Grounds of Appeal Statement
Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
Prepared For Mr Welby
NC/KW/7752 March 2017
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION 1
2 SITE, SITE CONTEXT AND PROPOSAL 3
SITE AND CHARACTERISTICS 3 PROPOSAL 5
3 PLANNING POLICY 6
NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK (2012) 6 BASINGSTOKE AND DEANE LOCAL PLAN (ADOPTED 2016) 7
4 REASON FOR REFUSAL 1 – PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT 9
5 REASON FOR REFUSAL 2 – IMPACT ON THE CHARACTER AND VISUAL QUALITY 17
6 REASON FOR REFUSAL 3 – HOUSING MIX 23
7 REASON FOR REFUSAL 4 – PLANNING OBLIGATIONS 26
8 CONCLUSIONS 28
APPENDIX 1 30
APPENDIX 2 37
APPENDIX 3 38
APPENDIX 4 39
APPENDIX 5 40
APPENDIX 6 41
APPENDIX 7 42
Grounds of Appeal Statement Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 This statement is submitted in support of an appeal by Mr Welby against the decision of Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council to refuse planning permission on 1 December 2016 for the erection of 3 no. four bed dwellings and garages including creation of new access onto the A30, and associated landscaping at Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire (ref: 16/02187/FUL).
1.2 The development was refused for the following reasons:
1. The proposed development would result in new dwellings in the countryside, outside of any settlement policy boundary, which would be contrary to Policies SS1 and SS6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 which aim to direct development to within the identified Settlement Policy Boundaries and specific site allocations. Within the countryside it is the intention of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 to maintain the existing open nature of the borough’s countryside, prevent the coalescence of settlements and resist the encroachment of development into rural areas.
2. The proposal would fail to be sympathetic to the rural character and visual quality of the area or recognise the intrinsic character of the countryside. The proposal would result in an encroachment of the built form into the countryside and have a suburbanising impact. In addition it is considered that the design of the proposed dwellings would not respect the local vernacular of the area and such a design and use of materials would be alien. As such it is considered that the proposal would have an adverse impact on the rural character and visual amenities of the area and be contrary to Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, the National Planning Policy Framework and Appendix 14 – “Countryside Design Guidance” of the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document.
3. The proposal is for three no. four bedroom detached homes. The Council’s strategic Housing Market Assessment states that future projections show that smaller units of two and three units are preferred in the borough with less need identified for four bedroom units. The proposal is seeking larger units in an area where predominantly larger units exist. As such it is considered that the proposal fails to comply with Policy CN3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 in that it would not provide a mix of market
Grounds of Appeal Statement 1 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
housing which would include a range of house types and sizes and insufficient evidence has been submitted, to justify the mix of housing proposed.
4. In the absence of any suitable legal agreement, or justification for the absence of a legal agreement, the proposed development does not make adequate provision for contributions towards open space to adequately off-set the impact of the development. The proposed development is therefore contrary to the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010, Policies CN6 and EM5 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029 and the guidance contained within the Planning Obligations and Community Infrastructure Interim Guidance Document and the Adopted Green Space Standards (April 2016), the National Planning Policy Framework (Mark 2012) and the National Planning Practice Guidance.
1.3 In this statement we make regular reference to the “Officer Report”. This is the delegated report issued by the Council at the time of the Decision and sets out the reasoning/justification for the proposal. The main case in support of the application was submitted in the Planning Statement produced by Bell Cornwell LLP. This remains the main policy justification for the proposal. This statement seeks to respond specifically to the reasons for refusal and the concerns raised in the Officer Report.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 2 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
2 SITE, SITE CONTEXT AND PROPOSAL
SITE AND CHARACTERISTICS
2.1 The application site is located within Nately Scures, a small linear settlement that is generally characterised by large plots set back from the A30. The site is outside of any defined settlement boundary and therefore within the countryside. Both sides of the A30 are built up. Nately Scures village lacks a rural feel due to the impact caused by the A30 and its associated street furniture that runs through it. The A30 links Hook with Basingstoke.
2.2 Ribbon development lines either side of the A30. On the southern side of the A30 there are two lines of built development. The character of the area comprises detached properties that are either houses/chalet bungalows or bungalows. Due to the mature trees along the A30 a number of the existing houses are not visible. There is great variation in the design of the existing dwellings in Nately Scures. Typically, the house designs respond to the change in land levels. To demonstrate the wide variation in the design, photos of those that are visible from the public realm are provided within Appendix 1.
Figure 1 – Aerial image of Nately Scures – Yellow line is the first tier of development and the green line is the second tier of development. Red circle shows the appeal site, blue circle shows Nately Scures House and the purple oval shows planning permission 15/04234/FUL
Grounds of Appeal Statement 3 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
2.3 Over the past few years the construction of a number of detached dwellings have been approved in Nately Scures by Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council. This is demonstrated by Figure 2 below. There is significant variation in the design of the new dwellings approved. Copies of the approved elevations are provided in Appendix 1. Figure 2 also identifies those applications live as of 18 January 2017.
Figure 2 – Applications / planning permissions for new dwellings in past five years in Nately Scures (correct as of 18 January 2017)
2.4 The appeal site is bound to the east and south by mature trees, to the north by Nately Scures House and garden and to the west by an approved new detached dwelling that is yet to be constructed (ref: 15/04234/FUL). Beyond the trees to the east are existing residential dwellings which follow the two tier layout of development. Beyond the new house to the west are existing houses that follow the two tier layout of development. To the south is an agricultural field and areas of woodland.
2.5 The site comprises of residential garden land to the rear of Nately Scures House. The site falls away from the A30 towards the southern boundary. Within the site are mature trees and an old tennis court.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 4 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
PROPOSAL
2.6 Planning permission is sought for three new residential dwellings each with four bedrooms. The dwellings would be located to the rear of Nately Scures House within the existing second line of built development that is evident to the south of the A30 (Figure 1).
2.7 The proposed dwellings would all be detached houses that respond to the changes in land levels across the site and respect the current outlook from Nately Scures House. The design of the properties would be contemporary. A contemporary flat roofed development has recently been approved to the north of the A30 (ref: 15/04400/FUL) this influenced the design of the proposed dwellings. The garden depths would be consistent with the typical garden depths in the area (between 56 and 40m).
2.8 A new access is proposed off the A30 to serve the three houses and the approved dwelling (ref: 15/04234/FUL). The existing access would be retained for use solely by Nately Scures House. Four car parking spaces per dwelling would be provided and cycle parking would be accommodated within the garages.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 5 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
3 PLANNING POLICY
3.1 Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires all applications for planning permission to be determined in accordance with the Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.
3.2 The development plan currently comprises of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011- 2029 (adopted May 2016), which sets out the Council’s vision and strategy for the area until 2029 and provides the basis for decisions on planning applications.
3.3 The Council have also adopted Supplementary Planning Documents that are a material planning consideration that may be relevant. In October 2016 The Council prepared a guidance note on Policy SS6(e) - New Housing in the Countryside, this was not subject to a formal consultation process and it was not independently assessed by an Inspector. It therefore carries little (if any) weight in the decision making process.
NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK (2012)
3.4 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is a material consideration. It is agreed that the three sections identified within the Officer Report as being relevant to the decision are appropriate for consideration; Section 6 (Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes), Section 7 (Requiring Good Design) and Section 11 (Conserving and enhance the natural environment).
3.5 However, we are of the opinion that there are additional sections of the NPPF that should have informed the decision and these should have been identified and set out within the Officer Report.
3.6 The NPPF places a presumption in favour of sustainable development at the heart of planning decisions, for which there are three dimensions: economic, social and environmental. These are set out within paragraph 7 of the NPPF. In addition, paragraph 14 emphasises that the presumption in favour of sustainable development is at the heart of the NPPF and it states that it should be seen as the golden thread running through decision-taking.
3.7 Paragraph 17 of the NPPF sets out twelve Core Planning Principles. Of these principles, the following points are of relevance:
Grounds of Appeal Statement 6 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
To proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver homes, businesses and infrastructure and taking account of market signals;
Always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings;
Actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling and focus significant development in locations which are or can be made sustainable.
3.8 Whilst it is recognised that housing in the countryside is more tightly controlled, the NPPF does not completely prevent new housing from coming forward. Paragraph 55 of the NPPF states:
‘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’.
BASINGSTOKE AND DEANE LOCAL PLAN (ADOPTED 2016)
3.9 Within the Planning Policy section of the Officer Report the policies considered when taking the decision are identified.
3.10 The key overarching policy SD1 (Presumption in favour of sustainable development) of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan was not referenced and thereby not considered in the Officer Report. This policy is important as it re-iterates the NPPF’s clear direction that sustainable development should be at the heart of decision-taking. It identifies that the Council will always work proactively with applicants jointly to find solutions which mean that proposals can be approved wherever possible, and to secure development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions in the area.
3.11 We are of the opinion that the following elements of the proposal were identified in the Officer Report as being acceptable or through no clear reference are assumed to be acceptable.
The Officer Report states that no affordable housing would be required if the proposal is approved as the development is below the 1000sqm. This is below the affordable
Grounds of Appeal Statement 7 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
housing threshold identified within the Planning Practice Guidance. It is noted that this guidance supersedes policy CN1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan.
