. Precise details of the materials and finishes to external walls, windows/doors, cladding, roof detailing, rainwater goods. louvres, screen details and hard landscaping to courtyard to be agreed (before the construction of the development above ground) 8. Notwithstanding details submitted, details of cycle provision to be provided and agreed and then retained thereafter. (before the construction of the development above ground) 9. Scheme for security measures (before the construction of the development above ground) 10. Before any A3 use occupies the lower ground floor of the building, details of the hours of operation, sound attenuation measures (between floors) and any ventilation and extraction systems to be installed shall first be submitted to and agreed. Such measures will thereafter be retained. 11. Hours of construction 12. Provision of refuse facilities and access to such facilities to be provided and retained. 13. Noise mitigation to be implemented and retained 14. Use condition controlling ground floor to be limited A1, A2 and A3 use only. 15. Restriction of residential accommodation to students 16. Removal of permitted development rights relating to telecommunications, renewable energy and exterior painting

Article 35, Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015

In accordance with the above legislation, the City Council can confirm the following: Page 19 Lancaster City Council has made the recommendation in a positive and proactive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development, working proactively with the applicant to secure development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. The recommendation has been taken having had regard to the impact of development, and in particular to the relevant policies contained in the Development Plan, as presented in full in the officer report, and to all relevant material planning considerations, including the National Planning Policy Framework, National Planning Practice Guidance and relevant Supplementary Planning Documents/ Guidance.

Background Papers

Member Engagement Forum Minutes. Page 20

MEMBER ENGAGEMENT FORUM PRE-PLANNING APPLICATION 10.30 A.M. 16TH APRIL 2018

PRESENT:- Councillors June Ashworth, Carla Brayshaw, Dave Brookes, Helen Helme Ward Councillor Nicholas Wilkinson

Officers in attendance:-

Mark Cassidy Planning Manager Jennifer Rehman Major Applications Planning Officer Emma Coffey Senior Conservation Officer Tessa Mott Democratic Support Officer

Also in attendance:-

Hugh Roberts Lancaster Civic Society Martin Crews City Block Trevor Bargh City Block Andrew Bargh City Block Richard Barton How Planning Bernadette Bone BB Heritage Studio Sean Smith SSHARC Architects

4 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Councillor Nick Wilkinson declared that he is a student landlord and owns properties nearby the application site.

Councillor Dave Brookes declared that over a decade ago he attended a City Block meeting and had therefore met some of the external attendees previously.

5 APPLICANT PRESENTATION

The developers gave a presentation regarding the pre-application submission ‘17/01532/PRE3 Apothecary Bar and Lounge 87 - 89 Penny Street, Lancaster’.

Initially the presentation informed the forum about the history of City Block and outlined existing national City Block developments. The presentation also outlined the varying nationalities of the student intake and that City Block had been awarded for satisfaction levels amongst international students.

There was a detailed analysis of the development proposal which included reference to how the application had developed over time by engaging with Planning Officers and accommodating their pre-application advice. There was a detailed explanation outlining the progress made in ‘option A’ and ‘option B’ and also of the differences between the two options.

It was explained that a heritage consultant was appointed to assist with the development of the plans. The heritage consultant emphasised that work had been done to consider Page 21 MEMBER ENGAGEMENT FORUM PRE- 16TH APRIL 2018 PLANNING APPLICATION

the key views and massing of the development. It was also explained that the development had incorporated design cues from the massing of the nearby church to avoid any negative impact of the proposed new development.

Particular reference was made to option B in that it respected high level stone façades with larger windows and living spaces. Option B also contained within it a 3500ft2 retail space with a corner entrance which was considered attractive to potential commercial tenants.

6 OPEN DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSAL WITH MEMBERS

Members of the meeting asked several questions of the developers present. The discussion included topics such as:

 Key views (from and towards) the development;  Amount of floors/bedrooms in the proposed building;  Timescales, anticipated start and completion dates;  Potential future uses of the building;  Refuge facilities and access;  Impact of the remaining property (in different ownership) adjacent to the proposed development; and,  Outlook of the flats.

The developers explained that statistical evidence had shown that in relation to growth, there was currently a requirement for more student accommodation in Lancaster. It was also outlined that the applicants were keen to utilise ‘cluster flats’ (with an optimum cluster size of 10-12) in this development, in order to facilitate the social aspect of living in the building and also because ‘studio flats’ now have occupancy issues.

The Planning Manager summarised the discussion and clarified that the principle of redevelopment of the site was accepted whilst appropriate discussions and consideration needed to take place in relation to: the loss of the public house/existing building; scale and massing of replacement structure; and the impact of the development upon the conservation area and the town/streetscape.

Members were in agreement and showed enthusiasm for the potential development, which had the potential to provide vibrancy along Penny Street and Marton Street. Members expressed that there was preference for design option B (outlined in the agenda document). It was agreed that the aesthetics of the building were attractive and an improvement on the building in its current form. It was noted however that the scale of the proposed development was at capacity and shouldn’t be exceeded. It was also suggested that the development would work well in the area commercially and works sensitively with adjacent and nearby businesses/properties.

(The meeting ended at 11.50 a.m.)

Any queries regarding these Minutes, please contact Tessa Mott, Democratic Services: telephone (01524) 582074 or email [email protected]

Agenda Item 7 Page 22 Agenda Item Committee Date Application Number

A7 23 July 2018 18/00405/FUL

Application Site Proposal

St Thomas Centre Relevant Demolition of existing 2 storey Church Marton Street Centre building and erection of a replacement 2.5 Lancaster storey Church Centre building, including single storey Lancashire lean-to and single storey link to the adjacent Church and alterations to existing carpark, including creation of steps and resurfacing

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr Tim Parsons Mr Dan Brown

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

24 July 2018 None

Case Officer Mrs Eleanor Fawcett

Departure No

Approval, subject to the receipt of a suitable bat Summary of Recommendation survey report and amendments to the gate and railing details

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The application site is within the centre of Lancaster and relates to St Thomas’ Church Centre, and the associated land surrounding this, in addition to St Thomas’s Church and an existing car park to the south. The church centre is two storey, finished in a mix of stone and render, and fronts onto Marton Street, with the building abutting the rear of the pavement. It also adjoins Victoria Place at the rear, which is at a higher level than the ground floor of the building. The boundary wall enclosing the land to the west of the centre lies adjacent to Peter Street. Both Peter Street and Victoria Place are fairly narrow cobbled roads that link from Marton Street to Penny Street and provide access to the carpark. The land rises at the entrance to this and there is a retaining wall adjacent to Victoria Place. Within the carpark is a large modular building which is used as a nursey.

1.2 The church lies to the west of the church centre building and is separated by a paved area and steps which provides access from Marton Street to both buildings and Victoria Place via some steps. St Thomas’s Church is Grade II Listed and is set back slightly from Marton Street and fronts onto Penny Street. It is enclosed by walls and railings which are separately Listed (Grade II). To the east of the site, adjacent to Peter Street, is a row of two storey stone properties which front onto Thurnham Street and Marton Street and comprise a mix of commercial and residential uses. To the north is the Police Station and to the south is a garage building between Victoria Place and the carpark. The site is located within the Lancaster Conservation Area and is just outside the Lancaster Air Quality Management Area.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 Planning permission is sought for the demolition of the church centre and the construction of a larger building over three floors. The main part of the building will be on a similar footprint to the existing building but will be oriented with the roofslope facing Marton Street and will have a large gable projection at the rear. A large single storey lean-to is proposed on the east elevation, which will Page 23 extend into the existing external space to the east, up to a new footway which is proposed adjacent to Peter Street. A smaller lean-to is proposed on the west elevation to provide a lobby to the new building, and this will be linked to St Thomas’s church, towards the southern part of the east elevation, with a glazed link. The proposal also includes resurfacing and marking of the carpark, the creation of steps linking this to Victoria Place, with a footway across the highway, and the installation of some metal gates and railings.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The most relevant site history is set out below.

Application Number Proposal Decision 18/00543/LB Listed building application for a single-storey glazed extension to Under connect the former choir vestry of the church and the proposed consideration replacement Church Centre building, alterations to the former choir vestry including the removal of an existing timber door and replacement with timber-framed partition and the removal of arched windows to the south elevation and replacement with fire escape door, installation of new perimeter security gates adjoining the Penny Street and Marton Street elevations, and alterations to the boundary wall to Victoria Place including the addition of a wrought iron railings 16/01486/PRETWO Pre-application advice in relation to the erection of a replacement 2.5 storey Church centre

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory and non-statutory consultees:

Consultee Response Environmental In relation to air quality, recommends provision of cycle parking, two electric vehicle Health charging points, and a construction environmental management plan to deal with any dust issues. Conservation Team Support, subject to conditions. The proposal would lead to total loss of a Non- Designated Heritage Asset, which would harm the building’s significance. The demolition would also cause harm to the significance of Lancaster Conservation Area and the adjacent Listed Building. This harm is considered to be less than substantial, but there are significant public benefits which could outweigh the harm. Tree Protection No objection, subject to conditions requiring: development carried out in accordance Officer with the submitted Arboricultural Impactions Assessment; submission of an Arboricultural Method Statement; and a scheme for new tree planting. County Highways No objections subject to conditions requiring: a construction management plan; off- site highway works; review of street lighting arrangements on Peter Street; and review of pay and display parking arrangements; reinstatement of footway/highway (if damaged/excavated); and surfacing of carpark. Ancient Monuments No concerns raised. Society Lancaster Civic No objection to the demolition of the existing building, with the retention of the Society exterior plaque. Further thought should be given to certain issues of detailing: the clean lines of the building are not enhanced by the prominent dark cladding surrounding the first-floor windows; there is a lack of harmony between the lean-to and main part of the building; insufficient detail on the drawings in relation to the glazed link; and lighter coloured cladding to match the render should be considered facing Peter Street and Victoria Court. Lancashire No objection, subject to an archaeological watching brief during construction. Archaeological Advisory Service

Page 24 5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 1 piece of correspondence has been received which raises an objection to the proposal and the following concerns:  Increased traffic on Marton Street;  The building is structurally sound and should not be demolished given its appearance and location next to the church;  The congregation gave generously in time and money to have the building restored just over 30 years ago;  There is a risk that demolition could occur before funds are available for the new building.

5.2 3 items of correspondence have been received in support of the proposal, raising the following points:  The design enhances the streetscape and complements the church and adjacent properties;  It will bring positive activity to the street and local area;  The building is no longer fit for purpose for current and future activities and remodelling of this would not meet the needs and the building is increasingly expensive to maintain;  It will provide facilities for the church to serve the local community.

6.0 Principal National and Development Plan Policies

6.1 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

Paragraphs 7, 14 and 17 – Sustainable Development and Core Principles Paragraph 23 – Ensuring the vitality of town centres Paragraph 32 – Access and Transport Paragraphs 56, 58 and 60 – Requiring Good Design Paragraph 70 – Delivering Social, Recreational and Cultural Facilities and Services Paragraph 118 – Conserving and enhancing biodiversity Paragraphs 131 – 134, 137 and 141 – Designated Heritage Assets Paragraph 135 – Non-designated Heritage Assets

6.2 Local Planning Policy Overview – Current Position

At the 20 December 2017 meeting of its Full Council, the local authority resolved to publish the following 2 Development Plan Documents (DPD) for submission to the Planning Inspectorate: (i) The Strategic Policies and Land Allocations DPD; and, (ii) A Review of the Development Management DPD.

6.3 Lancaster District Core Strategy (adopted July 2008)

Page 25 SC1 – Sustainable Development SC5 – Achieving Quality in Design

6.4 Development Management Development Plan Document

DM1 – Town Centre Development DM3 – Public Realm and Civic Space DM4 – The Creation and Protection of Cultural Assets DM20 – Enhancing Accessibility and Transport Linkages DM21 – Walking and Cycling DM22 – Vehicle Parking Provision DM27 – The Protection and Enhancement of Biodiversity DM30 – Development affecting Listed Buildings DM31 – Development Affecting Conservation Areas DM32 – The Setting of Designated Heritage Assets DM33 – Development Affecting Non-Designated Heritage Assets or their settings DM34 – Archaeological Features and Scheduled Monuments DM35 – Key Design Principles DM39 – Surface Water run-off and Sustainable Drainage

6.5 Other Material Considerations

Section 66 of The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (as amended states that the local planning authority shall have regard to the desirability of preserving a listed building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. Section 72 sets out that special attention should be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of a conservation area.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The main issues to be considered in the determination of this application are:  Demolition of the building  Scale and design and the impact on the Conservation Area and Listed Buildings  Impacts on Archaeology  Highway Implications  Impacts on Residential Amenity  Impact on Trees and Ecology  Air Quality

7.2 Demolition of the building

7.2.1 The building is located within the Lancaster Conservation Area and it sits adjacent to St Thomas’ Church, which is a Grade II Listed Building. The church dates from 1840-41 and was designed by Edmund Sharpe with a later chancel and steeple added 1852-53 by Sharpe and Paley. The church centre was built in 1843 as a school and acquired by the vicar of the Church of St Thomas in 1845. Ownership of the building passed to County Council in the 1960s and came back into the church ownership in the 1980s. Although alterations have clearly taken place to the building since then, and not all of the alterations have been sympathetic, given the building’s age, architectural features and historic association with the listed church, the building was identified as a positive unlisted building within the Lancaster Conservation Area Appraisal and is considered to be a non-designated heritage asset. The latter has been confirmed through an assessment made by the Conservation Team.

7.2.2 Policy DM31 of the DM DPD sets out that proposals which involve the loss of a building that makes a positive contribution to the significance of the Conservation Area will not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that this is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits that outweigh the harm. In addition, Policy DM33 sets out that there will be a presumption in favour of the retention of a non- designated heritage asset, and any loss would require clear and convincing justification. In the national context, guidance regarding non-designated heritage assets is clear. Local authorities may identify buildings, monuments, sites, areas or landscapes as a non-designated heritage asset. Where identified, these assets will have “a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions”. Page 26

7.2.3 The application includes a number of reports assessing the condition of the building and the works required in relation to its maintenance. A Heritage Assessment accompanies the Design and Access Statement and this sets out some justification for the replacement building, with a consideration of works and extensions to the existing building in order to meet the current and future needs. Initial concerns regarding the detail provided, particularly in relation to costs, have been allayed and are set out later in this report. The structural survey also demonstrated that the existing building could be reused and the need for the additional space, including existing and proposed space was not fully articulated, although it had been set out that there were particular issues with space on a Sunday, with a requirement to utilise the modular building in the carpark. As such, further information was requested to better demonstrate the limitations of the existing building and justify the additional space proposed, in addition to more details in relation to the works required and associated costs set out in the various surveys and reports.

7.2.4 A separate statement aimed at justifying the loss of the non-designated heritage asset has now been provided. This provides a history of the building, including how it has changed over time, the restrictions of the building, aspirations for the new development, condition issues of the building and options for remodelling. The building was originally single storey, with a second floor accessed by external stone steps added in 1845. In the 1980s, major alterations were carried out to bring the building back into use, including the replacement of the roof structure in a different form, alterations to external windows and doors, additions to the east elevation and significant changes to the internal space. Historic photographs have been provided to show how the building has changed over time.

7.2.5 The existing centre has a gross internal floor area of 580 sq.m over two floors. The available meeting room space for groups over 8 persons is limited to 2 rooms. A large room of approximately 100 sq.m is available at ground floor level and a further meeting room is located at first floor with the latter accessed via an external staircase. The submission identifies the following issues with the current building: poor accessibility across the site; poor integration between buildings; physical security and ensuring the safeguarding of children and vulnerable adults who use the buildings; appearance; limited space for community activities and groups; lack of disabled access to the first floor; poor layout of accommodation; lack of storage; noise egress between spaces; and lack of flexibility.

7.2.6 More information has now been provided in relation to the groups that currently use the building, with clarification of the particular needs on Sunday mornings, where existing issues with the availability of space for children’s groups had already been highlighted. The building is also used by a parent and toddler group, which is at capacity and cannot operate on another day due to lack of availability of space. There are also restrictions to the existing holiday club for school age children because of space. The building also caters for summer fun days, week night children’s and youth groups and contains offices used in association with the church.

7.2.7 In addition to expanding existing activities the aim of a new centre would be offer a variety of services to meet people at their point of need, such as:  A Family Life Centre, that will support families under pressure, through counselling and family therapies, support groups for those raising children with special needs, and parenting and relationship courses;  Parish nursing, which provides a qualified and registered health visitor or nurse who is employed by the church, and who is able to offer medical care and advice but in the context of care for the whole person, body, mind and spirit;  CAP (Christians Against Poverty) Life Skills courses, helping people learn how to cook on a budget, and manage their finances; and  Lunch Club for the elderly that might sit alongside the regular midweek communion service, to help meet the needs of those who are isolated and lonely in the city.

7.2.8 The submission also sets out that the building would be used by the community and they have had to turn down requests for regular use of the building by community, due to lack of space, from community groups including:  An organisation which carries out community integration work to build bridges with those settling in Lancaster from overseas;  A charity providing support to those with mental health issues in Lancaster & Morecambe;  An organisation wanting to offer parenting classes to parents of children with learning difficulties and special educational needs; Page 27  An organisation wanting space for a community parent and toddler group;  An organisation co-ordinating support for the homeless and those in need across Lancaster  The NHS wishing to offer regular health services.

7.2.9 There are a number of structural issues which would need to be addressed, but can be remedied, although they do have associated costs. The feasibility of adapting the existing building has been considered, with layouts prepared to show how it could be remodelled and extended. This would include the addition of internal stairs and a lift and a single storey side extension to create a hall, however they have identified that this would not meet the needs on a Sunday, and still require to use of the modular building, and would not meet all of their aspirations as highlighted above as it would be difficult to provide a second floor. An updated cost analysis has been undertaken to understand the potential costs of both the New Build Church Centre Development and the Remodelling Option using the latest cost data available. Whilst the overall construction cost is higher for the new build option, the VAT for the remodel option is £465,000 which makes the scheme more expensive.

7.2.10 As set out above, the loss of the building requires clear and convincing justification. The submitted statement illustrates that the centre was substantially altered in the 1980s and also considers the existing uses and constraints of the building and looks at the feasibility of reusing the existing building against the proposed new build option. The building is still be considered a non-designated heritage asset, but in light of the information provided this significance has been considerably diminished through modern alterations. In addition, it has been clearly outlined that there are public benefits arising from the proposals. Therefore, whilst the demolition would still cause a degree of harm to the non-designated heritage asset and associated church (Grade II), the harm is considered to be less than substantial, and there are significant public benefits which could outweigh the harm. There is a stone plaque on the existing building, which relates to the historic use of the building. This will be re-sited in the centre of the main part of the building, at ground floor, facing Marton Street.

7.3 Scale and design and the impact on the Conservation Area and Listed Buildings

7.3.1 The proposed building will be over three floors and the main part of the building will be on a similar footprint to the existing building but will be orientated with the roofslope facing Marton Street, with a large gable projection at the rear. The front part of the building will be approximately 1.3 metres higher than the existing building. A large single storey lean-to is proposed on the east elevation, which will extend into the existing external space to the east, up to a new footway which is proposed adjacent to Peter Street. A smaller lean-to is proposed on the west elevation to provide a lobby to the new building, and this will be linked to St Thomas’s Church with a glazed link. The front section of the building is proposed to be finished in a mix of reclaimed stone from the existing building and ashlar stone, with elements of dark grey cladding providing framing to windows. The rear projection would be finished in a through coloured render and the roof would be slate.

7.3.2 The large single storey lean-to on the eastern elevation is proposed to be a mix of reclaimed stone, grey cladding and glazing. It was originally proposed to have a sloping slate roof, however there were concerns regarding the appearance of this, given its depth, as it did not appear as an integral part of the design for the whole building. As such, the sloping section has been shortened, introducing a flat roofed element and this would have a grey Glass Reinforced Plastic (GRP) roof with a lead roll effect. A smaller lean-to is proposed on the west elevation which would be mostly glazed and have a sloping roof, similar to the other lean-to but with a large amount of glazing. This would encroach into the area which separates the current building from the church. From this a glazed link to the church is proposed which would mostly have a flat GRP roof, with the exception of a small section which would be glazed and attach to the listed building. The glazing would be set into the wall of the church.

7.3.3 The proposed massing and scale relates well to the surrounding built form and will still retain the listed church’s prominence in the streetscene. The design draws influence from the neighbouring church with the use of a pitched roof, oriented with the roofslope facing the highway, with coping stones and verticality of windows, but incorporating a modern approach. The re-use of the stone from the existing building, with ashlar above in addition to the slate roof is considered to be appropriate within the historic context. It is considered that the more modern materials, including the cladding and the GRP roof, will provide a contemporary appearance whilst not detracting from the character and appearance of the Conservation Area or the adjacent listed church and associated wall and railings. The alterations to the lean-to are an improvement to the scheme. Whilst the Page 28 footprint has remained largely the same, the reconfiguration of the lean-to roof has reduced the visual dominance of this feature which was a concern with the original proposal. A more simplified surround to the first floor windows in the gable facing Peter Street elevation has also been proposed which provides cleaner lines, more in keeping with the overall design concept.

