HARROGATE BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE – AGENDA ITEM 6: LIST OF PLANS. DATE: 21 July 2015

PLAN: 16 CASE NUMBER: 15/00357/FUL GRID REF: EAST 430329 NORTH 463170 APPLICATION NO. 6.67.19.D.FUL DATE MADE VALID: 06.03.2015 TARGET DATE: 01.05.2015 REVISED TARGET: CASE OFFICER: Luke Ashley WARD: Bishop Monkton

VIEW PLANS AT: http://uniformonline.harrogate.gov.uk/online- applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=summary&keyVal=NIXMMNHY0BA00

APPLICANT: Mr David Johnson

AGENT:

PROPOSAL: Erection of 1 dwelling

LOCATION: Chanda House Road South Stainley Harrogate North HG3 3NA

REPORT

SITE AND PROPOSAL The application site is set within the front garden area belonging to Chanda House. The host dwelling and garden curtilage are both set off from the main highway, this being Ripon Road, and is accessed off a private driveway which then leads up to the host dwelling. There is a moderate incline leading up from highway, with the application site being set at an elevated position when subsequently viewed from Ripon Road and the access point. The host dwelling is made up of a two storey dwelling backing onto Ripon Road, with a large brick built two storey detached outbuilding sited to the north of the main dwelling. There are ample gardens to the north of the host dwelling and it is within this area that the applicant is seeking to erect the single storey building. The application seeks to erect a single storey chalet style building within the front garden area of Chanda House. This chalet would measure 9.75m x 6.09m with a pitch height of 2.3m and an eaves height of 1.8m. The applicant describes the proposal as a holiday lodge and to all intents and purposes it would have the appearance of a mobile home, or park home similar to many units found on holiday and mobile home, caravan and leisure sites. To note, as it currently stands it is considered that the dimensions shown on the plans are incorrect in relation to the height of the proposal. This issue has been raised with the applicant however they have requested that any approval provided by the Local Planning Authority would be followed up with a subsequent application to vary the plans submitted. The use of the building is intended to be as a permanent residence for the applicant whom has stated that he intends to reside within the building for 11 months of the year. The building should therefore be classified as a permanent dwelling (use class C3).

MAIN ISSUES

1. Principle 2. Design 3. Neighbouring Amenity 4. Highways.

RELEVANT SITE HISTORY

86/02664/FUL Erecting stable block and hay store 03/05100/FUL - Demolition of outbuilding and erection of 1 no detached dwelling (site area 0.09ha). 05/01733/FUL Erection of 1 detached dwelling with detached double garage and formation of new vehicular access (site area 0.072ha) (revised scheme). 09/02141/FUL Conversion and extension of coach house to form detached dwelling, erection of detached garage and formation of vehicle access (Site Area 0.2ha).

CONSULTATIONS/NOTIFICATIONS

NYCC Highways And Transportation No objections

Principal Ecologist No response received

EHO Contaminated Land No objections subject to standard conditions being attached to safegaurd aginst unexpected land contamination

Parish Council 067 - SOUTH STAINLEY WITH

Parish Council No comments received

NYCC Highways And Transportation No comments received

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY NPPF National Planning Policy Framework CSEQ2 Core Strategy Policy EQ2: The natural and built environment and green belt CSSG4 Core Strategy Policy SG4 Settlement Growth: Design and Impact LPHD20 Harrogate District Local Plan (2001, as altered 2004) Policy HD20, Design of New Development and Redevelopment SPGRES Supplementary Planning Guidance, Residential Design Guide CSSG3 Core Strategy Policy SG3 Settlement Growth: Conservation of the countryside, including Green Belt CSSG1 Core Strategy Policy SG1 Settlement Growth: Housing Distribution CSSG2 Core Strategy Policy SG2 Settlement Growth: Hierarchy and limits CSEQ1 Core Strategy Policy EQ1: Reducing risks to the environment SPDHSE Supplementary Planning Document: House Extensions and Garages Design Guide SPGLAP Supplementary Planning Guidance, Landscape Character Assessment of Harrogate District

APPLICATION PUBLICITY SITE NOTICE EXPIRY: 17.07.2015 PRESS NOTICE EXPIRY:

REPRESENTATIONS SOUTH STAINLEY WITH CAYTON - No objections

OTHER REPRESENTATIONS

None received

VOLUNTARY NEIGHBOUR NOTIFICATION

None undertaken

ASSESSMENT OF MAIN ISSUES

1.PRINCIPLE - It should be noted that the description of development pertains to the erection of a holiday chalet as opposed to a new dwelling. During subsequent discussions with the applicant it is clear that his intention is to erect a permanent residence, which is affordable on his personal budget, within the curtilage of the host dwelling to allow him to remain on site once the main dwelling is latterly sold off.

He has indicated his intention to remain living at the new unit for only 11 months of the year, thus preventing it from becoming a permanent residence. However, clearly the unit is intended for permanent residential occupation and it has been assessed as such in the following paragraphs. As it is not intended to rent the unit out for holiday purposes, the following assessment does not refer to policies relating to tourism or policies aimed at diversifying the rural economy.

In March the Council published its new Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) that provides an up to date assessment of housing need. This indicates an annual requirement of 621 dwellings over the period 2014-2035. At the same time the Council published an updated housing supply position to reflect the SHMA requirement. This concluded that there was a 5.05yr supply of housing land, including a 20% buffer.

The NPPF requires that housing applications are considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development and goes on to note at para 49 that 'relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up to date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a 5 year supply of deliverable housing sites'. As the Council can demonstrate a 5 year supply of sites, the automatic application of para 14 of the NPPF, that permission should be granted unless to do so would result in significant and demonstrable adverse effects does not apply.