A new access onto the A30 is proposed as part of the proposed development. This would serve the three proposed dwellings and also one recently approved detached dwelling. The existing access would be retained and serve the existing Nately Scures House. We note that policy CN9 (Transport) of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan was not referenced in the Officer Report however the principle of the new access was assessed as advice was sought from the Highway Authority. Their comments were detailed within the report. The Highway Authority raised no concern in relation to the new access. The new access would be safe, suitable and convenient for the potential users with on-site provision for the turning of vehicles to ensure all users can enter and exit in a forward gear. The three additional houses would not result in inappropriate traffic generation. Highway safety would not be compromised. The proposal complies with the requirements of Policy CN9 of the Local Plan.
The application was accompanied by a Tree Report which considered the impact of the development on the existing trees. The loss of the trees to provide space for the access into the site and the new dwellings was accepted by the Case Officer following consultation with a Tree Officer. The Landscape Officer did not object to the proposed development noting that it would not be visible and the introduction of the three houses would not have an adverse impact on the character of the area. There was no concern raised by the Landscape Officer about the removal of trees on the site.
The application was accompanied by an Ecological Report. The Biodiversity Officer raised no objection to the application and so the aims of Policy EM4 of the Local Plan would be met by the proposal.
Through the absence of any assessment of water quality and pollution it is assumed that the Case Officer was of the opinion that there were no issues relating to these specific matters and that the requirements of the policies EM6 and EM12 are met by the proposed development.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 8 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
4 REASON FOR REFUSAL 1 – PRINCIPLE OF DEVELOPMENT
4.1 The first reason for refusal relates to the principle of development. The refusal reads:
The proposed development would result in new dwellings in the countryside, outside of any settlement policy boundary, which would be contrary to Policies SS1 and SS6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 which aim to direct development to within the identified Settlement Policy Boundaries and specific site allocations. Within the countryside it is the intention of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 to maintain the existing open nature of the borough’s countryside, prevent the coalescence of settlements and resist the encroachment of development into rural areas.
4.2 Whilst not referenced within the Officer Report or reason for refusal it is necessary for the presumption in favour of sustainable development to be considered. This is set out within the overarching policy SD1 (Presumption in favour of sustainable development) of the Local Plan. This policy should inform the decision taken. The policy states:
‘when considering development proposals the council will take a positive approach that reflects the presumption in favour of sustainable development contained in the National Planning Policy Framework. It will always work proactively with applicants jointly to find solutions which mean that proposals can be approved wherever possible, and to secure development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions in the area’.
4.3 Policy SS1 (Scale and Distribution of New Housing) of the Local Plan outlines the local strategy for housing delivery and sets out that 15,300 dwellings will be provided within the plan period. It sets the framework for the more specific policies which follow. Criteria (f) of the policy states:
‘Permitting exception sites located outside of defined Settlement Policy Boundaries where it meets criteria set out in the other policies in the plan or it is essential for the proposal to be located in the countryside’.
4.4 This links directly with Policy SS6 (New Housing in the Countryside) of the Local Plan. Policy SS6 of the Local Plan sets out seven criteria that indicate where development in the countryside will be permitted with the most relevant criteria for this appeal being (e).
Grounds of Appeal Statement 9 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
4.5 Policy SS6 (e) was subject to modification through the examination process of the Local Plan. At paragraph 213 of the Inspectors Report it states:
‘Policy SS6 sets out criteria for new housing outside settlement policy boundaries, including the re-use of PDL, and responds to the requirement to recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside in paragraph 17[5] of the Framework. The modifications [MM43-45] remove the criterion relating to a requirement for the support of the local parish council, which is contrary to national planning policy, and set out clear criteria for small scale residential proposal, i.e. four dwellings or fewer; they also link the policy to NP allocations and local need. Policy SS6, subject to these changes, is justified and accords with national planning policy’.
4.6 The Inspector clearly identified that requiring support of the local parish council is contrary to national planning policy. The requirement for Parish Council support was subsequently removed from the policy. However, the result of this removal is a policy lacking in clarity and precision.
4.7 The adopted policy, criteria e, allows development for new housing outside of Settlement Policy Boundaries (SPB) where, inter alia, they are:
‘Small scale (four dwellings or fewer (net)) residential proposals of a scale and type that meet a locally agreed need provided that:
It is well related to the existing settlement and would not result in an isolated form of development; and
The development will respect the qualities of the local landscape and by sympathetic to its character and visual quality; and
The development will respect and relate to the character, form and appearance of surrounding development, and respect the amenities of the residents of neighbouring properties’.
4.8 The supporting statement goes on to say that:
‘The policy allows small-scale new residential development in the countryside in limited circumstances, where it can be demonstrated that it would meet a local need, as agreed in consultation with the parish/town council (for example, in relation to dwelling size and type).
Grounds of Appeal Statement 10 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
Such developments should be four or fewer (net) to fall below the size threshold of sites that could be allocated through neighbourhood plans. It will be necessary for such developments to be well related to existing settlements and be suitably designed to respect the landscape setting and relate well to surrounding development’.
4.9 Policy SS6(e) is essentially a positive policy which accepts the role of the countryside in helping to deliver housing need. The reference to ‘settlement’ in the policy wording alludes to the existing Settlement Policy Boundaries (defined in the old Local Plan) as being out of date and not flexible enough to aid the delivery of houses in this current Local Plan period. Policy SS1 confirms that Settlement Policy Boundaries will be reviewed in the future and the current boundaries are not necessarily NPPF compliant.
4.10 The first test of the policy SS6(e) is that the proposal should be of a scale and type that meet a locally agreed need. Meeting locally agreed need was the replacement to the Parish Council support which was removed after the examination (paragraph 4.5 and 4.6 above). On adoption of the Plan in May 2016 there was no specific guidance provided on how local need should be established. When the planning application was submitted (June 2016) there remained no specific guidance provided on how local need should be established. Only in October 2016, five months after the adoption of the Local Plan, was guidance prepared by the council. It is noted within the guidance note that the note was produced by officers to provide informal guidance (our emphasis) on how the requirements of the policy should be interpreted.
4.11 The guidance note has not been consulted on, nor has it been independently assessed. Consequently, the guidance note can only be afforded limited (if any) weight. It should be noted that the guidance and the supporting policy text continues to try to require agreement with the Parish Council that there is a local need. This is against the Inspector’s intention and it does not align with the NPPF. The Policy does also not define ‘local’. Given that the overall Policy document is entitled the ‘Local’ Plan, it is reasonable to assume in the absence of any other definition that ‘local’ means the same thing i.e. Borough wide rather than Parish.
4.12 Further, the NPPF (paragraph 159) states that “Local Planning Authorities should have a clear understanding of housing needs in their area”. This is not limited to partial areas, but should include a full assessment of need across the borough, including rural areas.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 11 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
4.13 Upon submission of the planning application the applicant demonstrated that there was a local need for four-bedroom houses within Nately Scures. In paragraphs 2.8 to 2.10 of the Planning Statement reference is made to the Rural Housing Study (RHS) (2010) which considers the need across the Borough. The Parish Council’s Planning Statement was also referenced as this sets out support for new small scale developments that maintain community life and sustain the long term viability of villages.
4.14 In addition to the RHS there is clear evidence within the 2014 Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) (2014) that demonstrates that there is a need for housing within the rural areas and that the need for four-bedroom houses remains, notwithstanding the fact that smaller houses are also required (more detail is provided on this within Section 6 of this Statement which we will not repeat here).
4.15 In August 2016 additional information was requested as the Council were of the opinion that further information was required to demonstrate the local need for the area. At this time the guidance note was still not in place.
4.16 In the case officers email (Appendix 2 – dated 10/08/2016) the Council advised that an assessment of existing housing stock in the village and/or Parish and demographic characteristics (which could include household composition and underlying housing demand) should be carried out. It was also recommended that an assessment to whether there have been any permissions granted (but not implemented) in the area which could help meet a local need. Furthermore, there was the suggestion that the scope of the work should be agreed with the LPA and also the Parish Council at the outset. None of these are Policy requirements of SS6(e) and therefore the Policy is not being applied properly.
4.17 This advice was extremely broad and did not provide certainty as to what was required but it was clear that the extent of work required to establish a locally agreed need was extensive and posed an undue burden on the applicant. The process identified by the Council would also place an undue burden on the Parish Council who do not have expertise on how technical data should be collected and presented. In other words, The Council amended the Policy to satisfy the criticism of the examination Inspector however, they are trying to implement the Policy as originally drafted rather than how it is currently written. Local need should be Borough wide rather than Parish confined.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 12 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
4.18 If we have to apply Parish need as the test, then it is questionable whether the data the Council requested would successfully demonstrate a local need. When considering local need for affordable housing there is a clear methodology for collecting the evidence as there are local registers/waiting lists held by the Council and housing associations. Market housing is a broad area and one where there is no local data held. The rural area in which the appeal site is located are not progressing a Neighbourhood Plan and so no local level data is available through this means. To address whether there is a local need we are of the opinion that the most appropriate way of understanding whether there is local need and a demand for the housing is to approach Estate Agents within the local area. Demand for housing is an important factor that should be taken into consideration as housing of a specific tenure will not come forward if there is no demand for it.
4.19 Information from local Estate Agents was collected and presented as evidence to the LPA on 15 September 2016 (Appendix 3) this demonstrated that there is demand for the location and size of housing proposed.
Strutt & Parker who are based close to the site in Odiham confirmed in writing that demand is outstripping supply and that there are a significant number of regular enquiries for four bedroom detached houses in the local area.