7.3.4 The building will attach to the listed church via a glazed link. This will be in the form of a short length of frameless glass surround to the arched doorway of the choir vestry. This connection is proposed to be sawcut into the existing structure and held in place by a polysulphide sealant. A lead flashing would be proposed over the existing hood mould to maintain a weather proof seal. This is considered to have a minimal impact both visually and physically upon the listed building and is considered to be an appropriate solution to link the new building to the church.

7.3.5 Concerns have been raised with the agent in relation to the design of the proposed new fences and gates which have been proposed between the side of the church and Victoria Place, between the church and Marton Street, and between the wall abutting Victoria Place and the new building. Given that the railings and walls around the church are separately Grade II listed and were designated separately for their ornate design and association with Edmund Sharpe, there are concerns that the proposed design of railings would diminish this architectural interest. In addition, they will be projecting above the boundary wall which is considered to be inappropriate. It was advised that the gates immediately adjacent to the church (marked as A and B) were removed from the proposal or significantly redesigned to be more sympathetic to the surrounding architectural detail and character. Following these concerns being raised, amended details have been provided. Whilst the design does copy the finial detail, they are not a particularly sympathetic addition as the piers have a square profile. In addition, it appears that the height of one of these (marked as A) has been increased, so that it projects above the wall which bounds Victoria Place. The design of this is considered to be inappropriate and the agent has been advised that the details should be amended to better reflect the detail of the historic gates and fences the church.

7.3.6 The car park to the rear is proposed to be resurfaced with tarmac, with the existing concrete ramp from the highway retained. The carpark is well contained from public viewpoints and, as such, this surfacing is considered to be acceptable. There are some other areas of surfacing around the proposed building, including an external terrace at the front and a footway. At present the details of these are shown as paving flags, setts and tarmac for the footway. There are some concerns regarding the latter, and there may be a more sympathetic solution, although it is acknowledged that this would be easier to maintain, however the footway along Marton Street is flags rather than tarmac. The precise details of this can be covered by condition and there may need to be some input from the Highway Authority if they decide to adopt this.

7.3.7 Overall, subject to the resolution of the concerns with regards to the gates and railings, the proposed development is considered to be acceptable in terms of its scale, siting and design and will not detract from the character and appearance of the Conservation Area or the adjacent listed church.

7.4 Impacts on Archaeology

7.4.1 Some comments have been received from the Lancashire Archaeological Advisory Service in relation to the potential for archaeological remains at the application site. The church fronts onto Penny Street, which is known to represent the line of the main north-south Roman road running into Lancaster and appears to have remained in use from that time to the present day. By the end of the medieval period Lancaster seems to have extended as far as the south end of Penny Street, where 'The White Cross' stood. This is shown on Speed's map of 1610 as well as maps of 1684 and 1778. The latter two maps also show the plot which was later occupied by the church and school as an undeveloped east-west strip, reminiscent of a medieval burgage plot or strip field, which appears to have extended east as far as the present Aalborg Square. A map of 1821 again shows it as open ground, with the eastern end being used as gardens.

7.4.2 The above indicates that some areas of undeveloped land, with a potential for the preservation of prehistoric and Roman archaeological remains, may exist on the site. The first of these, between church and church centre, has probably been impacted by the construction of both buildings and by the 1980 works to the building. To the east side of the church centre, only limited landscaping works have been undertaken and this section has more potential for early remains to survive. It is possible that some areas between the existing foundations of the church centre may also retain undisturbed deposits, as may the car park. It is noted, however, that remains of the Roman cemetery have only Page 29 been recorded up to 25 metres back from the line of the Roman road to date. The west side of St Thomas Church Centre is located some 50 metres from the road line, and the most promising area adjacent to Peter Street is 67-77metres away. The west end of the car park is only some 25 metres from the road, but only limited resurfacing is proposed in that area. Given this, and the uncertainty in the provenance of the prehistoric remains, the Lancashire Archaeological Advisory Service have advised that archaeological investigation is not required prior to a planning decision being made. It has also been advised that it would also seem unjustified for formal archaeological excavation to be required, but it is considered that an archaeological watching brief during the development is appropriate. This can be covered by condition.

7.5 Highway Implications

7.5.1 The site is easily accessible by a choice of sustainable travel modes including foot, cycle and public transport. The surrounding pedestrian environment is of an acceptable quality, with footways being well lit adding to a sense of personal security. Signage and the built form add to a good level of legibility with adjacent pedestrian footway links providing an acceptable means of access to the site. The site lies adjacent to a designated cycle route which provides access to the city centre and surrounding cycle network. The proposed layout plan does not identify any cycle parking, however it is considered that there is scope to provide this. Parking is restricted on the highway in the vicinity of the site. There is some parking provided by the private carpark with additional parking available in established city centre carparks and other street parking.

7.5.2 The Highway Authority has advised that there is the potential for greater use to be made of Peter Street and its junction with Marton Street as the most direct means of access to the associated parking facilities. Peter Street is considered to be sub-standard in terms of the nature of the carriageway, only allowing for singular vehicle movements, with pedestrian movements restricted with a lack of footways. They have also advised that driver forward visibility at the junction of Peter Street and Marton Street is restricted due to on-street resident pay and display parking arrangements. In order to overcome concerns, the scheme includes the widening of Peter Street, where it adjoins Marton Street, in order to allow two vehicles to pass. A footway has also been shown within the site adjacent to Peter Street in order to aid pedestrian movements. The Highway Authority have also advised that there should be a review of the on street parking arrangements along the frontage of the site with Marton Street in order to aid visibility. These can all be covered by condition.

7.5.3 It is presumed that the development will increase the frequency of pedestrian/vehicular movements along Marton Street, Peter Street & Victoria Place. In addition to the measures outlined above the Highway Authority have also advised that a short length of centre line, transverse & Stop/Give Way thermoplastic markings should be laid at the junction of Peter Street with Matron Street and that there should be a review of street lighting arrangements on Peter Street, with an upgrade where appropriate. A traffic management plan has also been requested, however, the site is heavily restricted by parking restrictions and any direct impact on the highway (or excavation or works to the highway, and subsequent reinstatement) can be controlled by the Highway Authority. Overall, subject to the inclusion of conditions as set out above, it is considered that there will not be a detrimental impact to highway safety as a result of the proposal, and there is likely to be some improvement to the existing situation with the road widening and footpath works proposed.

7.6 Impacts on residential amenity

7.6.1 The proposal introduces built elements closer to properties to the east, which appear to be partly residential. However, given the height of the closest part of the building, 4.8 metres, and the separation by the lane and rear yards, it is considered that there will not be a detrimental impact on residential amenity.

7.7 Impacts on Trees and Ecology

7.7.1 Trees and shrubs within the site are generally in good overall condition and can be seen from the wider public domain as such they make a positive impact upon the character and appearance of the site and the immediate locality. S2 (cotoneaster), T3 weeping birch, G4 (cypress) and T9 (rowan) are Page 30 proposed for removal in order to accommodate the development. All other trees and shrubs are to be retained. The most important amenity trees, T5 and T6 (lime) are to be retained and appropriately protected. The development will encroach into the root protection area of retained tree T1 (sycamore). However, there are existing areas of hardstanding within the root protection area of this tree which may have constrained root growth. However, the presence of roots cannot be excluded. As such, the Tree Protection Officer has advised that a detailed Arboriculture Method Statement (AMS) will be required for all works proposed within the theoretical root protection area of retained trees. It is recommended that only “root friendly” materials and methods of working are used within this area to ensure the long term sustainability of the tree.

7.7.2 Additional planting is proposed at the entrance to (and within) the car park at the rear, and a small green space/planting bed is shown to the front of the lean-to on the side of the building. Scope for additional planting is limited, given that the development occupies much of the space to the side of the existing building. A condition to ensure that proposed landscaping is sufficient and appropriate.

7.7.3 As a result of the age and nature of the building and the proximity to the canal, it is considered that a bat survey is required. One has been submitted, however this only relates to the church and does not include the church centre building. The agent has been advised in relation to this and it is hoped that the relevant surveys can be undertaken prior to the Planning Committee Meeting.

7.7.4 The submitted report does provide some useful information in relation to bat activity in the area, as the assessment included an inspection of the building to be demolished, in addition to bat activity survey, and was carried out in summer 2017. The report sets out that during the initial dusk survey there was exceedingly limited bat activity detected around the building. A single common pipistrelle was observed flying up and down the Marton street side of the church, underneath the scattered tree line. Although activity was so low, there was some slight uncertainty about the flight-line of one of the bats, which wasn’t thought to have emerged from the Church, but which could not be satisfactorily confirmed either way. During the dawn survey, bat activity was even less, and revealed no re-entry of bats, and clarified that there was no habitual use of any feature on the Church for bat roosting.

7.7.5 The report sets out that the results were in line with the Ecologist’s reasonable expectation, given the urban nature of the site and the presence through the hours of darkness of high-power external security lighting at the site and nearby Police Station, neither of which confer high suitability to bat activity. Given the proximity of the building to be demolished to the church, it is unlikely that, even if a roost is discovered, that it would contain a significant number of bats because of the limited bat activity found from the surveys. However, as there is potential for bats, a decision cannot be made in relation to the application until the building has been surveyed, and further emergence surveys carried out if deemed to be necessary. If a roost is found, then a licence would be required from Natural England and, before the planning application is determined, the Local Planning Authority would need to be satisfied that the proposal would pass the three derogation tests that would be considered when deciding to grant a licence. These tests relate to there being an overriding public interest for the development, no satisfactory alternative, and the works not being detrimental to the maintenance of the population of bats. Given the nature of the proposal and the justification put forward for the replacement building, the first two tests could be passed. The third would be dependent on surveys, but as set out above it is unlikely that, if there is a roost, that it supports significant numbers of bats. An update will be provided to Committee in relation to this issue.

7.7 Air Quality

7.7.1 The site is located outside but in close proximity to the Lancaster Air Quality Management Area (AQMA). As the proposed building is slightly larger than the one it replaces and it will likely be more used, the Air Quality Officer advises that it is reasonable to assume that there may be a small increase in traffic and this may impact on the AQMA. It has been recommended that there is suitable provision of parking for cyclists in addition to at least two electric vehicle charging points. The agent has been asked if these can be included within the scheme. There should be scope to include the cycle parking, and this would probably be more appropriately-located close to the building rather than in the car park. It is not clear if it will be practical to provide the vehicle charging points, given the distance of the carpark from the building, but it would be a benefit to the overall scheme. If there are reasons why it is not possible to provide this, then it is considered that this would not justify the refusal of the scheme, particularly as there are a variety of modes of transport which can be utilised, given the city centre location. The Air Quality Officer has also recommended that a Construction Environmental Management Plan is provided to deal with dust issues that may arise. However, it is Page 31 considered that this issue can be adequately controlled by separate legislation.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 There are no planning obligations to consider in relation to this proposal.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 The proposal requires the demolition of the existing church centre leading to the total loss of a Non- Designated Heritage Asset, which would harm the significance of the building, in addition to the significance of Lancaster Conservation Area and the adjacent Listed Building. It is considered that sufficient justification has been provided for the loss of the building, to satisfy the requirements of Policy DM33 of the DM DPD, and that there are significant public benefits which would outweigh the harm, which is considered to be less than substantial for the purposes of the NPPF. The massing and scale of the proposed building relates well to the surrounding built form and will still retain the listed church’s prominence in the streetscene, drawing influence from the adjacent church whilst introducing more contemporary elements. It is considered that the building would preserve, and possibly enhance, this part of the Conservation Area and will not detract from the listed church.

9.2 The proposal is also considered acceptable in terms of impacts on residential amenity, highway safety and air quality. Subject to the submission of appropriate bat surveys covering the building to be demolished, that demonstrate that the proposal will not significantly impact on bat populations, and some alterations to the gate and railing details, the development is considered to be acceptable.

Recommendation

That Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the receipt of appropriate bat surveys and amendments to the gates and fencing and the following conditions:

1. Standard three year timescale 2. Approved plans 3. Secure contract for construction prior to demolition 4. Archaeological watching brief 5. Arboricultural Method Statement 6. Contaminated land assessment and remediation 7. Drainage scheme 8. Scheme of highway improvement works: road widening; pedestrian links; road markings; review of street lighting to Peter Street and parking arrangements on Marton street. 9. Materials/details including – stone; render; roofing materials; cladding; eaves verge and ridge details; rooflights; flues and vents; boundary treatments, including gates and fencing to churchyard; surfacing materials; windows and doors; window surrounds; barrier to car park; any repairs to the plaque; louvres; glazed extension to church. 10. Landscaping Scheme 11. Development in accordance with Arboricultural Implications Assessment 12. Surfacing and marking to car park 13. Provision of cycle storage 14. Inclusion of existing plaque, as shown on the drawings 15. Hours of construction

Article 35, Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015

In accordance with the above legislation, the City Council can confirm that it has made the recommendation in a positive and proactive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development, working proactively with the applicant to secure development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. The recommendation has been taken having had regard to the impact of development, and in particular to the relevant policies contained in the Development Plan, as presented in full in the report, and to all relevant material planning considerations, including the National Planning Policy Framework, National Planning Practice Guidance and relevant Supplementary Planning Documents/Guidance.

Background Papers None

Agenda Item 8 Page 32 Agenda Item Committee Date Application Number

A8 23 July 2018 18/00543/LB

Application Site Proposal

St Thomas Church Listed building application for a single-storey glazed Penny Street extension to connect the former choir vestry of the Lancaster church and the proposed replacement Church Centre Lancashire building, alterations to the former choir vestry including the removal of an existing timber door and replacement with timber-framed partition and the removal of arched windows to the south elevation and replacement with fire escape door, installation of new perimeter security gates adjoining the Penny Street and Marton Street elevations, and alterations to the boundary wall to Victoria Place including the addition of a wrought iron railings

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr Tim Parsons Northmill Associates

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

Extension of time until 25 July 2018 Committee Cycle

Case Officer Mrs Eleanor Fawcett

Departure No

Approval, subject to amendments to the gates and Summary of Recommendation fencing.

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The application site is within the centre of Lancaster and relates to St Thomas’ Church Centre, the associated land surrounding this, and St Thomas’s Church. The church centre is two storey, finished in a mix of stone and render, and fronts onto Marton Street, with the building abutting the rear of the pavement. It also adjoins Victoria Place at the rear, which is at a higher level than the ground floor of the building. The boundary wall enclosing the land to the west of the centre lies adjacent to Peter Street.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 Listed Building Consent is sought for a single-storey glazed extension to connect the former choir vestry of the church to a new church centre building to replace the existing one at the site. Page 33 Alterations to the church to facilitate this include alterations to the former choir vestry including the removal of an existing timber door and replacement with timber-framed partition and the removal of arched windows to the south elevation and replacement with a fire escape door. The proposed church hall will be on a similar footprint to the existing building but will be oriented with the roofslope facing Marton Street and will have a large gable projection at the rear. A large single storey lean-to is proposed on the east elevation, which will extend into the existing external space to the east, up to a new footway which is proposed adjacent to Peter Street. A smaller lean-to is proposed on the west elevation to provide a lobby to the new building, and this will be linked to St Thomas’s church, towards the southern part of the east elevation, with a glazed link. The proposal also includes the installation of some metal gates and railings to adjoin to the existing boundary walls of the church.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The most relevant site history is set out below.

Application Number Proposal Decision 18/00405/FUL Relevant Demolition of existing 2 storey Church Centre Under Consideration building and erection of a replacement 2.5 storey Church Centre building, including single storey lean-to and single storey link to the adjacent Church and alterations to existing carpark, including creation of steps and resurfacing 16/01486/PRETWO Pre-application advice in relation to the erection of a Advice Provided. replacement 2.5 storey Church centre

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory and non-statutory consultees:

Consultee Response Conservation Team Support, subject to conditions. The proposal would lead to total loss of a Non- Designated Heritage Asset, which would harm the significance of the building. The proposed demolition would also cause harm to the significance of Lancaster Conservation Area and the adjacent Listed Building. This harm is considered to be less than substantial, but there are significant public benefits which could outweigh the harm.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 No representations have been received.

6.0 Principal National and Development Plan Policies

6.1 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

Paragraphs 7, 14 and 17 – Sustainable Development and Core Principles Paragraphs 131 – 134, 137 and 141 – Designated Heritage Assets

6.2 Local Planning Policy Overview – Current Position

6.3 Development Management Development Plan Document

DM30 – Development affecting Listed Buildings

6.4 Other Material Considerations

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The main issues to be considered in the determination of this application are:  Impact on the Listed Buildings

7.2 Impact on the Listed Buildings

7.2.1 The proposal relates to extensions and alterations to the Grade II Listed St Thomas’ Church, and separately listed walls and railings, associated with a replacement church centre adjacent to the Church. The church dates from 1840-41 and was designed by Edmund Sharpe with a later chancel and steeple added 1852-53 by Sharpe and Paley. The church centre will be over three floors and main part of this will be on a similar footprint to the existing building but will be oriented with the roofslope facing Marton Street, with a large gable projection at the rear. The front part of the building will be approximately 1.3 metres higher than the existing building. A large single storey lean-to is proposed on the east elevation, which will extend into the existing external space to the east, up to a new footway which is proposed adjacent to Peter Street. A smaller lean-to is proposed on the west elevation to provide a lobby to the new building, and this will be linked to St Thomas’s Church with a glazed link. The front section of the building is proposed to be finished in a mix of reclaimed stone from the existing building and ashlar stone, with elements of dark grey cladding providing framing to windows. The rear projection would be finished in a through coloured render and the roof would be slate.

7.2.2 The large single storey lean-to on the eastern elevation is proposed to be a mix of reclaimed stone, grey cladding and glazing. It was originally proposed to have a sloping slate roof, however there were concerns regarding the appearance of this, given its depth, as it did not appear as an integral part of the design for the whole building. As such, the sloping section has been shortened, introducing a flat roofed element and this would have a grey Glass Reinforced Plastic (GRP) roof with a lead roll effect. A smaller lean-to is proposed on the west elevation which would be mostly glazed and have a sloping roof, similar to the other lean-to but with a large amount of glazing. This would encroach into the area which separates the current building from the church. From this is proposed a glazed link to the church which would mostly have a flat GRP roof, with the exception of a small section which would be glazed and attach to the listed building. The glazing would be set into the wall of the church.

7.2.3 The proposed massing and scale relates well to the surrounding built form and will still retain the listed church’s prominence in the streetscene. The design draws influence from the church with the Page 35 use of a pitched roof, oriented with the roofslope facing the highway, with coping stones and verticality of windows, but incorporating a modern approach. The re-use of the stone from the existing building, with ashlar above in addition to the slate roof is considered to be appropriate within the historic context. It is considered that the more modern materials, including the cladding and the GRP roof, will provide a contemporary appearance whilst not detracting from the character and appearance listed church and associated wall and railings, which are separately listed. The alterations to the lean-to are an improvement to the scheme. Whilst the footprint has remained largely the same, the reconfiguration of the lean-to roof has reduced the visual dominance of this feature which was a concern with the original proposal. A more simplified surround to the first floor windows in the gable facing Peter Street elevation has also been proposed which provides cleaner lines, more in keeping with the overall design concept.

7.2.4 As set out above, the building will attach to the listed church via a glazed link. This will be in the form of a short length of frameless glass surround to the arched doorway of the choir vestry. This connection is proposed to be sawcut into the existing structure and held in place by a polysulphide sealant. A lead flashing would be proposed over the existing hood mould to maintain a weather proof seal. This is considered to have a minimal impact both visually and physically upon the listed building and is considered to be an appropriate solution to link the new building to the church. The submission sets out that the present timber doorway into the vestry is rotten and is to be replaced by a timber framed insulated partition with plaster finish. This will render the doorway redundant, its historic purpose will still remain legible. However, this does raise the question of the need for the physical link if there will be no through route between the centre and the church and this has been queried with the agent. On the south elevation of the vestry are two two-light arched windows, the right one to be replaced by an aluminium framed powder-coated fire escape door to an external terrace area. The vestry is a later addition, added on map evidence between 1938 and 1957. As such, it is considered that the proposal will not be detrimental to the significance of the building.