However, although the Council can demonstrate a five year supply of housing sites, the supply position is marginal and it is important that it is maintained. Whilst the proposed scheme lies outside the built confines of South Stainley and is therefore classified as countryside where, under policy SG3 of the adopted Core Strategy, there is strict control over development; the maintenance of the supply is material to the consideration of this application.

Whilst a new dwelling here would contribute to the 5 year supply, an assessment needs to be made of whether a grant of permission would give rise to harmful effects that would outweigh this consideration.

The application site is located approximately 5 miles from the edge of Harrogate and in this event is considered as being located within a countryside location. In such circumstances the guidance contained within Core Strategy policy SG3 (Settlement Growth: Conservation of the countryside) is clear and this policy states that outside of the development and infill limits of the settlements listed in Policy SG2 of the Core Strategy, land will be classified as countryside and there will be strict control over new development in accordance with national and regional policy protecting the countryside and Green Belt

Paragraph 55 of the NPPF states that to promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. For example, where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby. Local planning authorities should avoid new isolated homes in the countryside unless there are special circumstances. Such circumstances include;

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

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

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

The exceptional quality or innovative nature of the design of the dwelling. Such a design should: Be truly outstanding or innovative, helping to raise standards of design more generally in rural areas; Reflect the highest standards in architecture; Significantly enhance its immediate setting; and Be sensitive to the defining characteristics of the local area.'

It is clear that none of these circumstances apply to this application. The new building does not provide accommodation for a rural worker, and nor does it represent enabling development to a heritage asset. The design of the building is not considered as being of an exceptional quality in terms of it being innovative, nor does it in any way enhance the immediate built environment. Moreover this building would be considered as damaging to the characteristics of the immediate site and as the applicant cannot demonstrate any of the special circumstances contained within the policy guidance, the principle of development in this instance is not considered acceptable.

2.DESIGN - Paragraph 17 of the NPPF states that planning should always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings. Paragraph 58 states that planning policies and decisions should aim to ensure that developments respond to local character and history, and reflect the identity of local surroundings and materials, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation and are visually attractive as a result of good architecture and appropriate landscaping. Paragraph 64 states that permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions. Policy HD20 of the Local Plan (Design of new Development and Redevelopment) sets out a series of design principles for new development. Proposals for new development should accord with the design principles laid out in section A, B, C, D, E, F, I and J. Development which is contrary to these design principles will not be permitted. Policy SG3 of the Core Strategy (Settlement Growth: Conservation of the countryside) states that outside of the development and infill limits of the settlements listed in Policy SG2 of the Core Strategy, land will be classified as countryside and there will be strict control over new development in accordance with national and regional policy protecting the countryside and Green Belt

Policy SG4 of the Core Strategy (Settlement Growth: Design and Impact) states that a proposals scale, density, layout and design should make the most efficient use of the land. Proposals should integrate, complement and be appropriate in form and character in regard to the surrounding settlement and landscape character of the local area. Proposals should contribute and where possible enhance the visual, residential and general amenity. There should be no loss of Greenfield land unless justified and the environmental impact and design of the development should conform with Policies EQ1 and EQ2 of the Core Strategy.

The Harrogate Landscape Character Assessment pays reference to the general character of the area, with the application site having been located within Area 50. The character assessment states that within this part of the borough, the main settlements are Brearton and Nidd plus scattered individual residential buildings and farmsteads. Local building materials are Magnesian limestone, white render, red brick and tile plus the interspersed modern farm buildings.

In respects of the above the applicant has opted for a development style which is completely at odds with the character of the area and is one that would be viewed in juxtaposition with the scale and form of the nearby Chanda House and its associated coach house.

The proposed chalet style dwelling would appear as a temporary feature, having the appearance of a large mobile park home, and it would not sit well alongside the substantial and characterful buildings adjacent to it. the style used would best suit a location more accustomed to a holiday park.

The temporary nature of the built form illustrated within the plans submitted would not add to the character of the site and would not be considered as an enhancement to the surrounding local area, and in this instance it is considered that in design terms the proposal would not adhere with Saved Local Plan Policy HD20 in terms of overall design.

As such, the rural feel of the location coupled with the well-formed and substantial nature of the surrounding buildings is at odds with the proposed chalet, and this form of development would be considered as an alien feature within the site curtilage and it is therefore recommended that the council refuse permission on this basis.

3. NEIGHBOURING AMENITY - In terms of the residential amenity afforded to the subsequent residents of Chanda House, it is considered that due to the small scale nature of the proposal, and its siting away from the both the front side and rear elevations of the host dwellinghouse, the proposal would not harm the future amenities afforded to this dwelling. In this instance the proposal is in accordance with the guidance contained within the Harrogate Residential Design Guide

4. HIGHWAYS CONSIDERATIONS - The new dwellinghouse will be sited off an existing access onto Ripon Road. This passageway already provides access for Chanda House whose garaging arrangements are accessed at this point. The proposal seeks to add an additional dwelling at this location and in this instance it is not considered that an additional vehicle would lead to a reduced level of highway safety. This access is already considered acceptable in its present condition.

CONCLUSION

The proposed dwelling would not respect the character and appearance of the host house and the surrounding area and it would unduly harm the visual amenity afforded to the site and its surroundings. The proposal is therefore contrary to the guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework, Policy HD20 of the Harrogate District Local Plan, Policies SG3, SG4, EQ1 and EQ2 of the Harrogate District Core Strategy DPD and guidance in the Council's Residential Design Guide.

CASE OFFICER: Luke Ashley

RECOMMENDATION

That the application be REFUSED. Reason(s) for refusal:-

1 The chalet style dwelling, by reason of its size, form, design and siting adjacent to the coach house, would appear detrimental to the character and appearance of the site and its surroundings and therefore contrary to Policy HD20 of the Local Plan and Policy SG4 of the Core Strategy.