McCarthy Holden confirmed that there is a need for family, well-sized accommodation in the Hook area. It is identified that there is a great shortage for properties under £1.0m offering accommodation between 2500sqft and 3500sqft.
4.20 As a package we are of the opinion that this demonstrates that there is a local need for housing. However, we re-iterate that this is not what the Policy requests. It is in our opinion higher level local need that needs to be demonstrated. Table 2 page 27 of the Local Plan states that 550 houses will be delivered from ‘small sites windfall’. The Local Plan then explains how these windfall sites will be delivered including SS6(e).
4.21 Paragraph 47 of the NPPF clearly identifies that Government recognise the need to ‘boost significantly’ the supply of housing. As set out within paragraph 3.8 above, the Government are supportive of new housing within the countryside where it will enhance or maintain the viability of rural communities. The advice from Government is that ‘local planning authorities should avoid new isolated homes in the countryside unless there are special circumstances’.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 13 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
There is no requirement from Government in paragraph 55 of the NPPF that the new homes should meet a locally agreed need.
4.22 The key test of paragraph 55 of the NPPF is whether the development is isolated. (ix) of Policy SS6(e) links to the isolation test as it requires new development to be well related to the existing settlement and for it to not result in an isolated form of development. The Officer Report does not address this point because it is considered that the first test of criteria (e) is not met. ‘Isolated’ is defined within the Local Plan as:
‘In the context of new residential development in the countryside where there is a significant separation between the proposed dwelling and the nearest settlement. Additionally, a dwelling is considered to be isolated if it is not well served by public transport (e.g. within 500m of a bus stop or train station) or well served by services and facilities (e.g. within 1km of an SPB, which generally contains facilities such as schools, post offices, doctors surgery etc).’
4.23 The appeal site is located within a ribbon of development along the southern boundary of the A30. In the Officer Report for a new detached dwelling on land adjacent to the appeal site (ref: 15/04234/FUL) it was noted that there ‘is a sporadic pattern of development along this stretch of Nately Scures’. It was concluded that ‘it would not be reasonable to describe the site as isolated in a physical sense’ (Appendix 4). This conclusion is consistent with the other planning applications approved by the Council in Nately Scures where they are located within the existing line of development (Figure 2 above). The appeal site is not physically isolated.
4.24 The Council also conclude that Nately Scures is not isolated with regard to access to services and facilities as there is a regular bus service operating along the A30 which provides access to Basingstoke, Hook, Odiham, Fleet and Farnborough. The bus service runs hourly from Monday to Saturday and so it would be practical for residents of Nately Scures to use the bus to access shops and facilities including regular journeys for school or work. This site is within 500m of a bus stop which is an example isolation test set out within the Local Plan. Appeal decision (APP/H1705/A/14/2224450) (Appendix 5) has also confirmed that Nately Scures is not isolated from services and facilities. The appeal site is not isolated with regard to access to services and facilities.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 14 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
4.25 The Parish Council also conclude that the appeal site is not isolated and therefore in accordance with Paragraph 55 of the NPPF. It is appropriately demonstrated that (ix) of criteria (e) of Policy SS6 of the Local Plan is met.
4.26 (x) and (xi) of criteria (e) of SS6 relate to Reason for Refusal 2 and so are addressed in Section 5 of this statement.
4.27 Planning application 16/01206/FUL (Figure 2) was determined in July 2016, following the adoption of the May 2016 Local Plan. When considering the principle of development for this application paragraph 55 of the NPPF was considered alongside the definition of isolation set out within the Local Plan. It was established that the site was not isolated in a physical sense or in terms of its accessibility to services and facilities. The case officer for this application correctly identified the guidance within the NPPF where a presumption in favour of sustainable development is clearly set out. Further to this Policy SD1 of the Local Plan was noted. It was concluded within the Case Officer Report that there ‘is no local need either identified or agreed by Newnham Parish Council’. From reviewing the online planning submission for this application there was no evidence provided on local need when the application was submitted as it was submitted prior to the adoption of the Local Plan. No further information was then requested prior to the determination of the planning application.
4.28 The Case Officer noted that the proposed development ‘cannot fully accord with SS6e and is therefore weighed against all other material considerations on its merits in the design and amenity considerations’. Benefits of the scheme also informed the decision ‘the proposed new dwelling would add to the local housing stock and make a positive, albeit small, contribution towards reducing the current deficit of housing in the area. The development would also provide employment during construction and the expenditure associated with an additional household would support the local economy. These benefits would be very modest but they would nevertheless weigh in favour of the proposal’. This is in line with paragraph 55 of the NPPF where it promotes sustainable development in rural areas ‘where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities’. The Officer concluded that ‘as there would be no material harm generated from the proposal, in this instance the conflict with SS6e for the reason of no local need being agreed by the Parish Council is not considered to warrant refusal of the planning application’.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 15 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
4.29 The approach taken by the Council for that application (ref: 16/01206/FUL) differs significantly from the approach taken for this appeal site. In our opinion, the approach taken in relation to 16/01206/FUL is correct whereby a presumption in favour of sustainable development informed the decision taken. It was acknowledged within the Officer Report that the policy could not be fully complied as local need could not be agreed with the Parish Council, and that this should weigh against the development. An assessment into to the harm of the development was completed (e.g. harm to countryside, character and appearance of the local area) and the benefits were identified. Prior to the decision being made the issues and benefits were all weighted and balanced leading to the approval of the planning application.
4.30 It was concluded that the development would be in a sustainable location and the development would bring about economic benefits. There would be no harm to the character of the area and the fact that local need was not agreed with the Parish Council was not sufficient to warrant refusal of the application. We are of the opinion that the same arguments are applicable for this proposal and that the matters should be appropriately balanced prior to the appeal decision being made. The presumption in favour of sustainable development should inform the final decision.
4.31 On this basis, we can conclude:
Policy SS6(e) is relevant;
‘Local’ need should refer to the ‘Local’ Plan area;
There is no requirement for Parish Council agreement and this has been specifically criticised at the Local Plan examination;
Settlement Policy Boundaries are out of date;
Borough whole need includes 550 ‘windfall’ homes on sites allowed for by Local Plan policies. This demonstrates ‘local’ need;
The Council cannot pick and choose windfall sites.
A balancing act should be undertaken where the benefits of the proposal are weighed against where planning policy cannot be fully complied with.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 16 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
5 REASON FOR REFUSAL 2 – IMPACT ON THE CHARACTER AND VISUAL QUALITY
5.1 The second reason for refusal relates to the character and design impact of the proposed development. The refusal reads:
The proposal would fail to be sympathetic to the rural character and visual quality of the area or recognise the intrinsic character of the countryside. The proposal would result in an encroachment of the built form into the countryside and have a suburbanising impact. In addition it is considered that the design of the proposed dwellings would not respect the local vernacular of the area and such a design and use of materials would be alien. As such it is considered that the proposal would have an adverse impact on the rural character and visual amenities of the area and be contrary to Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029, the National Planning Policy Framework and Appendix 14 – “Countryside Design Guidance” of the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document.
5.2 The first two sentences of the reason for refusal are fundamentally linked to the ‘in principle’ issue discussed in Reason for Refusal 1 and addressed in Section 4 of this statement. If the Council are going to argue that the site is unacceptable in principle for housing development, then harm to the countryside is inevitable as a by-product of this approach. As we have concluded that the principle is acceptable by SS6 we consider the harm from this starting point.
5.3 The ‘intrinsic character of the countryside’ is, for Nately Scures, described by the Landscape Officer in their response to the planning application (Appendix 6) as being:
‘a small linear settlement, with a number of properties located within large plots with a mature vegetation structure, set back some distance from the road … There are two significant influences on the wider character of the area, the A30 and the local pattern of development. The A30 is a dual carriageway, passing immediately in front of the property to the north, and limited any sense of remoteness or rural character. It is a very busy road with a proliferation of street lights and signage that impost a more urban influence.
Secondly, the existing pattern of development within this part of Nately Scures includes a number of larger dwellings/buildings that have subsequently been subdivided into smaller
Grounds of Appeal Statement 17 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
plots and have been developed. This exists to the immediate east of the site within The Baredown and residential development within a wooded setting exists to the west of the site. The property which was granted consent recently (15/04234/FUL) is located to the west of this application, beyond which are a number of other properties along the main road, set in verdant grounds. It is considered that the area has a leafy residential character, distinct from the countryside beyond.
The character of the site itself is considered to relate strongly to the settlement of Nately Scures itself rather than the wider countryside. The vegetation within and surrounding the site creates a strong sense of enclosure, separating it from the wider countryside. The features within the gardens are also more akin to a settlement character. There are a number of engineered slopes with steep gradients that do not reflect the more naturally flowing slopes within the surrounding countryside’.
5.4 The Officer Report recognises that Nately Scures is ‘a small rural settlement, which is essentially ribbon development along the A30 highway’. The case officer appears to agree with a large proportion of the Landscape Officers comments. The Officer Report states that the adjacent cul-de-sac known as Baredown creates a more suburban development and that the site is well screened with mature landscaping and trees on the south, east and west boundaries.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 18 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
Figure 3 – Site Location Plan for the appeal site (drawing no. 168_P_10_00 issue P14)
5.5 To achieve the proposed layout (Figure 3) and the new access onto the A30, only thirteen trees would need to be removed. These trees would be lost from within the site; the boundary trees would be retained. The houses would be set to the rear of Nately Scures House (which itself cannot be seen from the A30). The design and scale of the houses has been influenced by the spacing and size of the surrounding developments alongside the land level changes across the site and the desire to provide Nately Scures House with a continued verdant outlook. Furthermore, the contemporary design is influenced by planning permission 15/04400/OUT that was approved immediately to the north of the A30.