7.2.5 Concerns have been raised with the agent in relation to the design of the proposed new railings and gates which have been proposed between the side of the church and Victoria Place, between the church and Marton Street, and between the wall abutting Victoria Place and the new building. Given that the railings and walls around the church are separately Grade II listed and were designated separately for their ornate design and association with Edmund Sharpe, there are concerns that the proposed design of railings would diminish this architectural interest. In addition, they will be projecting above the boundary wall which is considered to be inappropriate. It was advised that the gates immediately adjacent to the church (marked as A and B) were removed from the proposal or significantly redesigned to be more sympathetic to the surrounding architectural detail and character. Following these concerns being raised, amended details have been provided. Whilst the design does copy the finial detail, they are not a particularly sympathetic addition as the piers have a square profile. In addition, it appears that the height of one of these (marked as A) has been increased, so that it projects above the wall which bounds Victoria Place. The design of this is considered to be inappropriate and the agent has been advised that the details should be amended to better reflect the detail of the historic gates and fences the church.

7.2.6 Subject to the resolution of the concerns with regards to the gates and railings, and clarification with regards to the purpose of the glazed link, the proposed development is considered to be acceptable in terms of its scale, siting and design and will not have a detrimental impact on the significance of the listed church and associated walls and railings.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 There are no planning obligations to consider as part of this proposal.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 Subject to the resolution of the concerns with regards to the gates and railings, and clarification with regards to the purpose of the glazed ink, the proposed development is considered to be acceptable in terms of its scale, siting and design and will not a detrimental impact on the significance of the listed church and associated walls and railings.

Page 36 Recommendation

That Listed Building Consent BE GRANTED subject to amendments to the gates and fencing and the following conditions:

1. Standard listed building timescale 2. Approved plans 3. Materials/details including – stone; render; roofing materials; cladding; eaves verge and ridge details; rooflights; flues and vents; gates and fencing to churchyard; windows and doors; window surrounds; barrier to car park; louvres; glazed extension to church.

Background Papers

None

Page 37 Agenda Item 9 Agenda Item Committee Date Application Number

A9 23 July 2018 18/00269/FUL

Application Site Proposal

Carnforth Business Park Erection of office (B1a) and storage and distribution Oakwood Way (B8) building with associated parking, access and Carnforth boundary fencing Lancashire

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr Edward Eagle JMP Architects

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

23 July 2018 N/A

Case Officer Ms Charlotte Seward

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Approval

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The proposed site occupies a central position within the existing Carnforth Business Park which is an established employment site where development for B1, B2 and B8 uses can be supported in principle.

1.2 The existing site was developed as a result of permission granted in 2010 (reference 10/01022/HYB). This application was a hybrid application that allowed full planning permission for the development of 6 plots (1-6) for B1, B2 and B8 uses and a remaining plot for the Gospel Hall, and included permission for the access, a new internal roads, drainage infrastructure and landscaping. Outline planning permission was also granted for the development of the remaining site (plots 7-16) for B1, B2 and B8 uses.

1.3 The full planning permission has been fully developed and occupied, including the infrastructure for the remaining sites, subject to the amendments permitted by a Section 73 (variation of condition) application in 2013 (reference 13/01161/VCN). The outline permission lapsed on 24 May 2014. The proposal site therefore has no extant planning permission for its use or development. However, it remains an allocated employment site within the existing and emerging policies and benefits from the infrastructure, including roads and drainage, that was implemented under the full planning permission.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 This application seeks permission for the development of a portion of the site for a B8 Storage and Distribution Unit, with a floorspace of 1,762 sqm floor space and a building height of 18m, and an 800 sqm 2 storeys office building. At ground floor the office building will have a reception, 162 sqm trade showroom, and some offices. The first floor is proposed to be used wholly for office space.

2.2 The building is proposed to be used by HFS (Hygienic Flooring Solutions) who will store and distribute vinyl flooring in the UK and Europe. The office building will be used for sales, accountancy and general administration in association with the business. The show room is a trade show room for merchants and retailers tradespersons. Page 38

3.0 Site History

3.1 The most relevant and recent application relating to this site and proposal are set out below:

Application Number Proposal Decision 10/01022/HYB Hybrid application for the development of Carnforth Approved Business Park on land off Kellet Road, Carnforth for use classes B1, B2, B8 and D1. Full application for the development of plots 1-6, access, new road, infrastructure and landscaping and outline application for Plots 7-16 12/00004/DIS Discharge of condition application to agree details Conditions 4, 5, 7, 10, reserved by conditions 1 -22 on 10/01022/HYB (full 13, 15, 20 agreed. element only) 12/00127/DIS Discharge of conditions application to agree details Pending Consideration reserved by conditions 7 and 8 and 19 on 10/01022/HYB (These conditions have (full element only) been reviewed as part of the determination of this application). 13/01161/VCN Hybrid application for the development of Carnforth Approved Business Park on land off Kellet Road, Carnforth for use classes B1, B2, B8 and D1. Full application for the development of plots 1-6, access, new road, infrastructure and landscaping and outline application for Plots 7-16 (Pursuant to variation of condition 2 seeking amendments to the dimensions of Gospel Hall and erection of a 1.2m high wall to the pedestrian plaza approved by application 10/01022/HYB)

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory and non-statutory consultees:

Consultee Response Planning and Comments: Development is reflective of other operations that take place on the Housing Policy business park. Any planning permission granted should be restricted by condition to ensure that the show room is used ancillary to the B8 use and is for use by trade customers only. County Highways Objection: Lack of parking provision and the potential to adversely affect the safety and operation of the surrounding lengths of the local highways network including on Boundary Road, further exacerbating the existing parking on Boundary Road which prevents the passing of two HGV unhindered. Lack of provision of sustainable transport facilities. Comments: The Framework Travel Plan meets the criteria for an Interim/Framework Travel Plan. A full travel plan would need to require by conditions and include the minimum requirements listed. A £6,000 contribution is requested to be provided by a S106 agreement to enable Lancashire County Council to provide a range of services including the appraisals of the travel plan and its monitoring and future review. Lead Local Flood Further information required: A plan drawing showing full route and capacity of the Authority receiving drain and its outfall into a surface water body; demonstration that the receiving drain has adequate capacity; evidence of legal rights to allow construction of and future maintenance of the surface water connection. United Utilities Comments: Foul and surface water must be drained on separate systems, surface water must be drained in accordance with the drainage hierarchy and not connection into the public sewage system directly or indirectly. Environmental Objection: The proposal does not demonstrate that all reasonable measures Health: Air quality possible to reduce the cumulative impact of this development on air quality in the Carnforth Air Quality Management Area have been made. Page 39 Environmental Comments: A condition should be applied to require limited site investigation to Health: determine whether there is any contamination at the site and a remediation method Contamination statement provided proportionate to the findings. This remediation method statement must be complied with throughout construction. Conditions are also requested in relation to soil/soil materials being brought to the site and in relation to the prevention of new contamination. Natural England No objection: Based on the plans submitted, Natural England considers that the proposed development will not have significant adverse impacts on statutorily protected sites or landscapes. Tree Officer No objection: subject to a number conditions, including implementation of the submitted Arboricultural Implications Assessment; agreement and implementation of a planting scheme; and a method statement for works within root protection areas or within 1m of the protection barrier. Lancashire Fire and Comments: Proposal must be in accordance with all the requirements of Building Rescue Service Regulations Approved Document B, Part B5 ‘Access and facilities for the Fire Service’

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 One letter of comment has been received. It requests that any external lighting be downward facing to reduce light pollution from this site.

6.0 Principal National and Development Plan Policies

6.1 National Planning Policy Framework  Paragraph 12 and 14 – Presumption in favour of Sustainable Development  Paragraph 17 – Core Principles  Section 1 (paragraph 18 – 22) – Building a strong, competitive economy  Section 4 (paragraphs 29 – 41) – Promoting sustainable transport  Paragraphs 56, 58, 61, 64 – Good design

(i) The Strategic Policies and Land Allocations DPD; and, (ii) A Review of the Development Management DPD.

6.3 Lancaster District Core Strategy (adopted July 2008)

 SC1: Sustainable Development  SC2: Urban Concentration Page 40  SC5: Achieving quality in design

6.4 Lancaster Local Plan (saved policies)  EC4: Carnforth Business Park  EC5: Employment Allocations

6.5 Development Management DPD  DM15: Employment Land and Premises  DM20: Enhancing Accessibility and Transport Linkages  DM21: Walking & Cycling  DM22: Vehicle Parking Provision  DM23: Transport Efficiency and Travel Plans  DM27: Protection and Enhancement of Biodiversity  DM29: Protection of Trees, Hedgerows and Woodland  DM35: Key Design Principles  DM37: Air Quality Management and Pollution  DM39: Surface Water Run-Off and SUDS  Appendix B – Car Parking Standards

6.6 Emerging Strategic Policies and Land Allocations DPD  EC1: Established Employment Areas

6.7 Emerging Development Management DPD  DM31: Air Quality Management and Pollution  DM34: Surface Water Run Off and SUDS  DM34: Protection of Trees Woodland and Hedgerows

6.8 Other Material Considerations  National Planning Practice Guidance  Surface Water Drainage, Flood Risk Management and Watercourses (May 2015);  Provision of Electric Vehicle Charging Points New Developments (September 2017);  Low Emissions and Air Quality Planning Advisory Note (PAN) (September 2017);

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The main issues to be considered in the determination of this application are:  Principle of development  Highways impacts  Air quality  Surface water and foul drainage  Flood Risk  Landscape and visual impact  Trees and ecology implications

7.2 Principle of development

7.2.1 National policy seeks to support sustainable economic growth. Local policy seeks to support employment growth in urban areas and on allocated sites. Core Strategy policy SC2 seeks to direct 95% of new employment floor space within the urban area of Lancaster, Morecambe, Heysham and Carnforth. Saved Local Plan policy EC3 allocated Carnforth Business Park for B1 (Business and Light Industrial) and B2 (General Industrial) Use where the proposal would not result in significant increases in HGV movements into or out of Carnforth Town Centre. Unless material considerations indicate otherwise, emerging policy EC1 of the Strategic Policies and Land Allocations DPD can be given the fullest weight in relation to paragraph 216 of the NPPF due to only minor representations being received that do not specifically relate to the allocations. This policy supports development proposals for B1 (Office), B2 (General Industrial) and B8 (Storage and Distribution) within Carnforth Business Park.

7.2.2 Development of this site for employment uses is therefore acceptable in principle. However, this proposal does not meet the requirements of Local Plan polic, which precludes B8 uses. However, Page 41 the proposal has a better fit with the emerging policy of the Strategic Policies and Land Allocation DPD which supports in principle B1 and B8 uses on this site. As such, this proposal does not fit within the existing policy and but accords with the emerging policy. It has been advised by the Planning and Housing Policy Team that weight can be given to this emerging policy.

7.2.3 Notwithstanding this, the historic development of this site is of a material consideration in the determination of this application. Whilst the outline permission granted in 2010 has lapsed, the 2010 full permission has been implemented. The full permission allowed for the development of the site for B1, B2, B8 and D1 uses. Furthermore, the permitted plans included general office use of the buildings and a number also included sale display rooms. Plot 4 included within the building a sales office and a display area of 97sqm. Plot 1 permitted a separate general office building which included a trade showroom of 189.5sqm which operates as the Head Office and northern Showroom for Havwoods International. The other units have a much smaller level of office space relative to the warehouse space which is of a more ancillary scale. As such the use of this site for storage and distribution and general office use with sales/trade showrooms has already been established at this site. This proposal very much follows the type of use that has been permitted for the plots 1 and 4 of the implemented site.

7.2.4 This proposal would result in the development of an existing employment site delivering 1762sqm of B8 employment space which is in accordance with the emerging policy requirement for this site and accords with the development of the existing site. The proposal would also result in the delivery of 800 sqm B1 office space including 162 sqm of trade showroom. This would result in the creation of 20 jobs initially hoping to grow to 30 in the next 2-3 years. Whilst this is not an employment use, it can be considered secondary in scale to the B8 use and is intended to be used in direct association with it.

7.2.5 Whilst the proposed development does not accord with the purposes of the original allocation of the site as set out in the saved policies of the Local Plan, the proposal does fit with the established development at this site and aligns more readily with the emerging policies of the Strategic Land Allocations DPD. Fundamentally would result in economic growth for the District on an allocated employment site. The use of the office and trade sales are separate from the B8 use would not be acceptable, but on balance the development of the general office and retail element could be considered acceptable where conditions restrict the following:  Sales trade showroom to be ancillary to the main use, displaying and selling only those products stored within the B8 use to tradespersons only;  Sales trade showroom to be limited to the area shown on the approved plans; and  Removal of permitted development rights

7.2.6 Subject to the restrictions set out above, it is considered that the proposal would result in positive economic development for the area where it can be considered acceptable in relation to its impacts and all other relevant policy.

7.3 Highways Impacts – traffic generation

7.3.1 National policy seeks to reduce the need to travel and decisions that generate significant movement should be located where the need to travel will be minimised and the use of sustainable modes of transport can be minimised, opportunities for sustainable transport should be maximised and improvements in the networks made where they cost effectively limit the significant impacts of the development. Local Policy seeks to ensure that development is located within sustainable locations and that development incorporates suitable and safe access to the existing highways network and road layout in accordance with design standards, and parking is provided in accordance with Appendix B.

7.3.2 The Transport Assessment (TA) submitted estimates that this development will generate 94 Annual Average Daily Trips (AADT) (47 in 47 out) with approximately one third of this traffic moving to and from Carnforth Town Centre. This will result in approximately 43 additional trips in Carnforth per day. The TA further breaks this down to estimate that of the 94 vehicles 10 will be Ordinary Goods Vehicles (which includes HGVS and larger goods vehicles). The assessment goes further to set out how this development sits within the overall estimated traffic generation for the whole of the Carnforth Business Park as set out in the 2010. It is stated that the 2010 TA was based on a total floor space of 23,854 sqm for the whole site The implementation of the full permission has resulted in a total floor Page 42 space of 13,629 sqm. This development would result in an additional floor space of 2,562 sqm which is significantly below the total floor space for the site that was examined up to 2023. In the grant of the 2010 permission it was therefore concluded that the generation of traffic for a floor space of 23,854 sqm from this site, equivalent to 1,207 traffic movements a day, was acceptable on the local highway network. The estimated AADT for this development has been based on the Weekday Traffic Generation accepted rate of 5.036 per 100 sqm as set out in the TRICS data submitted in 2010.

7.3.3 Whilst the outline permission for the remainder of the site has lapsed, it is considered that the rate of traffic generation for the floor space created within the site can still be considered valid. In the context of this rate the local highway network and the access to the site was considered to be able to accommodate the increase in traffic associated with a floor space of 23,854sqm up to 2023 at a rate of 5.036 per 100 sqm. Furthermore, since the 2010 permission, the Bay Gateway has opened which was expected to have had a reduction in traffic using the local network in Carnforth. On this basis it is considered that the traffic generated by this development can be considered acceptable in terms of the safety of the local highway network. County Highways has not raised any concern in relation to this predicted increase in traffic, though they have raised concern about the generation of HGV movements through Carnforth and the position of signage relative to the site that informs of the 7.5 Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) on Kellet Road to the junction with the A6 in Carnforth. To mitigate this County Highways has requested that the 7.5 tonnes restriction signs are moved to a more appropriate location so HGV drivers can be more clearly directed towards the motorway and given more advance warning of the restriction. It would also have a benefit to air quality as it would limit emissions in Carnforth’s Air Quality Management Area. The applicant is agreeable to a condition requiring the relocation of the sign.

7.3.4 In relation to matters of sustainability, policy seeks to reduce the need to travel. This proposal has sought to mitigate some of the traffic generated by private vehicles accessing the development through a Framework Travel Plan (TP). The TA estimates that this would result in a 15% reduction of light goods vehicles which would be the equivalent of 13 cars in the first year. County Highways has advised that the Framework TP can be considered acceptable as a “framework plan”, but that a condition of any permission granted would require a detailed TP to agreed and implemented. It should be noted that County Highways has requested a £6000 contribution for the monitoring of the Travel Plan but has subsequently stated that this can be carried out by an appointed Travel Plan Coordinator for the development. On this basis the financial contribution is considered not to be necessary.

7.3.5 The proposed reduction in trips that the Travel Plan would generate is welcomed but would still result in a significant amount of vehicular traffic and does not mitigate the very nature of the B8 storage and distribution use of the site. However, this impact needs to be weighed against the economic benefits of the proposal and the fact that the proposal falls within a site where employment growth is supported in principle. Overall it is considered that, subject to a condition requiring the agreement and implementation of a detailed Travel Plan, the proposed traffic generation can be considered acceptable in this instance.

7.4 Highways impacts – access and parking

7.4.1 The existing site has an access and internal road network that was permitted as part of the 2010 full planning permission and the use of this network for the new development can be considered acceptable in principle. This proposal seeks to create two new access points onto the existing internal road network with onsite parking; one for the B8 Use and one for the office building. The proposed accesses within the site will have good visibility splays left and right and adequate on site turning into the parking spaces and for HGV access to the B8 building. County Highways has confirmed that they considered that the site layout can accommodate HGV turning without affecting the operation or safety of surrounding lengths of the highways.

7.4.2 The existing access onto Boundary Lane also has good visibility, but this is affected by the unrestricted parking on the lane. The access onto Kellet Road is good to the left and slightly restricted to the right due to a bend in the road and could be improved by pruning of vegetation. County Highways has concern that the existing unrestricted parking on Boundary Lane hinders the passing of 2 HGVs. County Highways has not raised this concern about the intensification of the use of this access rather the potential for the lack of parking within the proposal to result in increased use of this unrestricted area for parking exacerbating the ability of the HGVs to pass. Notwithstanding this, the increased use of this lane will potentially result in the increased frequency of lorries not being able to pass and increase the potential for an obstruction to surrounding lengths of highway. It is considered Page 43 that off-site highways works to extend the double yellow lines to the full extent of Boundary Lane would result in improved visibility from the existing access onto Boundary Lane and help to ensure that two HGV vehicles can pass. Given the increased use of the accesses and Boundary Lane as a result of the proposal it is considered that this mitigation is reasonable and necessary to maintain the safety and efficiency of the surrounding highway network, and the applicant is agreeable to this.

7.4.3 The initial proposal showed a provision of 26 parking spaces and 4 motorcycle spaces. County Highways objected on the grounds of the parking provision being significantly below the maximum parking standard of 45 of a development of this size (Appendix B of the Development Management DPD) and the potential implication on the local highway network as a result of this. Amended plans have been provided that include 8 additional parking spaces and secure cycle parking for 8 bicycles. It is considered that an increase of 8 is reasonable, because with the anticipated LGV reduction of 13 vehicles in the Travel Plan. County Highways has verbally agreed that an increase in 8 parking spaces would allow them to remove their objection in relation to the scheme, and it was on this basis the plans were revised. County Highways has been formally re-consulted on these plans but has not yet responded. Committee will be updated with the consultation response. Any permission granted would require the full implementation of the parking as set out on the amended plans, and the agreement of details and implementation of secure cycle storage.

7.4.4 On the basis of the above assessment, subject to the proposed conditions it is considered that the parking, cycle parking and impact of the reduced parking on the local highway network would be considered acceptable.

7.5 Air Quality

7.5.1 National policy requires that planning decisions should ensure that any new development in Air Quality Management Areas (AQMA) is consistent with the local air quality action plan. Local policy requires that Air Quality Assessments (AQA) must be submitted for any development within or adjacent to an AQMA, and that development must ensure that users are not significantly adversely affected by the air quality within the AQMA and include mitigation measures where appropriate. The policy in the Emerging Development Management DPD goes further to states that development must avoid worsening any emission of air pollution in areas that could result in a breach and states that the Council will encourage opportunities to deliver net reductions in air emissions through on-site or off site measures. The Air Quality Planning Advisory Note (PAN) sets out the methodology that should be used to assess impact and sets out levels of required mitigation for certain types of development. In relation to the existing PAN document the development is of a type that triggers the standard mitigation and further mitigation.

7.5.2 The proposed development lies 1km (by road) east of Carnforth’s AQMA. The proposed development by its very nature of being a storage and distribution use generates traffic movements, in addition to the trips that will be generated by the office and trade sales use. The Transport Assessment (TA) submitted estimates that this development will generate 94 Annual Average Daily Trips (AADT) (47 in 47 out) with approximately one third of this traffic moving to and from Carnforth Town Centre. This will result in approximately 43 additional trips in Carnforth per day. The TA further breaks this down to estimate that of the 94 vehicles 10 will be Ordinary Goods Vehicles (which includes HGVS and larger goods vehicles).

7.5.3 The AQA submitted has assessed that this traffic generation will have an insignificant impact on local air quality because the level of traffic generation outside of the AQMA will be less than the thresholds as set out in the IAQM (2017) document, which considers significant to be equal to or greater than 500 LGV and 100 HGV outside of the AQMA and 100 LGV and 25 HGV within the AQMA. Notwithstanding this the report goes on to identify mitigation that could result in a 12% reduction of the emissions that this development would generate which include management of construction dust through condition of permission granted, Travel Plan, the provision of 2 electrical vehicle charging points, and a financial contribution to off-site compensatory measures to a total of £16,857.79 over 5 years equating to £3,371.56 annually.