5.6 When considering the effect of the development on the character of the area the Landscape Officer supported the proposal stating that ‘it is not considered that the proposal would result in an adverse effect on the landscape character … It is considered that this proposal reflects that pattern and would do so without significant effect on the character of the wider area … it is not considered that any significant effects on the wider character beyond the site will arise’. Further support was given to the plot sizes and spacing between the development acknowledging that this ‘would allow the vegetated character of the area to remain’. The
Grounds of Appeal Statement 19 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
design of the houses was also supported as it was acknowledged that they ‘would be located on lower ground and they are relatively low in height. It is considered that both of these factors would also result in a reduced effect on the character of the area’. Overall it was noted by the Landscape Officer that the vegetated character of the area would remain and that the countryside character would be protected as the existing boundary treatment would remain.
5.7 The assessment of the impact of the development on the landscape character within the Officer Report confirms that visibility of the site is limited. However, the Case Officer comes to a different conclusion on how the appeal site relates to the built up area of Nately Scures, concluding that as the site is to the south of the engineered slopes, and therefore further from the A30, it has a more rural character. It is stated that ‘to develop the site, in the manner proposed, would result in an encroachment and increase of the built form outside of the settlement which would be harmful to the character of the area and have a suburbanising impact’.
5.8 We are of the opinion that the Officer Report is incorrect in its conclusion on the extent of the built form of the settlement as it fails to consider, in full, the wider context of the site. We set out below, four reasons why the conclusion is incorrect:
(1) there is a well-established second line of development which the appeal site would be consistent with (Figure 1) it would not result in development being extended westwards as this already exists;
(2) the development would not alter the southernmost boundary of the site which defines the start of the countryside;
(3) the proposal would also not introduce a suburban character to the area as the Officer Report identifies that a suburban character has already been created by The Baredown which is located immediately to the east of the site and comprises of two lines of development; and
(4) planning permission (ref: 15/04234/FUL) was granted for one new dwelling immediately to the west of the site where it was concluded that ‘the proposed dwelling which would be set well back into the site would not be visible from public vantage points and would not have any impacts on wider character of the area or visual amenity’ thereby supporting
Grounds of Appeal Statement 20 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
the views of the Landscape Officer when considering the relationship of the site to Nately Scures / the countryside.
5.9 In our opinion the landscape character of the area comprises of detached houses in sizeable plots with well-established tree lined boundaries. There are two lines of development to the south of the A30 with both sporadic development and more formal development depending on the age of the properties. Views of houses are limited and there is a well-defined tree line that separates existing housing and their gardens from the open countryside around Nately Scures.
5.10 The extent of development proposed would not change these well-established features as the houses would be visually screened from any public viewpoint, the new houses would be surrounded by built development to the north, east and west, and they would not compromise the existing mature southern tree line. There would be no extension of built development into the wide open countryside to the south of the site. The proposal is sympathetic to the existing landscape character. Whilst we are of the opinion that it is not necessary, additional planting could be provided to contribute to the verdant character of the area.
5.11 In designing the development regard was had to Policy EM1 of the Local Plan and in our opinion the proposal would, as a whole, respect Nately Scures’s existing sense of place.
5.12 The Reason for Refusal also notes that ‘the design of the proposed dwellings would not respect the local vernacular of the area and such a design and use of materials would be alien’. Policy EM10 of the Local Plan seeks to achieve high quality proposal, based upon a design-led approach.
5.13 As demonstrated in Appendix 1, the existing houses all vary in their design. The design of the houses recently approved for development also vary widely in their design and scale with a mixture of single and two storey dwellings some with pitched roofs and some with flat roofs. A modern, flat roofed detached dwelling (ref: 15/04400/OUT) was been approved which influenced the design of the three proposed dwellings. One cannot conclude that a contemporary design is not a local vernacular in Nately Scures.
5.14 The proposed development would make efficient use of land whilst also being low density, the houses would be detached and they would have substantial garden depths and garden to each side of the dwellings to reflect the character of Nately Scures.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 21 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
5.15 The houses would be set an appropriate distance from the existing surrounding dwellings, through the existing level changes and mature planting in place. The Officer Report confirms that the proposal ‘would not result in any undue loss of residential amenity to occupiers of the existing neighbouring properties’.
5.16 It has been demonstrated that the proposal can accommodate the required car and cycle parking requirements to meet criteria 2(e) of Policy EM10 of the Local Plan. Waste storage areas can also be accommodated within the site and appropriate turning space has been demonstrated so the houses could be serviced by refuse vehicles.
5.17 The NPPF at paragraph 58, 59 and 60 recognises the need for high quality design that responds to the local character. However, it is clear that innovation should not be prevented or discouraged. There should be unnecessary prescription or detail and design should focus on scale, density, massing, etc. Paragraph 60 is very clear when it states that ‘decisions should not attempt to impose architectural styles or particular taste and they should not stifle innovation, originality or initiative through unsubstantiated requirements to conform to certain development forms or styles’.
5.18 The content of the Officer Report goes beyond the Councils remit of influencing design. The points made by the Case Officer are subjective and personal opinions of the design. Where there was concern about materials and colours, it would be appropriate to impose conditions requiring the finer design details of the scheme to be agreed prior to the commencement of development. It should be acknowledged that the palate of materials proposed were influenced by some of the surrounding development i.e. the use of render which is demonstrated as existing in photo 1 of Appendix 1.
5.19 The proposed dwellings are attractive and innovative in their design. They would not be visible from any public vantage points and so would not affect the local distinctiveness or sense of place for Nately Scures. The density and scale of development reflects the character of the area with the new houses being appropriately set away and screened from the adjacent existing and proposed housing. The new houses would be provided with appropriate parking and waste storage requirements. The location of the development would be within an existing line of development and so would not result in development extending the length or width of the settlement of Nately Scures. The aims of Policies EM1 and EM10 of the Local Plan are thereby met.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 22 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
6 REASON FOR REFUSAL 3 – HOUSING MIX
6.1 The third reason for refusal relates to housing mix. The refusal reads:
The proposal is for three no. four bedroom detached homes. The Council’s Strategic Housing Market Assessment states that future projections show that smaller units of two and three units are preferred in the borough with less need identified for four bedroom units. The proposal is seeking larger units in an area where predominantly larger units exist. As such it is considered that the proposal fails to comply with Policy CN3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011-2029 in that it would not provide a mix of market housing which would include a range of house types and sizes and insufficient evidence has been submitted, to justify the mix of housing proposed.
6.2 Policy CN3 comprises of four criteria that have to be met:
(a) Includes a range of house type and size to address local requirements; and
(b) Is appropriate to the size, location and characteristics of the site; and
(c) Is appropriate to the established character and density of the neighbourhood; and
(d) Provides 15% accessible and adaptable homes to enable people to stay in their homes as their needs change.
6.3 The wording within Policy CN3 of the Local Plan again makes reference to ‘local’. In this instance the Officer Report finds that it is appropriate for ‘local’ to mean Borough wide as it makes reference to the Strategic Housing Market Assessment which is a Borough wide document. This conflicts the ‘local’ argument they set out when considering Policy SS6(e).
6.4 Furthermore, there is a conflict within the Policy when it is related to this appeal site as it requires a mix of housing whilst also requiring the housing to be ‘appropriate to the size, location and characteristics of the site’. As identified within the reason for refusal the character of the area is ‘predominantly larger units’. The proposal cannot therefore be consistent with the character and density of the area whilst also delivering smaller dwellings. Without flexibility in applying this Policy, development on this site could not happen because either the test of (a) are failed, or the tests of (b) and (c) are failed.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 23 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
6.5 Below we provide evidence that demonstrates that there is a need for the type of housing proposed. To inform what is considered the ‘local requirement’ a more detailed look at the findings within the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) (2014) and Rural Housing Study (RHS) (2010) is required.
6.6 Paragraph 10.18 of the SHMA, when looking at Neighbourhood Stock Analysis, states that ‘there remains a substantial requirement for ‘family housing’ (3 bed and more) but also a significant requirement for smaller flats and houses (30-35% at 2026 using the assumptions)’.
6.7 The conclusions drawn within the SHMA refer back to the RHS findings. It is identified that the RHS ‘looked at needs for property types in the rural areas of the borough and recommended that as a guideline for future development, proportions should be rounded with a broad 40% target for smaller units mainly two bedrooms and 60% family sized three or four bedroom properties’.
6.8 Paragraph 10.23 of the SHMA repeats the RHS’s conclusions that ‘Although the existing stock has high proportions of three and four bedroom units, the data indicates that there is still a need for more large units with a shortfall of 2, 3 and 4+ bed property sizes in the rural area (paragraph 8.5.12)’.
6.9 More specifically the RHS concludes that for the East of the Borough there is a requirement for 52.9% 4+ bedroom properties.
6.10 The non-technical summary of the SHMA states that ‘a flexible approach to housing mix is recommended with a continuation in the provision of 2 and 3 bedroom properties. A lower proportion of 4+ beds are required in the future’.
6.11 The Officer Report and Reason for Refusal both identify that two and three bed dwellings are ‘preferred’. It is clear from the evidence within the SHMA and RHS that there remains a need for four bedroom houses.
6.12 Criteria (b) and (c) of the Policy require the proposed development to be appropriate to the location and characteristics of the site and also to the established character and density of the neighbourhood. As set out within the Planning Statement and within Section 2 of this Grounds of Appeal Statement, the site is located in an existing line of development that is characterised by detached dwellings within substantial plots. The proposal would achieve three dwellings
Grounds of Appeal Statement 24 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
that would relate well to adjacent existing and proposed houses through providing substantial separation distances. The garden depths would reflect those typical for existing dwellings and the size and design of the dwellings and their plots would respond well to the changing levels across the site and the wider area. The proposal would achieve a low density development that ensures the character of the area is preserved.
6.13 We are therefore of the opinion that this evidence demonstrates that the aims of Policy CN3 of the Local Plan can be met.
6.14 Notwithstanding that which is set out above, it is necessary to note that paragraph 5.29 of the Local Plan states that ‘the council recognises that for smaller developments (typically those of 3 or less units) it may not be appropriate to meet the requirements of the policy’ (our emphasis). The proposed development is for three units and so it would be appropriate for the Inspector to conclude that the requirements of this policy are not suitable in this situation.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 25 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
7 REASON FOR REFUSAL 4 – PLANNING OBLIGATIONS
7.1 The fourth reason for refusal relates to the need for a legal agreement to secure a contribution towards open space. The reason for refusal reads:
In the absence of any suitable legal agreement, or justification for the absence of a legal agreement, the proposed development does not make adequate provision for contributions towards open space to adequately off-set the impact of the development. The proposed development is therefore contrary to the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010, Policies CN6 and EM5 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 2011 – 2029 and the guidance contained within the Planning Obligations and Community Infrastructure Interim Guidance Document and the Adopted Green Space Standards (April 2016), the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) and the National Planning Practice Guidance.
7.2 An Open Space contribution was requested by the Landscape and Horticultural Officer who identified the need for a one-off contribution of £5624.88 towards enhancement of Newnham Green through the provision of a level, short mown area suitable for informal games.
7.3 The means of calculating the project cost was challenged as it did not correspond with the standard open space rates that should be used to inform the open space contribution requested.
7.4 Following an email to the Case Officer on 15 September 2017 a response was provided on 22 September 2017 confirming the calculation method (Appendix 7). The following was advised by the Landscape and Horticultural Officer:
“The figure is what is generated by the development: 3 x 4 bed x £1874.96 (the figure appears to be wrong on the scoping response sheet – I will amend this to match the approved fees & charges on-line) = £5624.88.
This figure was used as all landscape projects are estimates of the cost, and when this was calculated it was only slightly above the rate. By asking around different landscaping companies, the parish will be able to fit the project within that budget.
The rates used to calculate the project were based on a mid-range contract rate as follows:
Grounds of Appeal Statement 26 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
Grade, cultivate & seed 1600m2 @ £1.26/m2 = £2000 Apply topsoil to a depth of 100mm to create a level surface = 160m3 @ £25/m3 = £4000 / Total estimated cost = £6000”
7.5 It is questionable whether this development should be required to make the only contribution towards this project when the other developments approved within Nately Scures are not being required to make any Open Space contributions and will be users of the Open Space. However, it is acknowledged that the Council believe they can justify the financial request and note the Regulation 122 CIL tests that they believe the contribution meets.
7.6 Consequently, we have had a Unilateral Undertaking (UU) prepared which confirms that the £5624.88 contribution requested would be paid, if the Inspector also felt that the Regulation 122 tests were met by the Council’s identified project and justification. A clause is contained within UU identifying that if the Inspector is of the opinion that the project is not justified then the applicant is not required to make the financial contribution.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 27 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
8 CONCLUSIONS
8.1 This statement goes through the issues identified in each of the reasons for refusal and responds to them directly. We have endeavoured to submit a clear, concise and detailed response, in order to set out the grounds of appeal in a way that assists the Inspector.
8.2 We do not accept that a local need for the three new houses cannot be demonstrated when there are documents prepared by Basingstoke and Deane in support of their Local Plan that demonstrate a need for housing in rural areas. Furthermore, these documents demonstrate that there is a need for larger houses (4+ beds). We have demonstrated through evidence from local Estate agents that four-bedroom houses in the proposed location would meet a clear demand. We do however accept that our evidence with regard to local need has not been agreed by the Local Planning Authority.
8.3 The local distinctiveness, visual amenity from public vantage points and the character of the area would be well preserved by the proposed development without extending the built form beyond the existing line of development. The established boundary planting would remain with it being possible to provide additional planting to enhance and contribute to the verdant character of the area. The layout of the development would preserve the density of housing within Nately Scures, and protect the amenity of neighbouring residents. The scale and design of the houses would be reflective of the wide variation of housing styles seen throughout Nately Scures.
8.4 A Unilateral Undertaking has been prepared to provide a financial contribution to the creation of Open Space should the Inspector be of the view that it is necessary and appropriately justified by the Council.
8.5 The benefits of the proposal should be recognised as the construction of three houses will provided temporary employment on site. The new residents would then increase spending in the local area which would help support this and neighbouring rural areas thereby meeting the aims of Paragraph 55 of the NPPF.
8.6 The primary focus of the modern planning system, as outlined in the Local Plan and in national policy within the NPPF, is the fundamental principle - presumption in favour of sustainable development. It has been clearly demonstrated from a number of similar planning
Grounds of Appeal Statement 28 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
applications in the area that Nately Scures is a sustainable location and can accommodate new residential development without harm to the local area, both in terms of character, building design and amenity. The proposal would be equally as sustainable and would represent a sustainable form of development with no unacceptable harm.
8.7 Consequently, we believe that this proposal should be granted planning permission and ask the Inspector to agree with the case set out in favour of the proposal and allow the appeal.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 29 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
APPENDIX 1
Photographs of existing dwellings within Nately Scures
Aerial Photograph to show location and direction of photographs provided below
Photograph 1 taken from The Baredown showing front of detached chalet bungalow which is accessed off The Baredown.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 30 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
Photograph 2 taken from The Baredown showing front of detached bungalow which is accessed off The Baredown.
Photograph 3 taken from The Baredown showing front of detached house which is accessed off The Baredown.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 31 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
Photograph 4 taken from A30 showing front of detached house which is accessed off the A30.
Photograph 5 taken from A30 showing front of detached house which is accessed off the A30.
Grounds of Appeal Statement 32 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
Photograph 6 taken from A30 showing rear of detached house which is accessed off The Baredown.
Plans of approved dwellings within Nately Scures
Grounds of Appeal Statement 33 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
15/04400/OUT – Erection of 1 no. two storey private dwelling with access, appearance, layout and scale to be considered at Land at Nately Towers, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hampshire
Approved elevations:
Plans taken from the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council website
Grounds of Appeal Statement 34 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
16/01206/FUL – Demolition of existing buildings and structures and replacement with 1 no. detached two-storey dwelling with attached double garage together with pedestrian and vehicular access off existing shared access off Scures Hill with associated landscaping and planting at Land adjoining Scures Hill House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures
Approved elevations
Plans taken from the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council website
15/02851/FUL – Demolition of the existing buildings and structures. Erection of 1 no. detached two-storey dwelling with attached double garage, together with pedestrian and vehicular access arrangements off the existing shared access and associated landscaping and planting at Land adjoining Scures Hill House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook
Approved elevations
Plans taken from the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council website
Grounds of Appeal Statement 35 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
16/02480/FUL – Erection of a detached house and garage (amended design to that approved under planning permission 13/01460/FUL) at Oakfield Farm Court, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook
Approved elevations
Plans taken from the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council website
15/04234/FUL – Erection of one detached dwelling and detached double garage with associated landscaping and new private driveway at Land at Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures
Approved elevations
Grounds of Appeal Statement 36 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
APPENDIX 2
Email from case officer to Bell Cornwell LLP on 10 August 2016
Grounds of Appeal Statement 37 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire Kristina Wall
From: Anne Wilkinson Sent: 10 August 2016 15:53 To: Kristina Wall Cc: Sue Tarvit Subject: RE: 16/02187/FUL - Nately Scures House - update
Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged
Dear Kristina,
I have now had the opportunity to discuss that application with my manager.
In addition to the highway concerns there are in principle policy objections to the proposal. The Local Plan aims to direct development to within the identified Settlement Policy Boundaries and site specific allocations. Within the countryside it is the intention to maintain the existing open nature of the borough’s countryside, prevent coalescence of settlements and resist the encroachment of development into rural areas. The countryside is therefore subject to a more restrictive policy. Development proposals within the countryside will therefore only be permitted in exceptional circumstances as stated in Policy SS1 (Scale and distribution of housing) criterion f). Policy SS6, which is directly relevant to this proposal, clearly identifies where new housing in the countryside will only be permitted.
In the supporting planning statement, submitted with the application, it is advised that “Policy SS6 of the Local Plan sets out the criteria that new housing outside of Settlement Policy Boundaries should comply with for them to be permitted. Criteria (e) is most applicable for the proposed development.” A key requirement of Policy SS6(e) is that development should meet ‘a locally agreed need’. The applicant should provide current evidence to demonstrate that their proposal meets a specific and clearly-identified unmet need in the local area in terms of number, size and type - it will usually be appropriate to assess need at Parish level. It is noted that the applicant has referred to contextual information about housing need at a borough level by referencing the Rural Housing Study (2010), however the application should be supported by an assessment of requirements in the local area – such information has not been provided by the applicant. It is therefore considered that particular local need for the scale, size and type of homes proposed has yet to be sufficiently justified.