7.5.4 Initially Environmental Health raised an objection in relation to the methodology used and a lack of information provided. The AQA was subsequently amended. An objection is maintained from Environmental Health in relation to the following matters; the 88% of emissions are not mitigated/compensated for; lack of mitigation relating to the HGV fleet; lack of penalties for non- Page 44 compliance within the Framework Travel Plan; number of electrical vehicle charging points; lack of detail as to how the how proposed financial contribution would be spent.

7.5.5 In response to this position, the Air Quality consultants have reiterated that they consider the impact to be insignificant and that mitigation is therefore not required, and have reiterated their commitment to the mitigation, noting that they are unsure whether the financial contribution can be considered reasonable in relation to planning policy. In addition to this the architects have amended the plans to increase the EV charging points to five; two 32 Amp high speed chargers and three 13amp chargers. In addition to this the applicants have stated that they are agreeable to a condition in relation to the existing 7.5 T weight limit sign to prevent HGVs turning the site west into Carnforth.

7.5.6 On assessment of the proposed mitigation against the current policy DM37 it is considered that the development would not result in a significant impact on the air quality and has included some mitigation measures to ensure that emissions are reduced by 12%. It is considered that the inclusion of conditions to require the implementation of the proposed EV charging points, the agreement of a detailed Travel Plan is reasonable and accepted by the applicant. It is not, however, appropriate to apply conditions that are controlled by other legislation, such as dust control during construction.

7.5.7 On balance it is considered that, contrary to the objection from Environment Health, given the insignificant overall impact of the development on air quality, and the lack of weight that can be applied to the PAN, as it is not a formal policy document, the proposed mitigation is acceptable. Further it is considered that the proposed financial contribution, at this stage, would not meet the tests of the NPPF for planning obligations. This is because at present Environmental Health does not current have an action plan for the Carnforth AQMA that sets out projects that such monies could fund to address air quality. Subject to the conditions identified it is considered that the proposal is in accordance with the requirements of Policy DM37 of the Development Management DPD.

7.6 Surface water drainage and foul drainage

7.6.1 Policy requires that new development should seek to demonstrate that there is no increase in surface water run-off rates both on and off site upon completion of development and where practical reduce run-off. New development should also secure appropriate management and maintenance measures.

7.6.2 As part of the 2010 full planning permission a surface water drainage system has been installed within the site. This system sought to discharge direct into a nearby watercourse at a rate of 65 litres per second (l/s) within each plot being restricted to 5l/s. Through the discharge of conditions application it was agreed, together with the Environment Agency, that an overall site discharge could be restricted to 85l/s for the whole site. There would appear to be more than sufficient capacity to accommodate this proposal.

7.6.3 The amended proposed drainage plans show a separate drainage network for foul and surface water drainage. The foul drainage is proposed to connect to the existing foul infrastructure within the site and then connect to the public sewer. In relation to surface water, the proposed site has been calculated to require a 272m³ cellular attenuation tank to cater for the 1 in 100 plus 40% climate change event. A hydro break is then proposed to restrict the outfall to the required 10l/s into the existing surface water drainage system which will eventually connect to an existing watercourse. This proposed development occupies just over two of the originally proposed plots within the now lapsed outline permission. It is on this basis that this proposed seeks to have double the output originally intended for each plot. Following request from the Lead Local Flood Authority, further details have been provided in relation to the receiving drain and the location of the outfall, the capacity of the existing system and the legal rights to allow this site to connect into the system within the business park and to the outfall.

7.6.4 The Lead Local Flood Authority has not yet provided a consultation response to the proposed amended plans. An update will be provided in relation to this matter at Committee. It is likely where the scheme is found to be acceptable it is considered that any permission would need to be restricted by condition to ensure that the discharge rate from the development into the private drainage network is restricted to 10l/s to ensure that further development of the site can be adequately carried out within the remaining drainage capacity. Whilst only limited details have been provided in relation to the management and maintenance of the scheme in perpetuity, this can be adequately dealt with via condition of any permission granted. No specific conditions are considered necessary in relation to the foul drainage system other than to require the implementation of the submitted plans. Page 45 7.7 Trees and ecology implications

7.7.1 National policy and local policy requires that biodiversity is conserved and enhanced and that opportunities to incorporate biodiversity in and around the development should be encouraged. The application site is current an open site which consists of species poor semi improved grassland. The site is bounded to the south west by an existing hedgerow and a single mature ash tree. An Arboricultural Implications Assessment (AIA) has been submitted with the application which identifies the trees to be retained as category B2 and recommends that they need protection during development. The Tree Constraints Plan shows that the amended development will fall outside of the root protection area of the hedgerow and the ash tree. Suggested mitigation measures include a tree protection fence to protect the tree/hedge during construction, and the report concludes that the tree and hedgerow would not compromise the operation of the development in any way that put with at risk of damage or removal in the future. The Tree Officer has raised no objection to the original proposal subject to a number of conditions, and has been re-consulted on the amended plans and AIA that reflect the additional parking spaces, but a response is awaited. Committee will be verbally updated in this regard. However, given that the proposal will still fall outside the root protection area of the trees/hedgerow it is likely that the Tree Officer will remain of the same opinion.

7.7.2 An Ecological Appraisal has been submitted with the application which identifies that vegetation on the site is of poor species, consisting of semi improved grass land. The survey found no evidence of badgers set or use of the site. The survey identified potential for bats to use the area but as no existing building or trees are to be affected by the proposal no survey was determined to be required. The survey makes assessment of the risk to brown hares to be very low and so no mitigation is proposed. It is considered that the existing tree and hedgerow could be habitats for wild birds, precautionary mitigation and enhancement has been proposed. Enhancement has been proposed in relation to the species type for landscaping and for the inclusion of bat and bird boxes on the proposed new building.

7.7.3 The site falls within the impact risk zone for a number of designated sites including Thwaite House Moss, Crag Bank, and Morecambe Bay Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs). Natural England has been consulted as part of the application and they have confirmed that they have no objection to the scheme commenting that “based on the plans submitted, Natural England considers that the proposed development will not have significant adverse impacts on statutorily protected sites or landscapes”. The scale of the development and the separation of the development from the site would mean that no direct impact on a designated site could amount. Indirectly there is the potential for air pollution from the increased traffic association with the development to have an impact but this has been assessed to not be significant by the Air Quality Assessment and mitigation has been proposed to reduce the overall emissions. Based on the scale of the development proposal, the current use of the site and the distances of the site from the SSSIs it is considered that the proposal in itself or cumulatively with other consented schemes, would not result in likely significant effects (LSE) on the designated sites. A condition to require the implementation of the precautionary mitigation and the small scale enhancements is considered to be reasonable and relevant to the development in accordance with national and local policies that require biodiversity to be conserved and enhanced.

7.8 Landscape and visual impact

7.8.1 National policy states that development should be of good design that contributes positively to making places better for people, and is clear that permission should be refused for poor design that fails to take opportunity for improving the quality and character of an area. Local policy echoes this requiring that design should have regard to local distinctiveness having consideration of siting, layout, materials, orientation and scale.

7.8.2 The proposed design of the building is utilitarian in appearance and has very much been designed to match the existing style and materials of the buildings already on site. It is considered in scale, siting and design to be appropriate to the existing context and the employment use of this site, and the proposal would by its siting and ground level not result in any harm to the existing landscape character of this site. Details have been submitted for materials and these are considered to be acceptable. The proposed landscaping of the site, to include the retention of the existing hedgerow and tree and the proposed planting of 7 silver birch trees, will help to soften views of the building and also help to enhance the biodiversity of the site. We are currently working with the applicant to agree the final specification of the materials with a view to requiring the implementation of the materials by condition, Page 46 avoiding the need for agreement post decision. Overall, it is considered that the proposed design is acceptable subject to the conditions proposed

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 There are no planning obligations to consider as part of this application.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 The proposal would result in the development of an existing allocated site for employment uses. Whilst the proposal does not accord with the Local Plan, the 2010 permission has set a clear precedent for the development of the site which this proposal reflects in type and use, and the proposal can be seen to align with the emerging policy for existing allocated employment sites in the Strategic Land Allocation DPD and therefore can be supported where the development is acceptable in all other respects. Whilst the proposal will result in an increase in traffic, it provides adequate parking and turning facilities, measures to reduce travel through the Travel Plan, and off site highways improvement measures to improve the safety of Boundary Lane and limit HGV traffic in Carnforth. Furthermore, it demonstrates that, whilst contrary to the recommendations of Environmental Health that the proposed mitigation relating to air quality can be considered to be reasonably proportionate to the development and will ensure that the impacts resulting from air quality are not significant on the AQMA which is compliant with the Council’s adopted policy position. Subject to the consultation response from the LLFA, it is considered that the proposed foul and surface water drainage plans are acceptable. And finally, subject to finalising details it is considered that the scale and design of the building is acceptable and will complement the existing appearance and character of the Business Park. Overall, this development proposal would result in positive economic growth to the Carnforth area in a location that can be considered the first preference for this type of development.

Recommendation

That, subject to highway and drainage matters being satisfactory resolved, Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard 3 year timescale 2. Development to be in accordance with listed plans 3. Sales trade showroom to be ancillary to the main use, displaying and selling only those products stored within the B8 use to tradespersons only 4. Sales trade showroom to be limited to the area shown on the approved plans 5. Removal of permitted development rights for changes of use and mezzanine floors 6 Off-site highways improvement works 7. Transport management plan including car parking and turning areas provision, secure and covered cycle parking, detailed Travel Plan and provision of electric vehicle charging points 8. Surface water drainage scheme (discharge restricted to 10 litres per second from site) 9. Foul drainage 10. Surface water management and maintenance plan 11. Materials 12. Landscaping 13. Ecological mitigation

Article 35, Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015

In accordance with the above legislation, the City Council can confirm that it has made the recommendation in a positive and proactive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development, working proactively with the applicant to secure development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. The recommendation has been taken having had regard to the impact of development, and in particular to the relevant policies contained in the Development Plan, as presented in full in the officer report, and to all relevant material planning considerations, including the National Planning Policy Framework, National Planning Practice Guidance and relevant Supplementary Planning Documents/ Guidance

Background Papers None.

Page 47 Agenda Item 10 Agenda Item Committee Date Application Number

A10 23 July 2018 18/00637/VCN

Application Site Proposal

Site Of Former Filter House Erection of two 4-storey student accommodation Scotforth Road buildings comprising of 28 6-bed cluster flats (C4) Lancaster with associated car parking and bin and cycle stores Lancashire (pursuant to the variation of condition 2 on planning permission 16/00847/FUL for amendments to floor plans and elevations to provide 12 7-bed cluster flats (sui generis) and 14 6-bed cluster flats (C4) including amendments to the fenestration and heights of the buildings)

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr Vivian Watts Mr Barry Singleton

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

26 September 2018 Not applicable

Case Officer Mr Mark Potts

Departure Yes

Summary of Recommendation Approval (subject to the receipt of amended plans)

(i) Procedural Note

The application would ordinarily be determined under delegated powers, but the scheme is a departure from the Development Plan (given its allocation within the Local Plan as employment land), and Officers are recommending support of the scheme. Therefore it has to be determined by Planning Committee.

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The application site relates to a parcel of land of 0.8ha on the west side of the A6, south of the urban area of Lancaster and approximately 3km from Lancaster City Centre. The site is triangular - around 240m in length from north to south, 60m in width at the north end and tapering to a point at the southern end. The site is located within designated Countryside Area. Under the saved Local Plan the site is allocated for business use and adjoins land to the east (opposite the A6) that is allocated for the Bailrigg Science Park (now known as the Health Innovation Campus).

1.2 The site remains vacant and has done so now for some considerable length of time. It was occupied by a former water filter house, which has since been demolished. The only building now on the site is an electricity substation which dates from the 1960s. The site has suffered from quite extensive vandalism and graffiti over recent years.

1.3 The application site is tightly positioned between the A6 to the east of the site, which is a busy strategic vehicular access corridor into and out of the city, and the West Coast railway line to the west side. It therefore occupies a very prominent position at the southern gateway to the city. Beyond these access corridors the site is surrounded by open countryside, predominately used for agricultural purposes. Burrow Beck runs along the northern boundary of the site and is identified as Page 48 a Biological Heritage Site. It also forms part of the Urban Greenspace designation which creates a natural edge to the boundaries of the urban area of Lancaster.

1.4 Vehicular access to the site is directly from the A6 into an area of hardstanding previously used for servicing and car parking. There is a pedestrian footway on the opposite (east) side of the A6 but no pedestrian crossing, although there is a pedestrian refuge at the centre of the carriageway. The northbound bus stop adjoins the site at its southern end whilst the southbound stop is opposite the northern part of the site. The closest strategic cycle network is to the east of the A6 near the settlement of Bailrigg. This cycle path links the residential areas of South Lancaster to the University.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The approved development consists of two purpose-built accommodation blocks for students. The first of which is a 4 storey building which measures 14 metres in height at its highest point and would be 107 metres in length by 11 metres wide. The proposed materials consist of un-coursed stone facing to the ground floor, with darkened larch along the A6 frontage and native larch cladding within the inner courtyard elevation. The roof material would consist of a membrane in a lead effect finish with standing seams. The amendment proposes to increase the height of the building by about 1 metre to allow appropriate floor to ceiling heights. There are also some minor changes to the façade through the introduction of four additional saw tooth projections, though the footprint of the development follows the consented scheme.

2.2 Block B is located north of the existing substation on the site, and would be 30 metres in length, 8 metres in width and a maximum of 14 metres in height. Materials would include a mix of native larch cladding and un-coursed stone to the lower ground floor. The proposed amendment sees this block of accommodation increase in height from 14 metres to 15 metres, and there would be some minor changes associated with windows. The footprint of the development follows the consented scheme.

2.3 Another aspect of the proposal is to amend the cluster flat arrangement to 12 7-bed cluster flats and 14 6-bed cluster flats (the previous scheme was all 6 bedroom clusters).

3.0 Site History

3.1 The site has been the subject of a number of planning applications over the last twenty years, though the one of most note is the approved scheme which was granted in February 2017 (16/00847/FUL).

Application Proposal Decision Number 16/00847/FUL Erection of two 4-storey student accommodation buildings Approved comprising of 28 6-bed cluster flats (C4) with associated car parking and bin and cycle stores 15/00135/FUL Demolition of existing buildings Approved 13/00321/OUT Demolition of former car showroom and erection of a food Refused and appeal store (use class A1) and construction of a new access, withdrawn. servicing and parking areas 09/01102/CU Resubmission of application 09/00859/CU for change of Refused and dismissed use from car showroom to A1 non-food bulky goods retail at appeal. 09/00859/CU Change of use from car showroom to A1 Non-food bulky Withdrawn goods retail 99/01191/CU Change of use to two units for the sale of cars/motor Approved subject to the vehicles including works for parking, access and provision of a right turn landscaping lane and all other accesses to be closed. 99/00690/CU Change of use to specialist car sales/servicing and carpet Refused on highway storage grounds and

landscaping. 98/00075/CU Engineering/demolition works, incidental to the existing Approved use of the land including altering land levels and resurfacing to facilitate temporary use of the site for storage purposes Page 49 98/00593/CU Change of use to class B1 (Business/Light Industrial Use). Approved Retention of new access and car parking.

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory and non-statutory consultees:

Consultee Response County Highways No objection - the proposed amendments to the original application have no highway implications Parish Council No observations received within the statutory timescales National Grid No observations received within the statutory timescales Environment No objection Agency Lead Local Flood No observations received within the statutory timescales Authority Environmental No observations received within the statutory timescales Health Lancaster No observations received within the statutory timescales University Network Rail No observations received within the statutory timescales Fire Safety Officer No objection

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 To date there have been no representations received in response to the scheme.

6.0 Principal National and Development Plan Policies

6.1 National Planning Policy Framework

Paragraph 12 and 14 – Presumption in favour of Sustainable Development Paragraph 17 – Core Principles Paragraphs 56, 58, 61, 64 – Good Design Paragraph 69 – Promoting healthy communities

6.2 Local Planning Policy Overview – Current Position

At the 20 December 2017 meeting of its Full Council, the local authority resolved to publish the following 2 Development Plan Documents (DPD) for submission to the Planning Inspectorate:

(i) The Strategic Policies and Land Allocations DPD; and, (ii) A Review of the Development Management DPD.

The Review of the Development Management DPD updates the policies that are contained within the current document, which was adopted in December 2014. As it is part of the development plan the current document is already material in terms of decision-making. Where any policies in the Page 50 draft ‘Review’ document are different from those adopted in 2014, and those policies materially affect the consideration of the planning application, then these will be taken into account during decision- making, although again with limited weight. The weight attributed to the revised policies in the ‘Review’ will increase as the plan’s preparation progresses through the stages described above.

6.3 Lancaster District Core Strategy (adopted July 2008)

SC1 – Sustainable Development SC5 – Quality in Design

6.4 Lancaster Local Plan (saved policies)

E4 – Countryside Area EC1 – Lancaster Science Park E29 – Urban Greenspace

6.5 Development Management DPD

DM35 – Key Design Principles DM46 – Accommodation for Students Appendix D – Purpose Built and Converted Shared Accommodation Appendix F – Studio Accommodation

6.6 Strategic Policies and Land Allocations DPD

SG2 – Lancaster Health Innovation Campus

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The application is made under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act, and (if approved) the effect is the issue of a new planning permission, which sits alongside the original permission, which unless revoked remains intact and un-amended. A new decision notice should be issued which sets out all of the conditions related to it and it should repeat the relevant conditions from the original planning permission unless they have been discharged. As a Section 73 application cannot be used to vary the time limit for implementation, this condition must remain unchanged from the original permission.

7.2 Planning consent was granted in 2017 for two blocks of student accommodation to provide 168 bedrooms. Block A provided 4 clusters of 6 bedrooms totalling 24 bedrooms while Block B had 24 clusters totalling 144 bedrooms. Overall the total number of bedrooms was 168. The scheme before members essentially retains the 168 bedrooms but proposes amendments to the number of cluster flats to twelve clusters of 7 bedroom cluster flats and 14 clusters of 6 bedroom flats.

7.3 As part of this proposal the scheme proposes to accommodate laundry and associated office space, communal study space, games room, TV room/cinema, gymnasium, landlord’s office, maintenance store and plant room. In order to comply with building regulations and provide a zone for services, the floor to ceiling heights need to be increased to 3 metres across all floors, and this has been incorporated into the revisions. To account for this there has been an increase in height of both buildings by 1 metre. Heights of buildings were a concern for Officers and Members when the scheme was last presented to Planning Committee, but given the minor amendment, it is considered that a robust argument could not be presented at appeal to substantiate a refusal on this basis alone, on the understanding that site levels do not exceed that within the sub-station.

7.4 There was some significant discussion between the former applicant and their agent with respect to the design of the development and whilst a very similar design is offered, the introduction of further saw tooth projections along Block A, does intensify the appearance of the Scotforth Road elevation. Whilst accepting that design is subjective, Officers consider that the design of the original scheme was preferable. One element of concern is the southern façade of Block A which Officers negotiated as part of the original application to ensure it had some animation to it. Regrettably it now appears quite stark and lacks the creativity that embodied it as part of the approved scheme. The applicant has been made aware of this concern and amended plans are now awaited (the agent advising that Page 51 these will be forthcoming). Subject to the receipt of amended plans to address this matter, the scheme is considered acceptable.

7.5 Policy DM46 of the DM DPD and the associated Appendix D is quite clear that each unit of student accommodation shall not normally comprise of more than six bedrooms. The consented scheme adhered to this requirement but the scheme before Members seeks now to amend this to provide for twelve 7 bedroom cluster flats and fourteen 6 bedroom cluster flats. Whilst the scheme departs from the policy provision, the majority of the clusters would be 6 bedroom but critically the scheme now proposes the games room, cinema, gymnasium and communal study space. Officers did have concerns on the extant consent that the scheme lacked provision as communal facilities, so overall the revised scheme is deemed acceptable.

7.6 The adopted standard is for all bedrooms to have a minimum of 11 square metres with an en-suite, or 9 square metres without an en-suite. Room sizes vary between 13 and 15 square metres (including the en-suite) and therefore are significantly larger than the adopted position and living accommodation (to include kitchen and dining) amounts to 4 square metres per student (previously it was in the region of 8 square metres). Whilst there is a significant reduction in shared space, from the plans submitted in support of the scheme, the kitchen/living areas can all accommodate cooking facilities, dining table and chairs plus sofas and circulation space. The kitchen/dining is considered to represent a weakness of the scheme but given the room sizes and the commitment to provide communal entertainment spaces, the scheme on balance can be found acceptable.