I would therefore suggest that it would be useful for the applicant or you as their agent, for example to undertake an assessment of existing housing stock in the village and/ or parish and the demographic characteristics (which could include household composition and underlying housing demand) and also to assess whether there have been any permissions granted (but not implemented) in the area which could help to meet local need. It is suggested that the scope of any survey work is agreed with the Local Planning Authority and the Parish Council at the outset. This should consider whether there is a requirement for units of a particular type and size in this settlement and in this location.
In addition it is also considered that the submission would be contrary to the Council’s housing mix policy CN3 and that insufficient information has been submitted to justify the mix of housing proposed and lack of house types and sizes being proposed to address local requirements.
Therefore should you wish to consider the above concerns in addition to the highway concerns raised I am happy to agree to an extension of time in accordance with Section 34 (2)(c) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015. I would suggest an extension of time be agreed for a further 6 weeks to allow you time to submit the information sought and in order to allow the Local Planning Authority time to consider the information submitted. The new extended determination date would be 22 September 2016.
1 I am away from the office in the next couple of week and I would therefore advise that any amended or additional information to be submitted should also be sent to my manager Sue Tarvit, so that (in my absence )she can carry out any re-consultation required and avoid any unnecessary delays in the process.
I look forward to hearing from you by noon tomorrow as to whether you are in agreement to the proposed extension of time.
Regards Anne
Anne Wilkinson Senior Planning Officer Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council www.basingstoke.gov.uk Follow us on Twitter @twitter.com/BasingstokeGov
From: Kristina Wall [mailto Sent: 10 August 2016 10:55 To: Anne Wilkinson Subject: RE: 16/02187/FUL - Nately Scures House - update
**** PLEASE NOTE: This message has originated from a source external to Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council, and has been scanned for viruses. Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council reserves the right to store and monitor e-mails ****
**** PLEASE NOTE: This message has originated from a source external to Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council, and has been scanned for viruses. Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council reserves the right to store and monitor e-mails ****
Thank you for your email.
Just so you are aware our highways consultants have spoken with Highways and agreed a way forward and so are progressing this work as soon as possible. It appears that their concerns can be addressed.
Kind regards,
Kristina
Kristina Wall BSc(Hons) MSc MRTPI Senior Planner
2
APPENDIX 3
Estate Agent confirmation of housing need of this scale and size within this location (Strutt & Parker and McCarthy Holden)
Grounds of Appeal Statement 38 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire From: Sam Holden Date: 14 September 2016 at 17:45:40 BST To: Riorden Welby Subject: Property in and around Hook
Dear Mr Welby
I was lovely to meet with you and talk through the market and the need for different types of property in Hook and the immediate surrounding area. As you know Hook has a very active and family focused community and we have found that there is a lack of housing that provides quality and well sized accommodation to fit the needs of the local buyers. The greatest shortage is for properties under £1.0m and offering accommodation between 2500sqft and 3500sqft.
If I can be of use in any future way please do not hesitate to let me know
Kind regards
Samantha Holden Director
HARTLEY ROW PARK Fleet Road | Hartley Wintney | Hampshire | RG27 8ED WELCOME TO HARTLEY ROW PARK, A STUNNING COLLECTION OF HOMES IN THE RURAL VILLAGE IDYLL OF HARTLEY WINTNEY IN HAMPSHIRE.
AVAILABLE AT THIS EXCLUSIVE DEVELOPMENT ARE HOUSES RANGING FROM TWO TO FIVE BEDROOMS, MEANING THERE IS A HOME HERE TO SUIT EVERYONE. AS WITH ALL BEWLEY HOMES’ PROPERTIES, THE QUALITY OF DESIGN AND WORKMANSHIP IS SECOND TO NONE.
Somewhere you will be proud to call home Hartley Row Park
NESTLING BETWEEN TWO AREAS OF OUTSTANDING NATURAL BEAUTY AS WELL AS THE SOUTH DOWNS NATIONAL PARK, HARTLEY WINTNEY IS A HIGHLY SOUGHT AFTER LOCATION
Within walking distance, you’ll find an infant school and junior street stores for your retail pleasure, as well as its own Hartley Wintney is conveniently placed just a few school, a post office, doctor’s surgery, dental clinic and theatre, the Harlington. minutes’ drive away from the M3 with its links to London hairdressing salon. The village also boasts a football club, golf and Southampton. The village is served by Winchfield course and commons, plus West Green House, a neo-classical What’s more, the larger towns of Camberley, where there Railway Station, which is just over two miles away. From garden which plays host to outdoor music events in the summer. is a Marks & Spencer superstore, Reading and Guildford here, you can reach London Waterloo in approximately are 7, 12 and 23 miles away respectively, for when you 54 minutes. Other destinations include Basingstoke, As well as two pubs, Hartley Wintney offers coffee shops, fancy shopping, leisure and culture on a larger scale. Wimbledon and Clapham Junction. From Blackwater light lunch venues, and restaurants to while away in style. station, 15 minutes away, you can reach Reading, King John’s Castle at North Warnborough is thought to Guildford and even Gatwick. The neighbouring town of Fleet, around two miles away, has date back to the 13th century, the ruins of which stand by a number of supermarkets for your convenience, including a canal within a unique conservation area. Basingstoke For international travel, Hartley Wintney is around half Morrisons, Waitrose and Sainsbury’s. There, you’ll also find Canal, where you can fish, cycle and take leisurely walks, an hour’s drive away from Heathrow Airport and an the Hart Shopping Centre, which offers more than 40 high runs through the town. hour from Gatwick. Computer generated image indicative only. WELCOME TO Hartley Row Park
Home may be where the heart is, but soon Hartley Row Park will be where the home is.
This charming collection of properties is set in an attractive crescent shape, with mature trees and shrubs adding the finishing touches to the location. The homes themselves, meanwhile, are excellently appointed and exquisitely finished, with spacious living areas perfect for entertaining.
The kitchens have been fitted with all the appliances you’ll need for modern life, along with ample cupboard space for your convenience. You will also find chic white sanitaryware in each of the bathrooms, creating a crisp contemporary style. Finally, of the choice of homes available, some feature single or double garages. BEWLEY HOMES About us
Whatever the price range or house style, each Bewley home is built in a carefully selected location and designed to complement its environment, while meeting the practical requirements of everyday living. Quality and imagination combined with meticulous attention to exterior and interior detail are the key factors that have enabled Bewley Homes to secure its strong reputation for excellence. Bewley Homes promotes environmentally responsible designs and specifies building techniques that typically score in the top ten per cent for energy efficiency. The company also has a clearly defined policy regarding landscaping and protecting the environment. The company firmly believes in working with the local communities to achieve the best planning and design solutions and its portfolio of award-winning developments has played a crucial role in building relationships and confidence. As a result Bewley Homes is recognised and respected by its purchasers and planning authorities for outstanding quality, innovation and development excellence.
The many awards and commendations the company has received demonstrate its diverse skill across a range of disciplines including luxury and starter homes, restoration and exterior design. These accolades, however, are not just for the design and quality of Bewley Homes but also for the high level of customer care, which draws praise from purchasers and the house-building industry.
Whilst these particulars are prepared with due care for the convenience of intending purchasers, the information contained herein is intended as a preliminary guide only. They do not form part of any contract and the developer reserves the right to vary as necessary to complete the works. All designs may vary a little according to plot and all details should be checked at the sales office.
Image indicative only. Charities
The company also supports a variety of charities through corporate events and fundraising activities including Guide Dogs for the Blind, Kent, Surrey and Sussex Air Ambulance and the Arrhythmia Alliance.
Guide Dogs for the Blind Kent, Surrey and Sussex Air Ambulance Arrhythmia Alliance FLEET ROAD | HARTLEY WINTNEY | HAMPSHIRE | RG27 8ED
EVERSLEY AD T RO E B D E R OR R A TF T C HAR S SANDHURST K H M3 N G VENUE E I HARTLEY RACKLEY A L H B L CAMBERLEY E L C A A N R R ROW PARK E E A30 T B D 3 N 0 A HAZELEY 1 KL 1 OA
F A30 30 L MATTINGLEY A E E FRIMLEY T T W GREE A327 N RO N AD R A Hartley O S M3 A A E L Wintney A325 D D A P
O T R
N N
O Hartley U BASINGSTOKE
D O
N M O Wintney E A327 L N
A L M3 FARNBOROUGH N E A323
E
R A G 32
3
E
G N FLEET
LE A B L
E CHURCH A331 L H A
N C DOGMERSFIELD
E R A325 U
SA H CHURCH
N C DY LA CROOKHAM NE NORMANDY ODIHAM ALDERSHOT HARTLEY A287 ASH A30
M ROW PARK IT CH EL L AV E N E U CRONDALL A287 E N WINCHESTER TONGHAM A L
H C R U H C LONG SUTTON A31 FARNHAM
Local map Area map Maps not to scale
SAT NAV: RG27 8ED
Inhurst House | Brimpton Road | Baughurst | Hampshire | RG26 5JJ Telephone: +44 (0) 118 970 8200 | Facsimile: +44 (0) 118 970 8202 | Email: [email protected]
www.bewley.co.uk Plot 1 Wellington Gardens Heckfield, Hampshire Plot 1 Wellington Gardens Premier 10 year structural warranty. Heckfield, Hampshire The house is finished and ready for occupation RG27 0JL creating an exceptional opportunity to acquire a new dwelling which creates a careful blend between traditional styling with an exacting An outstanding brand new specification designed for modern lifestyles in a detached house within a small semi-rural yet accessible location. semi-rural hamlet Location Wellington Gardens occupies a discreet position Hook 4 miles (London Waterloo 53 minutes), within the semi-rural settlement of Heckfield Basingstoke 11 miles, Reading 10.5 miles, which is located approximately 4 miles to M4 (Junction 11) 6 miles the north of Hook surrounded by many miles of open countryside. Hook is a small town Entrance hall | Sitting room | Dining room | Study particularly favoured for commuter routes with Kitchen/breakfast room | Utility room | Master a mainline station serving London Waterloo. bedroom with en suite bath/shower room The larger regional centres of Basingstoke and Guest bedroom with en suite shower room Reading are within reasonable driving distance 2 Further double bedrooms | Family bathroom and provide a large range of shopping and Gated entrance | Driveway with parking recreational facilities. Double garage | Landscaped front garden The renowned Wellington College is within Lawned rear garden with large patio 9 miles. Predicted EPC rating band B Outside The property The house is approached over a brick pavior An exceptional brand new detached house drive and set back behind double five bar gates constructed by Westbuild Homes Limited to which open to the landscaped front garden a high specification using traditional brick and with plenty of parking and leading to the double block construction. garage. A pedestrian gate to the side opens The light and spacious accommodation to the rear garden with an area of seeded is arranged over two floors and in brief lawn. The extensive patio is accessed from incorporates the following specification. double doors in the either the sitting room or Open fireplace (designed for log burner to be the kitchen. The property is mainly enclosed by fitted) in sitting room, oak flooring (engineered) close boarded fencing. to hall, dining room, study and cloakroom, fitted carpets to sitting room, stairs, hall, bedrooms and bathrooms, oak internal doors, ash window boards and staircase with contemporary glass panels, ‘Optiplan’ painted shaker style kitchen with Silestone work surfaces and island top, Rangemaster dual fuel range cooker with concealed extractor, wine fridge, full height fridge and freezer, dishwasher, sanitaryware by Duravit with Hansgrohe brassware and shower fittings, oil fired central heating, fitted alarm system, private sewage treatment plant (shared between both plots) with reed bed soakaway. Reservation Procedure A reservation fee of £1,500 is required to reserve the property on the basis that the buyer will be expected to exchange contracts within 28 days from receipt of draft documents. Westbuild Homes reserve the right to review the position should contracts not have been exchanged within the designated period and reserve the right to withdraw the contract and retain a proportion of the reservation fee to cover administrative costs.
Health & Safety The house is prepared for occupation, however, there are still builders near the site working on the adjacent property. Care should be taken to remain on the site of Plot 1. General Local Authority: Hart District Council Floorplans (01252 622122). Main House internal area 2,221 sq ft (206 sq m) Services: Mains water, electricity, oil fired Garage internal area 392 sq ft (36 sq m) For identification purposes only. central heating, private treatment plant (serving both plots 1 and 2). The cost for running the Waste Water Treatment Plant are in the region of Sky Sky Sky Utility £350 per plot per annum. Dining Room Agent’s note: Please note that Wellington 4.15 x 3.47 Sky Sky Sky Gardens is a marketing name for the Utility 13'7" x 11'5" Main Bedroom Dining Room 5.46 x 3.37 development. Purchasers will be invited to Kitchen 17'11" x 11'1" 5.48 x 4.71 4.15 x 3.47 put forward a new house name, which once 13'7" x 11'5" Main Bedroom (Maximum) 18'0" x 15'5" 5.46 x 3.37 Bedroom 2 approved by the council, will form the postal Kitchen (Maximum) 17'11" x 11'1" 5.48 x 4.71 6.31 x 3.79 address. (Maximum)Study 20'8" x 12'5" 18'0" x 15'5" 3.78 x 2.67 Bedroom 2 (Maximum) (Maximum) 12'5" x 8'9" 6.31 x 3.79 Sky Directions Study 20'8" x 12'5" From Junction 5 of the M3 take the turning 3.78 x 2.67 (Maximum) 12'5" x 8'9" Sky off the roundabout towards Hook and at the Bedroom 4 Bedroom 3 next roundabout turn right signposted towards Sitting Room 4.45 x 3.05 6.25 x 4.45 4.45 x 3.08 14'7" x 10'0" Hartley Wintney. Follow this road continuing 20'6" x 14'7" Bedroom14'7" 4 x 10'1" (Maximum) Bedroom 3 straight over the next two roundabouts onto Sitting Room 4.45 x 3.05 6.25 x 4.45 4.45 x 3.08 F/P 14'7" x 10'0" Reading road (B3349) towards Rotherwick, 20'6" x 14'7" 14'7" x 10'1" (Maximum) Heckfield and Mattingley. Continue along this road for a few miles following through the hamlet F/P of Hound Green and past The New Inn on the Boiler First Floor right hand side following which turn immediately right onto a small slip road. Wellington Gardens Boiler First Floor can then be found after a few hundred yards on Garage the right hand side. 6.21 x 5.87 20'4" x 19'3" Garage 6.21 x 5.87 20'4" x 19'3"
Ground Floor Odiham The position & size of doors, windows, appliances and other features are approximate only. 82 High Street, Odiham, Hampshire RG29 1LP Denotes restricted head height Ground Floor 01256 702892 The position & size of doors, windows,© ehouse. appliances Unauthorised and other reproduction features prohibited.are approximate Drawing only. ref. dig/8257772/NJD Denotes restricted head height [email protected] © ehouse. Unauthorised reproduction prohibited. Drawing ref. dig/8257772/NJD struttandparker.com IMPORTANT NOTICE Strutt & Parker LLP gives notice that: 1. These particulars do not constitute an offer or contract or part thereof. 2. All descriptions, photographs and plans are for guidance only and should not be relied upon as statements or representations of fact. All measurements are approximate and not necessarily to scale. Any prospective purchaser must satisfy themselves of the correctness of the information within the particulars by inspection 60 offices across England and Scotland, or otherwise. 3. Strutt & Parker LLP does not have any authority to give any representations or warranties whatsoever in relation to this property (including but not limited to planning/building regulations), nor can it enter into any contract on behalf of the Vendor. 4. Strutt & Parker LLP does not accept responsibility for any expenses incurred by prospective purchasers in inspecting properties which have been sold, let or withdrawn. 5. If there is anything of including Prime Central London particular importance to you, please contact this office and Strutt & Parker will try to have the information checked for you. Photographs taken June 2016. Particulars prepared June 2016. Odiham office
Strutt & Parker LLP 82 High Street Odiham Hook Hampshire RG29 1LP Telephone +44 (0) 1256 702892
Mr R Welby Nately Scures House Scures Hill Nately Scures Hook 7th September 2016 Hampshire RG27 9JR
Dear Mr Welby,
Nately Scures House
Further to our recent telephone conversation, I write to provide you with our opinion on the need for 4 bedroom houses within the local area including Nately Scures, which is only 2 miles from our office in Odiham.
There is a clear and strong demand for family houses both new build and second hand within the local area.
I attach the details of one of the two new builds (Gable Lodge) in Heckfield which went under offer within a couple of weeks of launching in June this year. We arranged 27 viewings and received multiple offers.
We are also marketing two new build sites locally, Hartley Row Park in Hartley Wintney (brochure attached) and Montfort Place in Odiham. The combined sites involve over 100 units, with 39 units being 4 bedrooms or more, of which over 40% are already sold and of the remaining units some are not yet even built.
We have applicants on an ongoing basis that are registered looking for 4 bedroom properties and demand outstrips supply.
I hope the above illustrates the requirement for more 4 bedroom houses to be built in this locality.
Please do not hesitate to contact me should this not be sufficient for your purposes.
Yours sincerely,
Phillip S. Armstrong Partner
Regulated by RICS
Strutt & Parker LLP is a limited liability partnership and is registered in England and Wales with registration number OC334522. A list of members’ names is open to inspection at our registered office: 13 Hill Street London W1J 5LQ.
APPENDIX 4
Officer Report for 15/04234/FUL
Grounds of Appeal Statement 39 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
APPENDIX 5
Appeal decision for APP/H1705/A/14/2224450
Grounds of Appeal Statement 40 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire
Appeal Decision Site visit made on 3 November 2014 by Robert Parker BSc (Hons) Dip TP MRTPI an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government
Decision date: 9 December 2014
Appeal Ref: APP/H1705/A/14/2224450 Oakfield Farm Court, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, RG27 9JR • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr I Donaldson against the decision of Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council. • The application Ref 13/01460/FUL, dated 12 August 2013, was refused by notice dated 22 July 2014. • The development proposed is erection of new house and garage.
Decision
1. The appeal is allowed and planning permission is granted for erection of new house and garage at Oakfield Farm Court, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, RG27 9JR in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref 13/01460/FUL, dated 12 August 2013, subject to the conditions set out in the attached schedule.
Main Issue
2. The main issue in this case is whether, with due regard to the development plan, the National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) and the housing land supply of the Council, the appeal scheme would be an acceptable form of sustainable development.