7.7 It is recommended that all the planning conditions associated with the extant consent are applied on this consent. No formal application has been made to discharge the planning conditions associated with the scheme. No new conditions are proposed, but conditions 1 and 2 will need to be varied to ensure that the development is implemented within the three years from the original grant of consent (i.e. by 12 February 2020), and the list of approved plans reflect the amendments to the elevation treatments and internal spaces.

7.8 Concern was raised with regard to the previous application with respect to distance to the National Grid overhead power lines. This relates to Block B though no objection was raised previously in this regard and it is considered that the minimal increase in height will not cause any concern. Any comments received from National Grid will be reported verbally to Planning Committee.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 There are no planning obligations to consider as part of this proposal.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 The Filter House site has been in a poor condition for too long, and the proposed amendments are such that room sizes would all exceed the required minimum standards and whilst the kitchen/dining spaces have been reduced, the provision of communal rooms would supplement these shared spaces, and therefore the scheme can be supported. The amendments to the façade treatment is relatively minor and amended plans have been sought to address Officers’ concerns. On balance, it is considered that the scheme can be recommended for approval subject to the conditions as noted below and receipt of amended plans.

Recommendation

That, subject to receipt of amended plans addressing Officers’ design concerns, Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Timescales (amend so that development has to be implemented by 12 February 2020) 2. Approved Plans (amend to reflect updated floor plans and elevations) 3. Ecological Mitigation 4. Submission of finished floor levels 5. Access Details 6. Offsite Highway Works 7. Car Parking in accordance with approved details including submission of a car parking management plan 8. Access to the south of the site to be permanently stopped up Page 52 9. Cycle Facilities 10. Contaminated Land 11. Foul Drainage 12. Surface Water Drainage 13. Landscaping (Hard and soft landscaping) 14. Building Materials (Accommodation blocks, refuse, motorcycle, cycle and refuse stores, fencing and gates and acoustic fencing) 15. Noise Mitigation 16. Ventilation 17. Student Accommodation Only 18. Security Measures 19. Electric Vehicle Charging Points

Article 35, Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015

In accordance with the above legislation, the City Council can confirm that it has made the recommendation in a positive and proactive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development, working proactively with the applicant to secure development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. The recommendation has been taken having had regard to the impact of development, and in particular to the relevant policies contained in the Development Plan, as presented in full in the officer report, and to all relevant material planning considerations, including the National Planning Policy Framework, National Planning Practice Guidance and relevant Supplementary Planning Documents/ Guidance.

Background Papers

None

Page 53 Agenda Item 11 Agenda Item Committee Date Application Number

A11 23 July 2018 18/00445/VCN

Application Site Proposal

Land East Of Railway Line Erection of 20 dwellings with associated new access St Michaels Lane (pursuant to the variation of conditions 2, 4, 9, 10, 11 Bolton Le Sands and 13 on planning permission 15/01167/FUL to Lancashire amend the approved site layout, vary the trigger for the submission of a risk assessment and to vary conditions pertaining to noise mitigation, surface water drainage and landscaping to enable the development to be carried out with submitted details; and remove condition 8 as the revised layout accommodates provision for an easement to the watercourse)

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Oakmere Homes Mr Daniel Hughes

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

3 August 2018 None

Case Officer Mrs Jennifer Rehman

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Approve

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The application site relates to a 0.76 hectare parcel of pasture land located on the south-western periphery of the built-up area of Bolton-le-Sands. The site is situated to the east of the West Coast Main Line (WCML) with residential development bordering the site to the north and east. To the south is agricultural land designated as Green Belt. Native hedgerows and trees surround the site with an open drainage ditch running along part the western boundary. The nature of surrounding residential development is predominately two-storey in scale of varying styles and architectural periods, but little in terms of historical development.

1.2 St Michael’s Lane runs along the northern boundary of the site and provides the principal means of access and links to the A6 in an eastern direction. A vehicular level crossing with an automatic barrier (locally monitored) over the WCML is situated to the north west of the site.

1.3 The site is largely unconstrained by land use and/or environmental designations, but like the rest of the village, the Countryside Area allocation sweeps across the entire site. Part of the site is also reserved for Mineral Safeguarding.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The applicant has submitted an application to vary the original planning permission under the provisions of Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. A Section 73 application provides a useful mechanism to consider minor material amendments to development (i.e. amendments where its scale and/or nature results in development which is not substantially different Page 54 from the one which has been approved). It is only possible to make such changes to a development where there is a relevant condition that can be varied.

2.2 The applicant seeks consent to vary condition 2 (approved plans list) of the original planning permission to alter the layout of the previously approved development to address concerns raised by Network Rail’s Asset Protection team. These concerns have been raised with the developer outside the planning arena. Principally the concerns have related to the risks associated with the approved layout and the potential for obstructions and/or distractions which could threaten the safe and efficient operation of the level crossing. The amendments relate solely to plots 1 to 6 and their associated parking. Plots 1 to 6 on the approved scheme were designed to front St Michael’s Lane forming a row of development between the WCML and the proposed access. The applicant seeks to re-orientate these plots ninety degrees so that they predominately front the internal spine road serving the development rather than St Michael’s Lane.

2.3 In addition to the above principal changes, the applicant also seeks consent to vary the trigger for the submission of a risk assessment for works within 10m of the WCML (condition 4); the variation of conditions 9 (surface water drainage scheme), condition 10 (surface water management and maintenance plan), condition 11 (scheme for noise mitigation measures) and condition 13 (landscaping) to enable the development is carried out in accordance with the submitted details, and the removal of condition 8 (access to open watercourse).

3.0 Site History

3.1 The site benefits from a full planning permission for the erection of 20 dwellings houses with an associated access off St Michael’s Lane. Planning permission was granted on the 14 April 2016 with a number of conditions and a legal agreement securing: 1. the provision of a minimum of 40% affordable housing; 2. an education contribution; and 3. a public open space (POS) contribution.

3.2 An application to vary the legal agreement was submitted to the Council some 7 months after the determination of the original permission in order to negotiate downwards the amount of affordable housing and other planning obligations. This application was supported after lengthy viability negotiations between the Council and the developer, and a Deed of Variation was entered into securing only 4 affordable housing units and the omission of the POS and education contributions.

3.3 The applicant has submitted a discharge of condition application to agree details reserved by conditions 3, 5, 6, 9, 12 and 13 of the original permission. Only condition 3 (construction management plan), condition 5 (eradication of invasive species) and condition 12 (materials, boundary treatments and surfacing details) have been agreed.

Application Number Proposal Decision 15/01167/FUL Erection of 20 dwellings and associated access Approved 16/01487/VLA Variation of legal agreement attached to planning Approved permission 15/01167/FULL 17/00166/DIS Discharge of conditions 3, 5, 6, 9, 11, 12 and 13 on Split Decision approved application 15/01167/FUL

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory and non-statutory consultees:

Consultee Response Parish Council Concerns relating to the vehicle access onto St Michael’s Lane and also onto the A6 and ask that both these areas are addressed for the safety of all users. Network Rail No objections to the revised layout, the acoustic treatments and the principle of the drainage scheme. Lead Local Flood The details initially submitted have not been accepted. The LLFA has been consulted Authority (LLFA) on revised details and a verbal update will be provided. Page 55 Highway Authority No objection to the revised proposals pursuant to plots 1-6. Made comments on the (Lancashire County prospects for road adoption, private management of parking courts and parking Council) provision (should comply with the City Council’s parking standards due to site’s low accessibility) United Utilities No objections. Satisfied with the drainage details submitted and the revised wording (UU) of condition 9, which specifies no surface water to the public sewer and a controlled surface water discharge rate of 5 litres per second. UU has been re-consulted on the latest drainage proposals for the avoidance of doubt – a verbal update will be provided. Tree Officer No objections to the revised landscape proposals and maintenance regime. Lancashire Fire and Advises that the development should be designed to meet building regulations for Rescue Service access and facilities for the Fire service.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 At the time of compiling this report, 5 letters of objections have been received. A summary of the reasons for opposition are noted below:  Flood risk concerns including foul connections to Sunnybank Road are inappropriate and will exacerbate existing flooding problems, particularly foul water flooding which necessitates pumping and cleansing annually; increase in surface water flooding off-site; the site already floods; the flood exceedance route does not account for flows from Hillcrest Avenue which are substantial;  The amendments to the scheme are insufficient;  The amended plans have pulled the development closer to an existing dwelling on Hillcrest Avenue, namely plots 18 and 19 being 7m from the boundary rather than 10m and 9m respectively;  Increased overlooking, loss of privacy and loss of light;  Loss of marsh habitat and wildlife, noting the site could well be a SSSI site and therefore RSPB and Natural England have been contacted by the objector.

6.0 Principal National and Development Plan Policies

6.1 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF): Paragraph 12 and 14 – Presumption in favour of sustainable development Paragraph 17 – Core principles Section 4 (paragraphs 29-41) – Promoting sustainable transport Paragraphs 56, 58, 61, 64 – Good design Paragraph 69 – Promoting healthy communities Paragraphs 100-104 – Flood risk Paragraphs 120, 121, 123 and 124- Contamination, noise and air quality Section 11 – Conserving and enhancing the natural environment Paragraph 144 – Mineral safeguarding

Page 56 The Review of the Development Management DPD updates the policies that are contained within the current document, which was adopted in December 2014. As it is part of the development plan the current document is already material in terms of decision-making. Where any policies in the draft ‘Review’ document are different from those adopted in 2014, and those policies materially affect the consideration of the planning application, then these will be taken into account during decision- making, although again with limited weight. The weight attributed to the revised policies in the ‘Review’ will increase as the plan’s preparation progresses through the stages described above.

6.3 Development Management DPD (DM DPD) Policies DM20 - Enhancing Accessibility and Transport Linkages DM21 - Walking & Cycling DM22 - Vehicle Parking Provision DM25 - Green Infrastructure DM26 - Open Space, Sports and Recreational facilities DM27 - Biodiversity DM28 - Development and Landscape Impact DM29 - Protection of Trees, Hedgerows and Woodland DM35 - Key Design Principles DM36 - Sustainable Design DM38 - Development and Flood Risk DM39 - Surface Water Run-Off and SUDS DM27 - Protection and Enhancement of Biodiversity DM40 - Protection Water Resources and Infrastructure DM41 - New Residential Development DM42 - Managing Rural Housing Growth Appendix B - Car Parking Standards

6.4 Lancaster District Core Strategy (LDCS) Policies: SC1 - Sustainable Development SC3 - Rural Communities SC4 - Meeting Housing Requirements

6.5 Saved Lancaster District Local Plan (sLP) Policy: E4 - Countryside Area

6.6 Other considerations Joint Lancashire Minerals and Waste Local Plan DPD Policy M2 (Safeguarding Minerals); National Planning Practice Guidance; Surface Water Drainage, Flood Risk Management and Watercourses (May 2015).

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The main issues in the consideration of this application are:  Principle of development;  Whether the amended layout represents an acceptable and sustainable design and does not compromise the safe and efficient operation of national rail infrastructure which sits alongside the development site; and  Whether the details submitted pertaining to noise mitigation, drainage, landscaping and risk assessments are satisfactory and whether a condition remains necessary in relation to a scheme for the access arrangements to the watercourse to be agreed with the local planning authority.

7.2 Principle of development The application is made under Section 73 of the Town and Country Planning Act to vary conditions imposed on the previous permission. One of the purposes of a Section 73 application is to seek minor material amendments to the permission where there are relevant conditions capable of being amended. Where an application under section 73 is granted, the effect is the issue of a new planning permission, sitting alongside the original permission, which remains intact and un-amended.

7.3 As noted in section 2 of this report, the purpose of the application is principally to make amendments to the layout of plots 1 to 6 of the approved scheme. The amendments are judged to be minor material changes to the development as it would not result in a substantially different from of Page 57 development from the one which has already been approved. The amendments do not seek to alter the housing mix of plots 1 to 6 (house type design and size) or the number of dwellings proposed overall.

7.4 Whilst (if approved) a Section 73 application results in a new planning permission, it is not an opportunity to re-examine the principle of the development and the merits of the original proposal. Subsequently, the principle of the redevelopment of the site for 20 dwellings and its associated access is accepted. Matters relating to housing need, biodiversity, access and traffic impacts are all matters that have previously been considered and accepted.

7.5 Layout changes (variation of condition 2) The revised layout has arisen following lengthy discussions between the developer and Network Rail after the original planning permission was granted. Network Rail’s Asset Protection team were concerned that the original layout would not sufficiently dissuade visitors/residents of the development (such as delivery vehicles) pulling up in front of plots 1 to 6 on St Michael’s Lane despite the access and parking to these plots being within the site itself (along with other matters that are not relevant to planning). The main layout concerns included the front elevations facing the road, pedestrian access points directly off St Michael’s Lane and a new footway between the site’s principal vehicular access and the level crossing. Network Rail has clearly considered the potential risks significant - the risks being potential obstructions in the highway close to the level crossing affecting the safe and efficient operation of the WCML - and as a consequence the developer seeks to resolve their concerns through amendments to the scheme in order to implement their permission.

7.6 The applicant seeks to amend condition 2 (approved plans list) by the substitution of the approved site layout plan and site sectional drawings showing the reorientation of plots 1 to 6 and the reconfiguration of the associated landscaping and parking areas. Despite objections to the contrary the applicant does not seek to amend any other part of the development (save for plots 1 to 6) and specifically, plots 18 and 19 remain in their approved positions with no alterations to the interface distances previously accepted.

7.7 The original proposal secured plots 1 to 6 fronting St Michael’s Lane forming a strong, active streetscene. This was considered an appropriate response to the local townscape character and was a benefit to the scheme. However, it was not ideal and resulted in a large parking court prominently positioned on approach into the development itself. The amended plan seeks to turn plots 1 to 6 round by ninety degrees so plots 2-4 front the proposed internal spine road and plots 1 and 2 front St Michael’s Lane. This results in the associated parking court being located behind the dwellings and less visible from within the development and St Michael’s Lane. The negative consequence of this proposal is the need for an acoustic fence extending some 22 metres from the northwestern corner of the site to the rear (west) elevation of plot 2. This fence will be a minimum of 2.5 metres high from finished ground level but is intended to be complimented and screened (over time) by new hedgerow planting along the boundary with St Michael’s Lane. The developer has also agreed that the fence shall be painted green to help soften the visual impacts of this aspect of the development. The proposed development when viewed from St Michael Lane will arguably be less favourable than the approved scheme, but it is not judged to result in significant adverse impacts to the townscape character and/or visual amenity of the area. On this basis, the proposal is considered compliant with saved policy E4 and policies DM28, DM35 and DM42 of the DM DPD.

7.8 The revisions to the layout of the development have resulted in amendments to the location and provision of car parking serving plots 1 to 6. The changes have led to a reduction in dedicated parking from 10 spaces to 8 spaces provided within a communal parking court. Policy DM22 of the DM DPD requires proposals to incorporate provision for parking that accords with the levels set out in Appendix B of the DM DPD. For one bedroom properties there is a requirement for one parking space per unit and for two/three bedroom properties there is a requirement for two parking spaces per unit. These standards are maximum standards rather than minimum standards. To establish an appropriate level of parking, regard should be given to the location of the site relative to public transport services and local facilities, the design and layout of the development and the size and tenure of house types. The two one-bedroom properties have 100% parking and the four 2-bedroom properties, which are the approved affordable housing units, shall benefit from 150% parking (i.e. one space per unit with two additional visitor spaces) opposed to 200% parking as originally approved. Despite the local highway authority considering the site to be of ‘low accessibility’, it is located within an identified sustainable settlement (DM42) with access to public transport services on the A6 some 450m east of the site (via footpaths) with local facilities a further circa 250m east Page 58 (and uphill) towards the village centre. On this basis, the provision of 150% parking for the 2- bedroom affordable units would not result in an unacceptable level of parking to the extent it would conflict with policy DM22 bearing in mind the standards are maximum standards.

7.9 Whilst the proposed alterations result in a reduction of two parking spaces and a weaker streetscene elevation facing St Michael’s Lane, the alterations are judged necessary to ensure the development does not adversely affect the safe and efficient operation of the WCML. Equally, the changes would not lead to significant adverse impacts and, on balance, would not conflict with our design/amenity and parking policies. On this basis, the applicant’s proposal to substitute the relevant approved plans listed in condition 2 with the proposed plans can be supported.

7.10 Conditions An approval under s73 of the Act results in the grant of a new stand-alone planning permission therefore all existing planning conditions have been reviewed to ensure they remain necessary and relevant with revisions made where appropriate. The applicant has submitted certain details pursuant to a number of planning conditions as part of this section 73 application. The applicant wishes to vary these conditions to ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the submitted detail rather than pre-commencement conditions (as originally worded) being re-imposed. The applicant also seeks permission to remove condition 8 pertaining to access arrangements to the watercourse on the western boundary of the site.

7.11 Condition 4 – Risk Assessment Condition 4 is worded as follows:

No development or any site activity associated with the development, including site preparation/clearance and demolition, shall commence until details of a risk assessment and method statement for all works (including excavation and earthworks) within 10m of the West Coast Main Line (to protect the stability of railway land) have been submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Any excavation adjacent to the cutting crest / boundary will require supervision by Network Rail Asset Protection to ensure the stability and safety of the railway is not adversely affected. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interest of safe and efficient operation of national infrastructure.

The applicant has entered into a Build Asset Protection Agreement with Network Rail, which is a matter separate from planning. As part of this process the applicant has to provide a number of risk assessments (referred to as RAMs). Network Rail has confirmed they are in receipt of all necessary RAM submissions and that they have no current concerns regarding these proposals. The issue with the condition as currently worded prevents any development commencing on site until the relevant risk assessments have been submitted and agreed.

7.12 The wording of the condition as approved is only concerned with work within 10m of the railway line. As such, in order to avoid unnecessary delay implementing the development, it is possible to reword the condition as follows:

No development or site activity associated with the development including site preparation/clearance and demolition shall take place within 10m of the West Coast Mainline until a risk assessment and method statement for all works (including excavation and earthworks) within 10m of the West Coast Main Line (to protect the stability of railway land) has first been submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. Any excavation adjacent to the cutting crest / boundary will require supervision by Network Rail Asset Protection to ensure the stability and safety of the railway is not adversely affected. The development shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interest of safe and efficient operation of national infrastructure.

The variation effectively alters the trigger for when the risk assessments need to be submitted and agreed with the local planning authority without conflicting with the requirements of the original condition.

7.13 Condition 8 – Access for the maintenance of watercourse This condition required details of the access arrangements for maintenance of the open watercourse on the western boundary of the site to be submitted and agreed with the local planning authority before the commencement of development. No such details have been provided to date. However, the revisions to the layout have now secured an appropriate access towards the watercourse via Page 59 the proposed parking court to the rear of plots 1 to 6. Nevertheless to enable maintenance of the adjacent watercourse a double gate in the acoustic fence will be required to allow maintenance equipment access to the watercourse. Consequently, Members are advised that condition 8 can be removed on the basis that a new condition is imposed for the provision of these double gates and the car parking court prior to first occupation of units 1 to 6, and retained at all times thereafter.

7.14 Conditions 9 and 10 – Surface water drainage Conditions 9 and 10 require details of a surface water drainage scheme and its management and maintenance to be agreed before any development, site activity or site preparation/clearance takes place. The applicant seeks to vary condition 9 to enable the development to be carried out in accordance with the submitted drainage details and maintenance plan.

7.15 The proposed drainage plan shows the surface water and foul water operating on separate systems (compliant with condition 15 of the original permission), with the foul connecting to the existing sewer on Sunnybank Road and the surface water discharging to a new outfall into the adjacent drainage ditch. A hydrobrake is proposed to control the surface water flows to 5 litres per second with a surface water storage facility incorporated into the development. This comprises polystorm extra cellular storage cells to be installed below the gardens of plots 3 to 6 and the parking court. The principle of the drainage proposal is acceptable and accords with the SuDS hierarchy and our drainage/flood risk policy. The drainage proposals have been accepted by Network Rail and United Utilities. The Lead Local Flood Authority has, however, questioned some of the drainage calculations and the size/design of the drainage pipes. Amended information has been provided which the LLFA is currently considering. If the LLFA confirms the details are acceptable, the conditions can be varied accordingly to require the development to be carried out in accordance with the amended drainage scheme submitted. A verbal update will be provided on this matter. If the LLFA does not support the amended proposals, the conditions will be retained as originally worded requiring the developer to submit the details via a separate discharge of condition application before any development commences.

7.16 Despite concerns to the contrary, the principle of the drainage strategy is considered appropriate for this site. The technical details of ensuring the storage capacity is of sufficient size and the outfall and discharge rate is appropriate are matters for the LLFA to confirm. This will also include consideration of flood exceedance flows and the maintenance proposals. Officers are confident these matters can be resolved in advance of the Committee. One area where Officers have raised concerns relates to the provision of the storage facility under the garden areas of four dwellings (plots 3 to 6). This has been challenged but due to the high water table, existing ground conditions and outfall levels the use of oversized pipes instead was not a viable option. The use of the shallow geocelluar system is appropriate in such circumstances and is considered to require relatively low maintenance. Unfortunately scope to pull the storage facility out of the gardens is limited due to the exclusion area to Network Rail’s assets. The main concerns relate to securing access for future maintenance and management and preventing subsequent damage to the system by future occupants of the dwellings affected. Access to the storage facility is provided at either end of it and covenants would be imposed to ensure access to maintain, manage or replace the facility within the affected garden areas (the latter point is outside of the control of planning but is to be included in the amended maintenance plan).

7.17 In terms of preventing future damage to the system and ensuring that the drainage scheme would not increase flood risk on site or elsewhere over the lifetime of the development, Officers feel there is sufficient justification to impose new conditions on this section 73 application removing permitted development rights to prevent extensions, outbuildings and the hardstanding of gardens to the dwellings affected. Officers have also questioned how this would affect the deliverability of the affordable housing units (as these are plots 3-6). The registered provider has indicated this would not affect their interests in the properties. In the absence of other alternative sustainable drainage solutions, the proposed location of the surface water storage facility is considered acceptable on this occasion provided conditions are imposed relating to permitted development rights.

7.18 Condition 11 – Noise mitigation The original condition requires a scheme setting out noise mitigation measures for residential development based on the originally submitted acoustic report (2015). This is principally concerned with noise from the WCML. A scheme has been submitted which includes the provision of an acoustic fence along the western boundary and wrapping around the northern boundary. This fence shall be 2.5m high from finished ground levels. The fence shall comprise a solid vertical timber Page 60 fence painted green. The mitigation scheme also includes different graded acoustic laminate glazing to the windows in the rear elevations facing the WCML and the windows in the front elevations of properties proposed on the east side of the internal spine road and the provision of acoustic ventilation systems to enable rooms to be appropriately ventilated rather than opening windows. Environmental Health is satisfied with the mitigation proposed. Consequently there are no objections to vary the condition to ensure the development is carried out in accordance with mitigation measures proposed.

7.19 Condition 13 – Landscaping The submitted landscaping scheme incorporates the retention of the majority of trees around the site boundaries, particularly those to the southern boundary. The scheme incorporates new hedgerow planting around the area of public open space and along the site frontage with St Michael’s Lane together with tree planting and bulb planting within the estate itself. There are no objections from the Council’s Tree Officer or Network Rail concerning the proposed landscaping. The submitted maintenance plan has also been accepted by the Councils’ Tree Officer. The hard landscaping plan incorporates contrasting materials between main carriageway and private drives and will positively contribute to the overall design quality of the scheme. On this basis, varying the condition to ensure the development is carried out in accordance with the planting and hard landscaping plans and maintenance plan can be supported. The condition will still retain the trigger for implementation.

7.20 As noted earlier, in the event a section 73 is approved its effect is the grant of a new permission except for the time limit which remains unchanged from the original grant of planning permission. In addition to the conditions the applicant seeks to formally vary or remove as part of this application, the local planning authority must review all other conditions to ensure they remain necessary. Conditions 3, 5 and 12 have all been agreed under discharge of condition application 17/00166/DIS. These conditions cannot be removed as the development has not commenced and must be carried out in accordance with the details agreed. Conditions 3, 5 and 12 shall be reworded to reflect the details agreed. In addition to condition 8, it is contented that condition 15, which requires the development to be drained on separate systems, should also be removed. If the amended drainage proposal is accepted by the LLFA, condition 15 would be unnecessary as this drainage plan clearly shows the development drained on separate systems. All other conditions shall be retained.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 The original legal agreement and its subsequent deed of variation remain intact and unaffected by this variation of condition application.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 The proposed amendments will facilitate the implementation of this residential development by removing aspects of the previously approved layout that Network Rail had identified (after permission was granted) as posing significant risks to the safe and efficient operation of their national rail infrastructure. The amendments have come about following lengthy collaboration and negotiation between planning officers, the developer, the highway authority and Network Rail to enable the delivery of much needed housing. Whilst there are some aspects to the amended scheme that are less favourable than the approved scheme, on balance the revisions are considered to maintain an acceptable design and standard of living accommodation and would not adversely affect neighbouring residential amenity or cause significant harm to the townscape character and visual amenity of the locality.

9.2 With regards to the details submitted to address conditions, subject to confirmation from the LLFA that the amended drainage proposals are acceptable, details relating to drainage, noise mitigation, landscaping and asset protection adequately satisfy the requirements of the originally worded conditions and would secure a sustainable form of development.

9.3 Members are therefore advised that the proposals to vary conditions 2, 4, 9, 10, 11 and 13 and remove condition 8 are considered acceptable and compliant with development plan policy and can be considered favourably.

Page 61 Recommendation

That the variation of conditions 2, 4, 9, 10, 11 and 13 and the removal of condition 8 BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Time Limit (3 years from the date of the original permission 15/01167/FUL) 2. Approved plans list 3. Construction Management Plan (as approved under 17/00166/DIS) 4. Risk Assessment for works within 10m of WCML 5. Eradication of invasive species (as approved under 17/00166/DIS) 6. Access details to be agreed (retained as a pre-commencement condition) 7. Off-site highway details to be agreed (retained as a pre-commencement condition) 8. Drainage scheme to be implemented (if approved by LLFA) 9. Surface water drainage management and maintenance plan 10. Noise mitigation to be implemented and retained 11. Materials and boundary details to be implemented (approved under 17/00166/DIS) 12. Landscaping proposals and maintenance to be implemented 13. Implementation of estate road to base course level before any other development 14. Hours of construction 15. Visibility splays 16. No pedestrian access onto St Michael’s Lane other than principal vehicular access 17. No obstruction of the level crossing or signage during construction and fit out 18. Removal of permitted development rights for outbuildings, rear extension and hardstanding of rear gardens to plots 2-6 as set out on the approved layout plan pursuant to condition 2. 19. Provision of double gates (for maintenance of the watercourse) and the car parking court prior to first occupation of units 1 to 6, and retained at all times thereafter

Article 35, Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015

In accordance with the above legislation, the City Council can confirm that it has made the recommendation in a positive and proactive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development, working proactively with the applicant to secure development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. The recommendation has been taken having had regard to the impact of development, and in particular to the relevant policies contained in the Development Plan, as presented in full in the officer report, and to all relevant material planning considerations, including the National Planning Policy Framework, National Planning Practice Guidance and relevant Supplementary Planning Documents/ Guidance.

Background Papers

None

Agenda Item 12 Page 62 Agenda Item Committee Date Application Number

A12 23 July 2018 18/00169/FUL

Application Site Proposal

East Gate Lodge Change of use of existing bungalow (C3) to a Keer Holme Lane residential care home for children (C2), demolition of Borwick existing extensions, erection of a single storey side Carnforth extension and part single part two storey rear extension with a raised terrace and creation of a new access and parking facilities

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr M Horner HPA

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

18 April 2018 Awaiting amended plans and committee cycle

Case Officer Mr Robert Clarke

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Approval

(i) Procedural Matters

The proposed development would normally fall within the scheme of delegation. However, Councillor Roger Mace has requested that the application be reported to the Planning Committee on grounds of the unsustainable location for the use proposed.

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The site which forms the subject of this application is a parcel of land located to the south of Keer Holme Lane. The site does not benefit from a useable vehicular access point as the small access point to the north western corner has become overgrown with vegetation, so an informal layby on the highway verge has formed the site’s parking provision. An unmade agricultural track extends from the highway to the east of the site which provides access to the fields to the east and south.

1.2 The main site measures 0.18 hectares in area though it also benefits from a detached paddock located to the south of the aforementioned agricultural access track. The existing bungalow is of a relatively small scale, featuring a square footprint. It is finished with rendered walls underneath a pyramid roof with a central chimney, but has been altered by 3 extensions to the eastern and southern elevations. Land levels vary across the site but generally decrease in a southerly direction. The northern boundary of the site is formed by a hedgerow and post and wire fence, and this fence then continues and forms the south eastern boundary of the site. The western boundary is formed by a line of substantial trees.

1.3 The site forms the northern extremity of the Capernwray Hall Registered Historic Park and Garden (the Hall being Grade II* Listed). The detached bungalow within the site, East Gate Lodge, forms an original gate lodge to the estate and is considered to be a non-designated heritage asset. In addition to this, the site is located within the middle zone of the Lupton/Carnforth Transmission gas pipe line. The site is identified as being located within a countryside area on the Lancaster District Local Plan Proposals Map.

Page 63 2.0 The Proposal

2.1 This application seeks consent for the change of use of the existing detached bungalow from a domestic dwellinghouse (use class C3) to a residential care home for children (use class C2), demolition of the existing extensions, erection of a single storey side extension, part single part two storey rear extension with a raised terrace and creation of a new vehicular access point with associated parking facilities. This development replaces the initial proposal which involved the demolition of the existing bungalow and its replacement with a two storey detached dwelling with a detached double garage. This previous scheme proposed a new access for the site to be taken from the existing agricultural track to the south.

2.2 The proposed single storey side extension will project from the eastern elevation of the property with a maximum width of 6.4 metres and a maximum depth of 6.1 metres. The maximum ridge height when measured to the front northern elevation will be 5 metres, which increases to 6 metres to the rear southern elevation due to differences in land levels. This extension will be finished in render with stone window surrounds to match the appearance of the existing building, underneath a hipped natural slate roof.

2.3 The proposed extension to the rear elevation will take the form of a single storey ‘link’ extension followed by a two storey element. The proposed ‘link’ extension will have a maximum depth of 7.9 metres and a maximum width of 7.5 metres and will feature a flat roof with a maximum height of 3.9 metres. A raised terrace will extend from the south western elevation, with a raised height of 1 metre. This extension will be finished in timber cladding to the elevations and have a sedum roof.

2.4 The two storey element of the rear extension will feature a footprint measuring 8.6 metres by 6.8 metres and will be finished with a dual pitched roof with a maximum ridge height of 7.2m. This extension will be finished with stone elevations underneath a natural slate roof. Powder coated aluminium frames will be installed throughout the existing structure and the proposed extensions.

2.5 The proposed vehicular access point will be located to the north eastern corner of the site and will feature a width of 5.5 metres. The access will be finished in hard surfacing for 7 metres into the site, at which point the new parking facilities will be finished with stone chippings. In total 6 parking bays will be provided within the site.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The Local Planning Authority has previously provided pre-application advice:

Application Number Proposal Decision 17/00895/PREONE Pre-application request for demolition of dwelling (C3) Advice Provided and replacement with new dwelling (C2)

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory and non-statutory consultees:

Consultee Response Parish Council Objection to the initial proposal due to the following planning concerns: - Suitability of the use proposed in this isolated rural location; - Generation of additional traffic movements on rural highway; - Highway safety; - Increase in noise and air pollution; and - Inappropriate design and character of the replacement dwelling; No response to the consultation of the revised scheme has been received at the time of compiling this report. Conservation Team Objection to the initial scheme which sought the demolition of the existing bungalow. Demolition of the former gate lodge to Capernwray Hall and replacement with a two storey dwelling would result in harm to the significance of the Registered Park and Garden and Capernwray Hall. Page 64 Following receipt of the revised proposal the Conservation Team have no objection. The proposal will lead to a degree of harm to the non-designated heritage asset, however, this harm is considered to be outweighed by the retention of the original lodge structure and removal of the existing unsympathetic extensions. Historic England Historic England confirmed that the application does not fall within their scope for providing consultation advice. The Gardens Objection to the initial proposal due to the following planning concerns: Trust/Lancashire - Loss of a historic gate lodge building; and Gardens Trust - Inappropriate design and character of the replacement dwelling. No response to the consultation of the revised scheme has been received at the time of compiling this report. Lancashire Objection to the initial proposal due to the following planning concerns: Archaeological - Loss of a historic gate lodge building; and Advisory Service - Inappropriate design and character of the replacement dwelling. No response to the consultation of the revised scheme has been received at the time of compiling this report. Tree Officer No response to the initially proposed scheme was received. Furthermore, no objection subject to the development complying with the submitted Arboricultural Implications Assessment. County Highways No objection to the initial proposal subject to conditions. No objection to the revised scheme including the proposed new access point on to Keer Holme Lane subject to conditions. Environmental No objection to the initial proposal, a condition requiring the installation of electric Health vehicle charging points was recommended. No response to the consultation of the revised scheme has been received at the time of compiling this report. Fire Safety Officer No objection to the initial proposal, advice regarding vehicle turning facilities and water provision provided. No response to the consultation of the revised scheme has been received at the time of compiling this report. Lancashire No response to the initially proposed scheme was received. Furthermore, no Childcare Service response to the consultation of the revised scheme has been received at the time of compiling this report. Cadent No objection to the initial proposal. Gas/National Grid No response to the consultation of the revised scheme has been received at the time of compiling this report.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 With regards to the initially proposed scheme, 31 letters of objection (some duplicates) have been received by the Local Planning Authority raising the following planning considerations: - Inappropriate and unsustainable location for the proposed use; - Increased traffic movements and resultant increase in air pollution; - Loss of existing historic structure and resultant harm to the significance of the Registered Park and Garden and Capernwray Hall; - Inappropriate design and character of the replacement dwelling and resultant landscape impact; - Inappropriate access from farm track; - Highway safety; - Impacts upon surrounding residential amenity; and - Surface water drainage. No further responses regarding the consultation of the revised scheme have been received at the time of compiling this report.

6.0 Principal National and Development Plan Policies

6.1 National Planning Policy Framework

The National Planning Policy Framework indicates that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development. At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption Page 65 in favour of sustainable development (paragraph 14). The following paragraphs of the NPPF are relevant to the determination of this proposal:

Paragraph 17: Core planning principles Section 1: Building a strong, competitive economy Section 3: Supporting a prosperous rural economy Section 4: Promoting sustainable transport Section 6: Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes Section 7: Requiring good design Section 8: Promoting healthy communities

6.2 Development Management DPD Policies

DM20: Enhancing Accessibility and Transport Linkages DM22: Vehicle Parking Provision DM27: Protection and Enhancement of Biodiversity DM28: Development and Landscape Impact DM29: Protection of Trees, Hedgerows and Woodland DM32: The Setting of Designated Heritage Assets DM33: Development Affecting Non-Designated Heritage Assets or their Setting DM35: Key Design Principles DM45: Accommodation for Vulnerable Communities

6.3 Lancaster District Core Strategy Policies

SC1: Sustainable Development SC4: Meeting the District’s Housing Requirements

6.4 Lancaster District Local Plan – saved policies

E4: Countryside Area

6.5 Local Planning Policy Overview – Current Position

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The main issues are: Page 66 - Principle of the use - Design and impact upon the wider landscape and historic environment - Residential amenity - Parking and highways - Impacts upon trees and biodiversity - Drainage

7.2 Principle of the use

7.2.1 This application seeks consent for the change of use of the existing detached bungalow, removal of the existing extensions and erection of a replacement single storey side extension and part single and part two storey rear extension to provide care for young persons that cannot be provided by a family parent or guardian due to family circumstance. This care provision is registered and inspected by Ofsted, and delivered through an established professional care provider. The submission sets out that the care home proposed will house a maximum of four young people aged between 10-17 (inclusive) who have a specific need to be placed in a rural environment. The home would provide bespoke care, supervision and mentoring for the residents who are referred by local and national authorities and child care services including follow on accommodation and alternative longer term care provision.

7.2.2 The care home would employ up to seven staff comprising four support staff supplemented by two part time staff working on a shift basis to provide 24 hour care, 7 days a week, and a manager based at the site 0900-1700 Monday to Friday. There would be a minimum of two staff on the site at all times, with support staff working in two shifts to cover the 24 hour period. Individual bedrooms would be provided for each of the four residents, with a further bedroom to be made available for staff who would ‘sleep in’ during the evening shift.

7.2.3 The site is situated in an isolated location, divorced from services, being approximately 4 miles by road from Carnforth. There are no pedestrian or public transport links to the site and the national speed limit applies to the roads in the immediate vicinity. As such, all movements to and from the site would be by private transport. Although this is the case with the existing residential property, the proposal is likely to increase the number of traffic movements as a result of the employees who would need to use private transport to access the site.

7.2.4 The submission sets out that the ethos of the care home is for the support staff to assume a parental role with the residents, providing a stable and controlled environment in which they can be supervised. In this respect, the aim of the care home is to be akin to that of a family home, with support staff supervising up to four young people. Residents of the care home would be educated externally through placements offered in educational institutions in the main urban areas and would access other public facilities and services (e.g. health centres) on an appointment basis, always being accompanied by a member of the support staff. It states that there would be no need for any additional or unique comings and goings to the site (e.g. servicing) beyond those normally associated with a dwelling house.

7.2.5 In relation to the reason for the location, the submission sets out that residents of the care home are referred by authorities. The nature of the placements is such that residents have suffered destabilising circumstances in their lives which place them among some of the most vulnerable in society and for whom urban environments would be unsuitable. Justification for the need and location of the proposed use has been provided in the form of evidence of referrals from various authorities and services dating from December 2017 to April 2018 which indicates the demand for the accommodation type proposed. This demand is further exemplified by the submission of a press article regarding the need for increased provision for young person’s social care in the District and correspondence between the City Council’s Housing Strategy Officer and Lancashire County Council in which the need for such development was established. It is acknowledged that this correspondence relates to a different application/site, however, the use proposed in this case directly relates to the established requirement for such accommodation.

7.2.6 Although in an unsustainable rural location, it is considered that sufficient evidence has been provided to justify the requirement for this proposal to be situated in such a location. The applicant would be willing to accept a condition restricting the maximum number of residents to the four currently applied for in order to limit the scale of the use and prevent an intensification in the future which could increase the number and frequency of vehicle movements. This restrictive condition is Page 67 recommended as is a further condition restricting the use of the site to a children’s care home to prevent future changes of use within the C2 use class. This application justifies its locational requirement, but other forms of C2 uses would need to do likewise. On balance therefore, it is considered that the principle of such development in this location can be supported.

7.3 Design and impact upon the historic environment and wider landscape

7.3.1 As well as the change of use of the site, this application initially proposed the demolition of the existing property and erection of a replacement two storey building. The application site lies within the north western extremity of the Capernwray Hall Registered Historic Park and Garden. East Gate Lodge, forms an original gate house to the estate forming the historic grounds of Capernwray Hall, which is a Grade II* listed building.

7.3.2 Capernwray Hall is located 840 metres to the south of the application site. It was built c.1844, designed by Edmund Sharpe, and is constructed in coursed squared sandstone blocks with a slate roof. The significance of the building derives from its architectural style – designed in a Perpendicular style – and its historic association with notable architect Edmund Sharpe and the Marton family. The park and garden is Registered due to the gently rolling landscape of woodland and trees which provides the historic parkland setting to Capernwray Hall. East Lodge is visible on the 1890s OS map and is referenced in the Listing description in respect to the entrances and approaches to the estate.

7.3.3 In accordance with the Listed Building and Conservation Areas Act, when considering any application that affects a Listed building, a Conservation Area or their setting, the Local Planning Authority must pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of the heritage asset or its setting. This is reiterated by policies DM30, DM31 and DM32.

7.3.4 The present day East Gate Lodge and its curtilage was separated from the grounds of Capernwray Hall in 1946 whilst the Hall was only granted listed status in 1983. For this reason, the existing property is considered not to be curtilage listed in relation to its association with Capernwray Hall.

7.3.5 The grounds surrounding Capernwray Hall are characterised by undulating land containing areas of woodland, smaller copses and individual trees, created for the Marton family in the early nineteenth century. This was later followed by the construction of the present Hall c1844. The parkland has a predominantly open character in its northern part, allowing views out in this direction across the valley of the River Keer. East Gate Lodge is one of several entrances and lodges which are integral to the understanding, appearance, operation and enjoyment of the hall and grounds. Despite it not benefitting from listed status itself or being considered curtilage listed and suffering from various unsympathetic additions and alterations, as a result of the above setting the lodge building is considered an essential component of the surrounding historic environment. The lodge has a strong associative value as a result and its loss would cause harm to the overall significance of the Grade II* Capernwray Hall and the Registered Park and Garden.

7.3.6 Furthermore, the existing bungalow although within close proximity to the highway verge, sits low within the surrounding landscape whilst the existing hedge and tree cover provide a good degree of screening, so much so that this building is unobtrusive in and suited to the appearance of the locality. The proposed replacement dwelling would have been over two stories and equally close to the highway verge. Due to this increase in height the proposed development would have been much more apparent and obtrusive within the landscape. In addition to this, although the development would have utilised materials typical of the area, it was considered that the overall design of the structure was of an inappropriate character for this rural setting. The highway facing elevations (north western and north eastern elevations) both of which would be highly visible within the street scene lacked animation and were of little architectural merit. Overall the design appeared suburban in character which was considered incongruent for this rural setting. In addition to the design of the property, the scheme also proposed a substantial parking and turning area sufficient for 7 vehicles whilst the proposed detached garage would provide space for a further two vehicles. The cumulative impact of this area of hardstanding along with the associated cars would have created an inappropriate urbanising effect in this rural environment which also forms part of the Registered Park and Garden. Based on this assessment, the proposed development would not have been supported.

Page 68 7.3.7 Following on from discussions with both the agent and applicant the amended scheme as described in section 2 was received by the Local Planning Authority. This scheme now seeks to retain the historic structure of East Gate Lodge and remove the existing unsympathetic single storey extensions. The proposed side and rear extensions are contemporary in style and will utilise the changing topography of the site so as to minimise their presence within the locality. Most notably, the two storey element of the proposal will be located at a lower land level so that its eaves are equal to those of the original structure whilst its ridge is lower than the pyramidal roof of the lodge. The addition of the extensions are considered to compromise the setting of the original building to a minor degree, however, the contemporary design approach will aid in distinguishing between these recent additions and the original structure.

7.3.8 Overall, the proposed development is considered to result in less than substantial harm to the non- designated heritage asset. However, this harm is considered to be outweighed by the removal of the existing poor extensions, construction of appropriately scaled and designed replacement extensions, and the retention and refurbishment of the former lodge building within the setting of the Capernwray Hall Registered Park and Garden. In order to ensure that the materials used within the development are appropriate in light of the sensitivity of the site a condition requiring details and samples of various materials is recommended.

7.3.9 In addition to the above, the way in which the proposed extensions utilise the topography of the site combined with the existing screening afforded by the highway boundary hedge and proposed additional landscaping scheme will ensure that the development appears unobtrusive within the wider landscape. Moreover the use of materials typical of the local vernacular will ensure that the development respects the character of the locality.

7.3.10 Consideration has been given to the design and appearance of the proposed new vehicular access point and associated parking facilities. Given the rural character of the street scene, it is important that the proposed access does not create an urbanising effect along this stretch of rural highway. A small amount of hard surfacing to the entrance to the site is supported whilst the use of stone chippings to the remainder of the parking area will minimise the harshness of this aspect of the site within the rural landscape. Additional planting combined with the existing hedgerow, as indicated on the proposed site plan will provide a good degree of screening to the site from Keer Holme Lane. A condition requiring a landscaping scheme for the site is recommended.

7.4 Residential amenity

7.4.1 The nearest neighbouring property to the application site is located approximately 90 metres to the east. Concerns have been raised regarding the proposed use of the site and the potential for this use to impact upon nearby residents, principally through residents absconding from the site. The operation of the care home would be governed by separate regulations. Furthermore, such matters are not material planning considerations.

7.4.2 Given the distance between the 2 properties and the existing vegetation that forms a natural screening the proposal would not impact upon existing privacy or amenity that the occupants of this dwelling currently enjoy.

7.5 Highways and parking

7.5.1 No objection to the use of the existing agricultural track for access to the site, as proposed by the initial application, was raised by the County Highways Officer subject to conditions for surfacing materials. However, the track which was to form this access is not within the ownership of the applicant and without consent from the landowner, these works could not be implemented.

7.5.2 The revised scheme now incorporates a new vehicular access point from Keer Holme Lane, featuring a width of 5.5 metres. No objection to the site’s revised point of access has been raised by County Highways. Adequate visibility is considered to be retained in an easterly direction along Keer Holme Lane. Visibility is reduced in a westerly direction due to a slight bend in the road and its undulating nature in this direction. Despite this adequate visibility splays are considered to be provided so as to ensure highway safety when egressing the site. Conditions have been requested by County Highways regarding the laying of hard surfacing to the entrance to the site. This is indicated on the proposed site plan and is recommended as a condition to prevent loose materials being tracked onto the adjacent highway. Page 69

7.5.3 Further conditions regarding highway boundary vegetation/hedgerow management and the closure of the existing access point are also recommended. With regards to the hedgerow management scheme, County Highways has requested that a distance of 215 meters in each direction of the access point be maintained and regularly cut back. The majority of the boundary vegetation identified by the Highways Officer falls outside of the site ownership and so cannot be controlled or conditioned. Maintenance of the boundary hedgerow that forms the site frontage and is within the applicant’s ownership can be conditioned as part of the landscaping scheme. After a discussion with County Highways regarding the above, this was concluded to be acceptable. A further condition requiring the closure of the existing access to the north western corner of the site as requested by County Highways is recommended to prevent this access being reinstated and used and to prevent vehicles from having to reverse to and from the highway.

7.5.4 A residential care home is a fairly intensive residential use (use class C2), likely to generate trips over and above a small 3-bed bungalow, with staff often coming and going as part of a work shift pattern, other workers visiting the site to supplement the support given to its residents and the transportation of the residents to off-site facilities, such as schools and recreation. The Design and Access statement details anticipated vehicle movements of carers starting/finishing work, parking requirements and the number of staff regularly on site. It is anticipated that 6 parking spaces are required for the regular arrangements of running the care home. This is considered to be suitable for the scale of the use proposed. Therefore the proposal is considered to provide sufficient levels of parking provision, consistent with Policy DM22. This parking provision would need to be created prior to occupation, and retained as such at all times thereafter, which can be controlled by planning condition.

7.5.5 The Environmental Health Officer has recommended a condition requiring the installation of electric vehicle charging points as it was considered that the use proposed would contribute to air quality impacts within the District. The application site is located in a rural area some distance away from the main urban areas of Lancaster, Morecambe and Carnforth. Due to the scale of the use proposed and the additional regular trips generated as stated above, the proposal is considered to have a negligible impact upon air quality, as such as condition requiring the installation of charging points would be considered an unreasonable imposition.

7.6 Impacts upon trees and biodiversity

7.6.1 An Arboricultural Implications Assessment accompanies the application. The highway boundary to the site is formed by two separate unmaintained hedgerows, comprising privet and ash. These have limited amenity value though they can be retained in the context of the proposed development. However, due to the diminishing health these hedgerows are to be cut back/coppiced and relaid along the boundary of the site with an additional section of hedgerow to the east of the proposed access point.

7.6.2 The on-site trees are distributed across the western half of the site, predominantly in 2 groups, comprising sycamore, ash, apple and damson. Subject to the adoption of general working guidelines and tree protection fencing these trees can be retained. A number of the fruit trees on site are recommended for removal due to their poor health along with other remedial measures such as cutting back and pruning. These measures are acceptable and will not impact upon the character of the wider locality. A condition requiring the development to be undertaken in accordance with the submitted Arboricultural Implications Assessment is recommended along with a condition for additional landscaping to the east of the site.

7.6.3 Due to the dilapidated and uninhabited state of the existing lodge building, surrounding tree coverage and nearby water courses, the site has been closely inspected (including emergence surveys) for the presence of bats. The surrounding landscape and habitats were considered to offer moderate potential for foraging whilst the building was also considered to have a moderate potential for use by bats. The daytime inspections revealed access points within the ridge line and eaves of the roof whilst an internal inspection of the roof void highlighted the presence of bat droppings. The subsequent emergence surveys identified a single flying bat in the roof void and low numbers of bats emerging from the eaves of the property. These were identified as Soprano Pipistrelle and Common Pipistrelle bats. Due to the low number of bats it was considered that the building consisted of transitional/day roosts only and concluded that the building is unlikely to be essential for species survival. Nevertheless, without mitigation measures it is considered that the development has the Page 70 potential for the loss of confirmed roost sites. Mitigation measures in the form of working guidelines as well as the installation/retention of a minimum of 4 gaps along the eaves of the building to allow for continued roosting at this site in the future are recommended. Officers consider the mitigation measures suggested are commensurate to the level of use, and have received verbal confirmation from its ecological advisors, Greater Manchester Ecological Unit, in this regard. A condition requiring the development to be carried out in accordance with the suggested mitigation measures is recommended. In addition to the above the developer will also be required to obtain a Natural England Licence prior to the commencement of works on site.

7.7 Drainage

At present the property is served by a septic tank. Given the use of the site is to be intensified this will be replaced with a tank sized to accommodate the capacity of the proposal. Surface water drainage will be in the form of a soakaway system within the site curtilage.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 There are no planning obligations to consider as part of this application.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 The proposed use will provide a place of care for 4 young persons that cannot be provided by a family member or guardian due to family circumstance. Due to the needs of the perspective residents the rural site is considered to be suitable. Although this use is likely to generate a modest level of additional vehicular trips on the surrounding highway network, the established requirement for such accommodation within the District is evident and is considered to justify the unsustainable location. Due to the separation distances, surrounding tree coverage and intervening field boundaries the development is considered to have no detrimental impact upon neighbouring residential amenity. The existing trees on the site can be retained in the context of the development proposed though remedial measures to improve their health and longevity are recommended. The mitigation measures suggested to preserve bat roosting opportunities are considered to be adequate. Therefore the application can be supported subject to planning conditions.

Recommendation

That Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions: 1. Standard 3 year timescale 2. Development to be carried out in accordance with approved plans 3. Prior to the commencement of works above ground, details and samples of materials shall be submitted for approval 4. Submission and agreement of a landscaping scheme, including boundary hedgerow maintenance 5. Prior to occupation, the proposed highway access shall be finished with hardstanding for a minimum distance of 5 metres into the site 6. Prior to occupation, the highway access and parking facilities are to be available for use 7. Prior to occupation, the existing point of access to the north west corner of the site shall be permanently closed 8. Development to be carried out in accordance with the submitted Arboricultural Implications Assessment 9. Development to be carried out in accordance with the ecological mitigation measures 10. No more than 4 young persons shall be in receipt of care by the residential care home at any one time 11. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Use Class Order, the property shall be restricted to children’s care home and no other use within Use Class C2 without the express consent of the Local Planning Authority

Article 35, Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015

In accordance with the above legislation, Lancaster City Council has made the recommendation in a positive and proactive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development, working proactively with the applicant to secure development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. The recommendation has been made having had regard to the impact of development, and in particular to the relevant policies contained in the Development Plan, as presented in full in the officer report, and to all relevant Page 71 material planning considerations, including the National Planning Policy Framework, National Planning Practice Guidance and relevant Supplementary Planning Documents/ Guidance.

Background Papers

None

Agenda Item 13 Page 72 Agenda Item Committee Date Application Number

A13 23 July 2018 18/00756/VCN

Application Site Proposal

Former Ridge Hotel Site Erection of two 2-storey buildings comprising of 16 10 Patterdale Road one-bed affordable flats (C3) with associated parking Lancaster and landscaping (pursuant to the variation of Lancashire condition 2 on planning permission 17/01572/FUL to alter the finished site and floor levels)

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

TGP HPA

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

17 September 2018 None

Case Officer Mrs Eleanor Fawcett

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Approval

(i) Procedural Matters

The original application for the proposed development was not reported to the Planning Committee as it is a relatively small scale major development and no objections were received. However, the current application has received an objection and, in accordance with the scheme of delegation, it is therefore required to be reported to the Planning Committee.

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The site relates to a vacant piece of land which is located on the corner of Firbank Road and Patterdale Road, to the northeast of the centre of Lancaster. It currently comprises a mix of grass and hardstanding, however there was previously a building on this site, the Ridge Hotel, which was demolished several years ago. There are two existing access points from Firbank Road, and part of the site is currently used for the parking of vehicles. There is a change in levels across the site, with it being higher to the east, and also higher than the road level on Patterdale Road.

1.2 The site is in a predominantly residential area, with rows of mainly two storey terraced properties to the west and south, on the opposite side of the highway. To the north is a row of bungalows whose rear gardens abut the site. Adjacent to the eastern boundary is a footpath, beyond which is the playing field to the Ridge Primary School and Firbank Children’s Centre.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 Planning permission was granted earlier in the year for the erection of 2 two-storey buildings, each comprising eight one-bedroom flats for affordable occupancy. These will front onto Firbank Road and be set back from the highway with parking served from two access points at the front. Separate gardens are proposed at the rear for the ground floor units, and shared bin and cycle storage will be provided. The current application proposes the variation of condition 2 on the original consent which relates to the approved plans. The proposed amendments relate to finished floor and site levels of part of the development in order to better respond to the existing site levels. Block A, which is closest to Patterdale Road, will have a slightly lower floor level than approved (reduced by 0.2 and 0.27 Page 73 metres) and Block B will have a higher level than approved (increased by 0.975 and 0.9 metres). The site levels will also change to respond to the alteration to the floor levels.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The relevant site history is set out below:

Application Number Proposal Decision 17/01572/FUL Erection of two 2-storey buildings comprising of 16 one-bed Approved affordable flats (C3) with associated parking and landscaping 17/01138/PREMTG Follow up meeting for level 2 advice 16/01492/PRETWO Advice provided 16/01492/PRETWO Erection of 6 dwellings with associated parking and Advice provided landscaping 07/01721/OUT - Outline application for demolition of existing public house; Approved erection of 6 semi-detached, three bedroom dwellings with associated access, parking and gardens and provision of altered access to Firbank Road

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory and non-statutory consultees:

Consultee Response County Highways No adverse comments to make. Environmental No response received to date. Health County Schools No response received to date. Planning Team Lead Local Flood No response received to date. Authority United Utilities No response received to date. Canal and Rivers No comment to make. Trust Lancashire No response received to date. Constabulary Lancashire Fire and It should be ensured that the scheme fully meets all the requirements of Building Rescue Service Regulations Approved Document B, Part B5 ‘Access and facilities for the Fire Service’.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 1 piece of correspondence has been received which raises an objection to the application and the following concerns:  Will appear overcrowded with 16 flats over two storeys;  Increase in anti-social behaviour; and  The street cannot accommodate additional traffic and visitor parking.

6.0 Principal National and Development Plan Policies

6.1 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)

Paragraphs 7, 14 and 17 – Sustainable Development and Core Principles Paragraphs 49 and 50 – Delivering Housing Paragraphs 56, 58 and 60 – Requiring Good Design

6.2 Local Planning Policy Overview – Current Position

Page 74 At the 20 December 2017 meeting of its Full Council, the local authority resolved to publish the following 2 Development Plan Documents (DPD) for submission to the Planning Inspectorate: (i) The Strategic Policies and Land Allocations DPD; and, (ii) A Review of the Development Management DPD.

6.3 Lancaster District Core Strategy (adopted July 2008)

SC1 – Sustainable Development SC5 – Achieving Quality in Design

6.4 Development Management Development Plan Document (adopted July 2014)

DM35 – Key Design Principles DM41 – New Residential Dwellings

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The main issues to be considered in the determination of this application are:

 Impact on the character and appearance of the area  Impact on residential amenity

7.2 Impact on the character and appearance of the area

7.2.1 The alterations to the levels will result in less excavation at the eastern end of the site, but will require some increase in levels in the centre. The appearance of the development will change in that there will be a greater difference between the ridge heights of the two separate blocks than the original scheme, which had a more gradual step change across the two buildings. The existing development on Patterdale Road, which faces towards the site, rises in height to the east, following the gradient of the road. As such, it is considered that the development will relate well to its surroundings, will not have a detriment impact on the character or appearance of the area, and will probably respond better to the difference in levels across the site, avoiding the need for a large retaining wall at the eastern end.

7.3 Impact on residential amenity

7.3.1 The site is at a higher level than Patterdale Road, which is raised from the ground floor level of the dwellings fronting this to the west. The western gable will face towards two properties, one is two storey and one is a bungalow and will be separated from these properties by approximately 22 metres. The building closest to Patterdale Road will be lowered slightly from the approved scheme. As such, it is considered that there will not be a detrimental impact on the amenities of the occupiers of this properties, and there will likely be a slight improvement from the consented development. Page 75

7.3.2 The main part of the proposed buildings will be approx. 27 metres from the front wall of the existing dwellings to the south, which front onto Patterdale Road. As set out above, these also follow the gradient of the road and, whilst part of the development will be higher than the dwellings opposite, it is considered that this will not have a detrimental impact on the amenities of these properties. They will also be a similar distance to the rear wall of the bungalows to the north, however, they will be much closer to their gardens. At the eastern part of the site, the current ground level is similar to that at these adjacent properties. As such, the increase in level of the building, which will still mostly be lower than the existing ground level, will not result in any increased overlooking or an overbearing impact. There is a section where the ground level will be raised, but the boundary treatment will be at the garden level to ensure privacy between the gardens and it is considered that, given the separation distance, the properties will still be afforded sufficient amenity and privacy.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 There are no planning obligations to consider in relation to this proposal.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 The alterations to the approved affordable housing scheme, to amend the finished floor and ground levels, are considered to be in keeping with the character and appearance of the streetscene and will not result in a detrimental impact to the amenities of the neighbouring properties.

Recommendation

That Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard 3 year timescale 2. In accordance with plans 3. Watching brief for contamination 4. In accordance with construction management plan 5. Implement drainage system 6. Development in accordance with External Materials Schedule 7. Provision of access, parking and turning facilities 8. Provision of bin and cycle storage 9. Windows in the side elevations of flats 7, 8, 9 and 10 to be fitted with fixed obscure glazing only 10. The development in accordance with the Affordable Housing Statement 11. Implement landscaping scheme

Article 35, Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015

In accordance with the above legislation, the City Council can confirm the following:

Lancaster City Council has made the recommendation in a positive and proactive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development, working proactively with the applicant to secure development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area. The recommendation has been taken having had regard to the impact of development, and in particular to the relevant policies contained in the Development Plan, as presented in full in the report, and to all relevant material planning considerations, including the National Planning Policy Framework, National Planning Practice Guidance and relevant Supplementary Planning Documents/ Guidance.

Background Papers

None

Agenda Item 14 Page 76 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS

LANCASTER CITY COUNCIL

APPLICATION NO DETAILS DECISION

17/01311/FUL Parsons Field, Restarigg Farm, Kirkby Lonsdale Road Application Permitted Demolition of existing machinery store and stables, erection of an agricultural building for free range laying unit, change of use of existing agricultural building for egg packing facilities, construction of two bulk feed bins, installation of staff facilities with associated package treatment unit and associated landscaping for Martin Mulligan (Kellet Ward 2015 Ward)

17/01320/FUL Recreation Hall, Aughton Road, Aughton Change of use of Application Permitted agricultural land to land in association with the village Hall (D1) to create an external recreational space and an extension to the existing car park for Mr Andrew Pyle (Halton-with-Aughton Ward 2015 Ward)

17/01405/ELDC Newhouse Farm, Lancaster Road, Slyne Existing lawful Lawful Development development certificate for the use of a track for vehicular Certificate Refused access for Mr K Sanderson (Bolton And Slyne Ward 2015 Ward)

17/01527/FUL Higher Broadwood, Cragg Road, Wray Retrospective Application Refused application for the change of use of agricultural land to agricultural contractors yard (B8), change to land levels, retention of a storage building, erection of an extension to the storage building and retention of hardstanding for W Conder And Son (Lower Lune Valley Ward 2015 Ward)

17/01528/CU Greendales Farm, Carr Lane, Middleton Change of use of land Application Permitted to site 10 static holiday caravans, extension to toilet block and creation of a dog walking/amenity area for Mr M McCarthy (Overton Ward 2015 Ward)

17/01561/FUL 49 China Street, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection of a three Application Permitted storey building comprising of ground floor shop/office and student accommodation above comprising six studio flats for Mr Steve Ashby (Castle Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00004/FUL 2 Moor Street, Lancaster, Lancashire Change of use from Application Permitted retail shop (A1) to 3 bed house in multiple occupation for students (C4) and installation of velux windows to the front and rear elevations for Mr R. Grayston (Castle Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00035/DIS Land Adjacent To , Bulk Road, Lancaster Discharge of Split Decision condition 18 on approved application 16/01084/FUL for . (Bulk Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00048/DIS Land North Of 43, Clarendon Road, Lancaster Discharge of Application Permitted conditions 3 and 4 on approved application 17/00595/FUL for Mr Gavin Wright (Skerton East Ward 2015 Ward)

Page 77 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS 18/00053/DIS TNT Garage, Hornby Road, Caton Discharge of conditions 9 Application Permitted and 15 on approved application 14/00768/OUT for _ (Lower Lune Valley Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00057/DIS TNT Garage, Hornby Road, Caton Discharge of condition 6 on Application Permitted approved application 16/01310/REM for _ (Lower Lune Valley Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00058/DIS Scale House Farm, Conder Green Road, Galgate Discharge of Split Decision conditions 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 14 on approved application 16/00623/RCN for Mr & Mrs Wilson (Ellel Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00059/DIS Neville House, Moorside Road, Brookhouse Discharge of Split Decision conditions 3 and 5 on approved application 17/01515/VCN for Mr Julian Handy (Lower Lune Valley Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00061/DIS Land At, 2 Hall Garth Close, Hall Garth Gardens Discharge of Application Permitted condition 3 on approved application 16/01182/OUT for Mr H Nicholson (Kellet Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00064/DIS 240 - 241 Marine Road Central, Morecambe, Lancashire Application Permitted Discharge of condition 5 on approved application 13/01151/CU for Mr Graham Cass (Poulton Ward)

18/00066/DIS South Lakeland Caravans, Milnthorpe Road, Yealand Split Decision Redmayne Discharge of conditions 3,4,5,7,8,9,10,11 on approved application 18/00096/RCN for . . . (Silverdale Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00072/DIS Glenside, Red Bridge Lane, Silverdale Discharge of condition 6 Application Permitted on approved application 15/01066/FUL for John Shaw (Silverdale Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00086/DIS Unit 1, Kingsway Retail Park, Caton Road Discharge of Application Permitted condition 3 on approved application 18/00116/FUL for C/O Agent (Bulk Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00100/DIS Torrisholme Methodist Church, Norwood Drive, Morecambe Application Permitted Discharge of condition 3 on approved application 18/00272/FUL for Mr Bernard Vause (Torrisholme Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00106/LB 49 China Street, Lancaster, Lancashire Listed building Application Permitted application for erection of a three storey building comprising of ground floor shop/office and student accommodation above comprising six studio flats for Mr Steve Ashby (Castle Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00183/FUL Land To The North East Of Ivy Cottage, Low Road, Halton Application Permitted Change of use of agricultural land to residential, erection of a 4 bed detached dwelling with associated re-grading of land and alterations to the existing access, and installation of a waste water treatment system for Mr Richard Hepwood (Halton-with-Aughton Ward 2015 Ward)

Page 78 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS 18/00257/PLDC 314 Lancaster Road, Morecambe, Lancashire Proposed Application Withdrawn Lawful Development Certificate for the erection of a detached outbuilding for Mr & Mrs M. Heaton (Torrisholme Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00268/FUL Rear Of Taps On The Green, 77 Kellet Road, Carnforth Application Permitted Demolition of existing bowling pavillion and erection of a replacement bowling pavilion for Mrs Joyce Cooke (Carnforth And Millhead Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00292/FUL 17 Taylor Grove, Morecambe, Lancashire Construction of 2 Application Permitted hip to gable extensions and construction of 2 dormer extensions to the front and rear elevations for Mr Matthews (Bare Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00298/OUT Land At Middleton Towers Leisure Club, Natterjack Lane , Application Withdrawn Middleton Outline application for the erection of a 18-unit care home (C2) with associated access and layout for Mr Ward (Overton Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00300/CU Middleton Towers Leisure Club, Natterjack Lane, Middleton Application Withdrawn Change of use of existing leisure facilities (D2) building into ancillary staff and visitor overnight accommodation for care home (C2) and ancillary leisure facilities (D2) for care home for Mr Ward (Overton Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00301/LB Middleton Towers Leisure Club, Natterjack Lane, Middleton Application Withdrawn Listed building application for works to facilitate the change of use of leisure facilities into ancillary care home facilities for Mr Ward (Overton Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00316/FUL Lake View, Red Bridge Lane, Silverdale Erection of garage and Application Permitted storage building, alterations to existing access incorporating a new gate and creation of an access track and turning area for Mr And Mrs Crabtree (Silverdale Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00322/FUL 8 Main Road, Bolton Le Sands, Carnforth Erection of detached Application Permitted outbuilding, creation of a gable end window, replacement windows, raising height of boundary wall and replacement gates to the east elevation and construction of new wall to the north elevation for Mr Vincent Carter (Bolton And Slyne Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00325/FUL Land Adjacent To 149 Bowerham Road, Lancaster, Lancashire Application Permitted Widening of an existing dropped kerb for Mrs Pat Blenkarn (John O'Gaunt Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00333/FUL Middleton And Overton Sea Defences, First Terrace, Application Permitted Sunderland Point Reconstruction of part of sea wall, creation of accessible bird hide and walkway for Sunderland Point Community Ass (Overton Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00355/FUL 7 Aldcliffe Yard, Lancaster, Lancashire Removal of window Application Permitted and stone infill, installation of patio door with fan light window, construction of patio and retention of railings to the rear elevation for Mrs Alison Marlow (Scotforth West Ward 2015 Ward)

Page 79 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS 18/00356/LB 7 Aldcliffe Yard, Lancaster, Lancashire Removal of window Application Permitted and stone infill, installation of patio door with fan light window, construction of patio and retention of railings to the rear elevation for Mrs Alison Marlow (Scotforth West Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00361/NMA Site Of Former Broadway Hotel, Marine Road East, Application Permitted Morecambe Non material amendment to planning permission 17/00311/VCN to lower the boundary walls and remove grilles for Mr Michael Stainton (Poulton Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00363/FUL Cote Farm, Strellas Lane, Slyne Change of use of land for the Application Permitted siting of a mobile home for an agricultural worker, creation of a parking area and domestic garden for Mr & Mrs N Casson (Bolton And Slyne Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00378/CU 92 Euston Road, Morecambe, Lancashire Change of use of Application Permitted retail (A1) into Thai massage parlour (Sui Generis) for Mrs Jay Brown (Poulton Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00379/FUL 2 Back Green Street, Morecambe, Lancashire Change of use Application Permitted of dwelling (C3) to a laundry with associated storage (B1) for Mrs Sharon Monks (Poulton Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00385/FUL Mousekill Barn, Kellet Road, Over Kellet Creation of a Application Permitted vehicular access point, construction of an access track, alterations to existing boundary wall and construction of a new boundary wall for Ms Ruth Thomas (Kellet Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00387/FUL Halls Beeline, Northgate, White Lund Industrial Estate Application Permitted Erection of a 1.8m boundary fence and installation of 3 access gates for Mr Andrew Thomson (Westgate Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00401/FUL 48 Albert Road, Morecambe, Lancashire Change of use of Application Permitted ground floor shop (A1) to a 2-bed maisonette (C3), replacement of shop front with a wall and a bay window, installation of a door in an existing window opening to the side and construction of a garden wall to the front and side for Mrs A. Hainsworth (Harbour Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00402/FUL 63 Victoria Street, Morecambe, Lancashire Installation of Application Permitted replacement roof coverings for Mrs Lynne Lord (Poulton Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00407/FUL University Of Cumbria, Bowerham Road, Lancaster Creation Application Permitted of entrance door and ramp to North-West elevation, installation of plant machinery including two external flues to the roof and ventilation to South-East elevation for Mr Andrew Gravett (John O'Gaunt Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00419/FUL Hall Farm Cottage, Kellet Road, Over Kellet Erection of a Application Permitted single storey side extension and insertion of windows to the northern and southern elevations for J & L Benson (Kellet Ward 2015 Ward)

Page 80 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS 18/00420/LB Hall Farm Cottage, Kellet Road, Over Kellet Listed building Application Permitted application for erection of a single storey side extension, installation of three rooflights to the rear roof, insertion of new windows and replacement windows and doors to the northern, southern and eastern elevations, enlargement of front door, removal of render, repointing of stone work, replacement roof slates and various internal alterations including relocation of stairs, alterations to internal walling and floor levels for J & L Benson (Kellet Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00422/ADV Central Garage, Main Road, Galgate Advertisement Application Permitted application for the display of an internally illuminated totem sign, an internally illuminated freestanding sign, an internally illuminated fascia sign, one non-illuminated flag sign and 2 non-illuminated freestanding signs for Seat UK (Ellel Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00428/FUL Brownside, Docker Lane, Arkholme Erection of an extension Application Permitted to silo pit and erection of an extension to machinery store for Mr W Harrison (Kellet Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00434/FUL Mellishaw North Development Site, Mellishaw Lane, Heaton Application Permitted With Oxcliffe Erection of four buildings comprising a total of 20 industrial units (B1a Office, B1c light industrial, B2 general industrial and B8 storage and distribution), the creation of associated access, internal roads and parking and erection of sub-station for Mr Cox (Westgate Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00435/FUL Vale Of Lune R U F C, Powderhouse Lane, Lancaster Application Permitted Installation of a first floor level to facilitate the conversion of squash court into gymnasium (D2) for Vale Of Lune RUFC (Skerton West Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00438/FUL 42 - 44 Queen Street, Morecambe, Lancashire Retrospective Application Permitted application for the installation of an ATM to the front elevation for Ms Jan Clark (Poulton Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00439/ADV 42 - 44 Queen Street, Morecambe, Lancashire Advertisement Application Permitted application for the retained display of an internally illuminated fascia sign to surround ATM for Ms Jan Clark (Poulton Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00442/FUL Land To The Rear Of 33 McDonald Road, Heysham, Application Refused Lancashire Change of use of land for the siting of a residential caravan and portable w.c. for Mr Vance Atkinson (Overton Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00451/FUL Fell View Barn, Moss Lane, Yealand Redmayne Erection of a Application Permitted single storey side extension for Mrs Sandra Dixon (Silverdale Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00454/FUL Lantern O'Er Lune Cafe, Tithebarn Hill, Glasson Dock Change Application Permitted of use of restaurant (A3) to restaurant/drinking establishment (A3/A4) for Mrs Melonie Wagstaff (Ellel Ward 2015 Ward)

Page 81 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS 18/00457/CU The Old Stables, Bulk Street, Lancaster Change of use of Application Permitted mixed use unit comprising an office (B1) and physiotherapy (D1) to mixed use unit comprising an office (B1), bar (A4) and micro brewery (B1) for Mr Mike Dent (Castle Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00475/VCN Forrest Hills, Hazelrigg Lane, Ellel Erection of a resource Application Permitted centre (pursuant to the variation of conditions 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 9, 10, 16, and 18 on planning permission 08/00079/FUL to amend the approved plans including the location, layout, use class and car parking; and the removal of conditions 6 and 12 relating to the roof, 8 relating to landscaping, 11 relating to renewable energy, 13 relating to windows , 14 relating to raised terrace, 15 relating to siting in relation to the river bank, and 17 relating to electronic cards for Mr David Griffiths (Ellel Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00476/FUL Land Adjacent To Milnthorpe Road (A6), , Alterations to Application Permitted existing vehicular access point for Mr Simon Temple (Silverdale Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00479/LB 23 St Georges Quay, Lancaster, Lancashire Listed building Application Permitted application for the replacement of 1 window to rear elevation for Mrs Claire Bleazey (Castle Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00481/FUL Dolphinholme Church Of England School, Abbeystead Lane, Application Permitted Dolphinholme Erection of a front extension to form new entrance for The Diocese of Blackburn (Ellel Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00489/FUL Clear Water Fisheries, Kellet Lane, Over Kellet Construction of Split Decision wall and gates to car park entrance and retention of otter protection fencing to the eastern boundary for Mr Alex Mollart (Warton Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00495/FUL 364 Heysham Road, Heysham, Morecambe Change of use of Application Permitted ground floor from betting shop to drinking establishment (A4) and erection of rear single storey extension for Heysham Micro Pubs Ltd (Heysham Central Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00497/FUL 35 Broadacre, Caton, Lancaster Erection of a single storey Application Permitted side and rear extension. for Mr And Mrs A And S Parr (Lower Lune Valley Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00498/FUL Storey House White Cross Industrial Estate, South Road, Application Permitted Lancaster Replacement of 4 existing white painted single glazed timber windows with new Heritage style white uPVC sliding sash double glazed windows for Ms Janet Nielsen (Scotforth West Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00499/FUL 3 Clifton Drive, Morecambe, Lancashire Demolition of Application Permitted existing garage and erection of a single storey side and rear extension for Mrs Burrow (Bare Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00507/FUL 33 Wennington Road, Wray, Lancaster Erection of a single Application Permitted storey rear extension for Mr Andrew Newport (Lower Lune Valley Ward 2015 Ward)

Page 82 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS 18/00509/LB Mousekill Barn, Kellet Road, Over Kellet Listed building Application Permitted application for works to facilitate the creation of a vehicular access point, alterations to existing boundary wall and construction of a new boundary wall for Ms Ruth Thomas (Kellet Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00512/PLDC 15 Caton Green Road, Brookhouse, Lancaster Proposed Lawful Development lawful development certificate for the installation of new Certificate Granted windows and roof light to the side elevation and replacement of window with double doors to the rear elevation. for Mr & Mrs Smithson (Lower Lune Valley Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00513/LB The Gables, The Green, Over Kellet Listed building application Application Permitted for repointing from cement to lime mortar, installation of secondary double glazing and repairs to window casements, external painting of render on front and rear elevation and installation of internal doors to replace existing for Mr Stephen Jeffers (Kellet Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00515/PLDC 38 Portland Street, Lancaster, Lancashire Proposed lawful Lawful Development development certificate for the change of use from Certificate Granted residential (C3) to a house of multiple occupation for 4 people (C4) for Mr Matthew Burrows (Castle Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00520/FUL 6 Sunningdale Crescent, Hest Bank, Lancaster Demolition of Application Refused existing garage and erection of a part two, part three storey side extension for Rev Pauline Nixon (Bolton And Slyne Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00521/ADV Lancashire Fire And Rescue Service, 38 Cable Street, Application Permitted Lancaster Advertisement application for the display of 2 non- illuminated vinyl wall signs, 1 non-illuminated hanging sign and 1 non-illuminated fascia sign for Ian Riding (Bulk Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00523/FUL Chancellors Wharf, Aldcliffe Road, Lancaster Installation of Application Permitted aluminium framed curtain walling to replace existing timber framed curtain walling, and partial replacement of existing timber framed windows and external doors with aluminium windows and doors for Helen Wood (Castle Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00525/FUL Richmond Hall, Lancaster Road, Cockerham Erection of a Application Permitted building to form a farm maintenance workshop for Mrs Victoria Walmsley (Ellel Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00526/FUL The Shakespeare, 96 St Leonards Gate, Lancaster Change of Application Permitted use of part of lower ground floor to form self contained studio apartment for student accommodation for Mr Leong Yok Tan (Bulk Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00531/FUL Lyngarth, Lancaster Road, Slyne Erection of a single storey Application Permitted rear extension and construction of a raised terrace area for Mr Dan Johnson (Bolton And Slyne Ward 2015 Ward)

Page 83 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS 18/00538/FUL 33 Silverdale Road, Yealand Redmayne, Carnforth Installation Application Permitted a first floor window to the north elevation and demolition of existing garage and erection detached outbuilding for ancillary living accommodation and car port for Ms Jan Walker (Silverdale Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00541/FUL 2 Jack Scout Cottages, Lindeth Road, Silverdale Construction Application Permitted of a side dormer extension and retention of a first floor rear extension for Mrs Sharon Tomlinson (Silverdale Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00544/OUT Hillam Farm, Hillam Lane, Cockerham Outline application for Application Permitted demolition of existing dwelling, erection of a replacement dwelling and installation of a septic tank for Mr David Winder (Ellel Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00549/PLDC 12 Pedder Grove, Overton, Morecambe Proposed Lawful Lawful Development Development Certificate for the erection of a single storey Certificate Granted rear extension, installation of a new window to the existing side elevation and installation of a flue to the existing rear elevation for Mr & Mrs Procter (Overton Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00553/CU Manor House Farm, 128 Main Road, Slyne Change of use of Application Permitted outbuildings to cafe (A3) for Mr Gittins (Bolton And Slyne Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00554/LB Manor House Farm, 128 Main Road, Slyne Listed building Application Permitted application to facilitate the change of use of outbuildings to cafe (A3) comprising of alterations of existing door openings, installation of new windows, replacement doors and windows, installation of rooflights, creation of new internal openings, laying of new flooring and repointing with lime mortar for Mr Gittins (Bolton And Slyne Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00559/FUL 18 Lonsdale Place, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection of a single Application Permitted storey side extension, part single part two storey rear extension, construction of a dormer extension to the rear elevation with Juliet balcony and stairs to the front elevation for Mr & Mrs Andrew & Ann Sutherland (Scotforth West Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00562/FUL Brookhouse Old Hall, Brookhouse Road, Brookhouse Erection Application Refused of a two storey detached dwelling with detached garage for Mr Horner (Lower Lune Valley Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00563/LB Brookhouse Old Hall, Brookhouse Road, Brookhouse Listed Application Refused building application for the erection of boundary walls and creating an opening within existing boundary wall for Mr Horner (Lower Lune Valley Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00566/PLDC Burnside, Procter Moss Road, Ellel Proposed lawful Lawful Development development certificate for the construction of a dormer Certificate Granted extension to the rear elevation for Mr & Mrs S Mather (Ellel Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00577/FUL 19 Eardley Road, Heysham, Morecambe Erection of a first Application Permitted floor rear extension, single storey rear extension, and erection of a replacement detached garage for Mr & Mrs Spavin (Heysham Central Ward 2015 Ward)

Page 84 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS 18/00582/FUL 6 Bottoms Lane, Silverdale, Carnforth Erection of single Application Permitted storey side extension for Mr & Mrs Bond (Silverdale Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00590/FUL 12 Hornby Bank, Hornby, Lancaster Demolition of existing Application Permitted rear extension, erection of a two storey rear extension and installation of a raised roof for Mr James Wilkinson (Upper Lune Valley Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00591/LB Caterleisure Ltd Platform 3, Castle Station, Westbourne Road Application Permitted Listed building application for the fitting of 1 non illuminated hanging sign and 2 directional signs for Mr Peter O'Connell (Castle Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00596/PLDC 16 Kelsey Street, Lancaster, Lancashire Proposed Lawful Lawful Development Development Certificate for a loft conversion with Certificate Granted construction of rear dormer extension, erection of a single storey rear extension, external store, and installation of rooflights and solar panels to the front elevation for Miss Jo Clark (Castle Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00608/FUL 25A Main Road, Bolton Le Sands, Carnforth Erection of single Application Permitted storey front extension, erection of detached outbuilding, demolition of existing porch and installation of glazed screening to the front, installation of replacement windows to the existing front and rear elevations and alterations to existing access for Mr & Mrs J Cook (Bolton And Slyne Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00612/FUL Verandah Cottage, Main Road, Thurnham Erection of a Application Permitted detached outbuilding for Mr Foxcroft (Ellel Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00613/FUL 2 Dallas Road, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection of a front Application Permitted extension to garage, replacement of existing garage door with roller door and replacement of polycarbonate roof with glass roof for Mr & Mrs D'Souza (Castle Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00614/LB 2 Dallas Road, Lancaster, Lancashire Listed building Application Permitted application for the erection of a front extension to garage, replacement of existing garage door with roller door, replacement of polycarbonate roof with glass roof and lowering of a ceiling, installation of a wall and a new soil pipe for Mr & Mrs D'Souza (Castle Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00621/FUL 12 Norfolk Avenue, Heysham, Morecambe Erection of a part Application Permitted two storey and single part storey rear extension for Mrs M. Gill (Heysham North Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00631/PLDC 13 Clarence Street, Lancaster, Lancashire Proposed Lawful Lawful Development Development Certificate for the construction of a dormer Certificate Granted extension to the rear elevation for Mr S. Edwards (John O'Gaunt Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00636/FUL Woods Barn, Laverick Road, Halton Erection of a single storey Application Withdrawn side extension for Mr & Mrs Towers (Halton-with-Aughton Ward 2015 Ward)

Page 85 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS 18/00650/FUL 23 The Meadows, Yealand Redmayne, Carnforth Conversion Application Permitted of existing garage into ancillary living accommodation, removal of garage door and installation of a replacement door and window to the existing front elevation and erection of external store to the rear for Mrs S. Roberts (Silverdale Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00651/FUL 22 Whitendale Drive, Bolton Le Sands, Carnforth Installation Application Permitted of a new pitched roof over existing garage and canopy to the front elevation for Mr & Mrs A. Jennings (Bolton And Slyne Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00657/FUL 19 The Spinney, Heysham, Morecambe Demolition of existing Application Permitted conservatory, erection of a single storey rear extension with raised terrace area for Mr & Mrs W. Liu (Heysham South Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00659/NMA Woodside, Bowerham Road, Lancaster Non-material Application Permitted amendment to planning permission 17/01201/FUL for the installation of solar panels to the southern elevation of the proposed detached garage and to provide a cloakroom to detached garage with obscure glazed escape window for Mr Raymond Metcalfe (John O'Gaunt Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00662/PLDC 11 Walker Grove, Heysham, Morecambe Proposed Lawful Lawful Development Development Certificate for the construction of a hip to gable Certificate Granted extension and dormer extension to the rear elevation for Mr J. Kiyani (Heysham South Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00664/NMA 7 Peacock Lane, Hest Bank, Lancaster Non material Application Permitted amendment to planning permission 17/00784/FUL to reduce the width of two storey extension, move the footprint of the single storey rear extension and reduce the width of a ground floor conservatory window for Mr Neale Goddard (Bolton And Slyne Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00698/FUL 4 St Celias Way, Morecambe, Lancashire Erection of a single Application Permitted storey rear and side extension for Mr Morrison (Bare Ward 2015 Ward)

18/00712/NMA 18 Artlebeck Road, Caton, Lancaster Non-material Application Permitted amendment to planning permission 16/00369/FUL to amend the flat roof to a pitched roof for Ms Katy Liundi (Lower Lune Valley Ward 2015 Ward)