Reasons
3. The appeal relates to a parcel of land to the side of Oakfield Cottage which fronts onto the A30 between Basingstoke and Hook. The site lies outside of the Settlement Policy Boundaries identified by saved Policy D5 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Adopted Local Plan 1996-2011 (LP). It is therefore considered to be in the countryside for planning policy purposes. Saved Policy D6 of the LP restricts residential development in the countryside to replacement dwellings, conversions of existing buildings, affordable housing on rural exception sites and the development of brownfield sites in sustainable locations. The proposal does not fall into any of these categories and therefore it conflicts with saved Policy D6 of the LP.
4. The case officer report concedes that the Council cannot demonstrate a five year supply of housing as required by paragraph 47 of the Framework. In light of this admission, and in the absence of any substantive evidence to show that the situation has changed in the interim, I cannot be confident that a five year
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate Appeal Decision APP/H1705/A/14/2224450
supply of housing land can be demonstrated. In such circumstances, paragraph 49 of the Framework states that relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date. Thus saved Policy D6 of the LP is out-of-date.
5. Paragraph 14 of the Framework sets out a presumption in favour of sustainable development. For decision taking this means that where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting permission unless: (i) any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole; or (ii) specific policies in the Framework indicate that development should be restricted. My assessment will therefore be made in the context of the presumption set out in paragraph 14.
6. The Council contends that the proposal would conflict with paragraph 55 of the Framework which states that local planning authorities should avoid isolated new homes in the countryside unless there are special circumstances. The term ‘isolated’ is not defined but to my mind it has two distinct dimensions; firstly whether the site is physically remote and secondly whether it has easy access to services and facilities.
7. The appeal site lies within a ribbon of residential development alongside a main road. The pattern of development is described by the local planning authority as sporadic but I noted during my visit that the built form is continuous for a stretch of approximately 500 metres. The plot is flanked on either side by existing buildings and from the road it has the appearance of a natural infill opportunity. This being the case, I do not consider that it would be reasonable to describe the site as isolated in a physical sense.
8. There is a bus service operating along the A30 which provides access to Basingstoke, Hook, Odiham, Fleet and Farnborough. The service runs approximately hourly from Monday to Saturday. Whilst there are no services in the evenings or on Sundays, it would be practical to use the bus to access shops and facilities and for regular journeys to and from school or work. The Council has expressed some concerns regarding the location of the eastbound bus stop. However, having walked the route to the bus stop during my visit, I do not consider that this issue would be a significant disincentive to using public transport.
9. It is relevant to note that at a public inquiry relating to a previous planning proposal it was agreed 1 that the site was accessible to employment, education, retail, community and other facilities for the purposes of emerging Policy D11. I am told that this policy became the current saved Policy D9 which permits development on brownfield sites in sustainable locations outside Settlement Policy Boundaries. No explanation has been provided by the Council as to why its stance has changed in relation to the sustainability credentials of the site.
10. My overall finding is that the appeal site is not isolated, either physically or in terms of its accessibility to services and facilities. Future occupiers of the dwelling would have a real choice about how they travel and the opportunity to use public transport for everyday trips. As such, there would be no conflict with paragraph 55 of the Framework and the need to demonstrate special circumstances does not apply.
1 Paragraph 8 of Inspector’s decision letter – APP/H1705/A/04/1145268 www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate 2 Appeal Decision APP/H1705/A/14/2224450
11. At the heart of the Framework lies the presumption in favour of sustainable development. This requires consideration of all three dimensions: economic, social and environmental. These roles are mutually dependant and should be jointly sought to achieve sustainable development.
12. The new dwelling would add to the local housing stock and make a positive, albeit small, contribution towards reducing the current deficit of housing in the area. This is a clear social benefit to which I attach considerable weight. The development would also provide employment during construction and the expenditure associated with an additional household would support the local economy. These benefits would be very modest but they would nevertheless weigh in favour of the proposal.
13. The Council has raised no issues regarding the effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area. From what I saw on site I have no reason to disagree. No other environmental harm has been drawn to my attention, apart from the issue of whether the proposal would increase the reliance on the private car which I have already addressed above.
14. Accordingly, I conclude that the appeal site is not isolated and as such there would be no conflict with paragraph 55 of the Framework. Although the proposal would be at variance with saved Policy D6 of the LP, the adverse impacts of building a dwelling on this particular site outside the Settlement Policy Boundaries would not significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits I have identified in respect of housing supply and the local economy. Consequently, I am satisfied that the proposal would be an acceptable form of sustainable development.
Planning Obligation
15. The submitted planning obligation (S106) aims to secure a range of financial contributions. I have considered its provisions in the context of advice in the Framework. Paragraph 204 states that obligations must meet a series of tests: necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; directly related to the development; and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. These tests have statutory force by dint of the CIL Regulations 2.
16. The context for contributions in this particular instance is set by Policy C1 of the LP which states that development will be permitted only where there are, or will be, adequate infrastructure and community facilities. Where provision is inadequate developers will be required to provide the infrastructure and community facilities necessary to allow the development to proceed.
17. The bulk of the monies would be put towards the Basingstoke Environmental Strategy for Transport (“BEST”) for expenditure in the vicinity of the site or within the A30 East corridor. Given the importance of public transport to making this a sustainable site, it is reasonable to expect that monies would be necessary to support bus services and to provide improved infrastructure along the route. I noted that there is scope to encourage public transport use, for example by providing facilities such as real-time passenger information. On this basis I am satisfied that the transport contribution would accord with the requirements of Regulation 122 and the Framework.
2 Regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate 3 Appeal Decision APP/H1705/A/14/2224450
18. Despite being given the opportunity to do so, the Council has provided no justification as to why contributions to community facilities, playing fields and allotments are necessary to make the development acceptable. There is no information before me on the extent of any existing deficiencies and I have not been provided with any indication of where the monies would be spent. It is insufficient to rely upon the figures set out in the Interim Planning Guidance on ‘Section 106 Planning Obligations & Community Infrastructure’. The development plan makes clear that contributions will only be appropriate where existing provision is inadequate. Given the failure to identify where these inadequacies lie, I have attached no weight to the contributions.
19. The S106 also includes a requirement for the developer to provide a Broadband and Telecommunications Plan which would secure broadband provision to the development with data rates in excess of 512 kilobits per second. ICT infrastructure is referred to in Policy C1 and it seems to me that access to broadband would meet sustainability objectives by encouraging home working and thereby reducing the need to travel. As such, the obligation accords with the tests of Regulation 122 and the Framework.
Conditions
20. The Council has put forward a list of suggested conditions which have been agreed by the appellant. I have considered these against the tests set out in the Planning Practice Guidance and have amended the wording where necessary to ensure that the conditions are precise and to avoid duplication.
21. I have attached a condition requiring the development to be carried out in accordance with the approved plans, for the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning. Conditions are also required to secure details of materials, hard and soft landscaping, boundary treatments and hedgerow protection during construction, in the interests of preserving the character and appearance of the area.
22. I have also attached a condition to secure the parking and turning areas shown on the plans and bicycle parking provision. These are necessary in the interests of highway safety and to encourage use of sustainable transport modes. A condition is also required in relation to refuse and recycling, to ensure satisfactory storage and collection arrangements.
23. Further conditions are necessary to control the timing of construction works and deliveries and to secure a Construction Method Statement, in order to protect the living conditions of local residents. I have also imposed conditions requiring the first floor windows in the side elevations of the dwelling to be obscurely glazed and restricting additional openings, to prevent loss of privacy for neighbouring occupiers.
24. The Council has suggested a condition requiring the garage to be built in accordance with the approved plans, restricting its use to the parking of vehicles and bicycles and preventing future conversion. Such a condition is unreasonable and unnecessary, given that there is adequate driveway parking and any future material change of use would require planning permission.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate 4 Appeal Decision APP/H1705/A/14/2224450
Conclusion
25. For the reasons given above I conclude that the appeal should be allowed.
Robert Parker
INSPECTOR
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate 5 Appeal Decision APP/H1705/A/14/2224450
SCHEDULE OF CONDITIONS
1) The development hereby permitted shall begin not later than three years from the date of this decision. 2) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Drawing nos 6091.01A, 6091-02A, 6091- 03B, 6091-04A, 6091-05A, 6091.06B and 6091-07. 3) No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the dwelling and garage hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. 4) No development shall take place until details of the materials to be used for hard and paved surfacing have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved surfacing shall be completed before the dwelling is first occupied. 5) No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority a scheme of landscaping which shall specify species, planting sizes, spacing and numbers of trees/shrubs to be planted. The details submitted pursuant to this condition shall include provision for the retention of the hedgerow along the eastern boundary and a maintenance programme detailing all operations to be carried out in order to allow successful establishment of planting.
The approved landscaping works shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the first occupation of the dwelling or the completion of development, whichever is sooner. Any trees or plants which, within a period of 5 years from the date of planting, die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, to be agreed in writing by the local planning authority. 6) No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority a plan showing all boundary treatments and details of the design and materials for all walls and fencing. The boundary treatments shall be erected in accordance with the approved details before the dwelling is first occupied. 7) No development shall take place until details of temporary protection measures for the existing hedgerow along the eastern boundary have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved measures shall be put in place prior to any works commencing and they shall be maintained for the duration of the construction period. 8) No development shall take place until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall provide for:
(i) the parking and turning of vehicles of site operatives and visitors (all to be established within one week of the commencement of development);
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate 6 Appeal Decision APP/H1705/A/14/2224450
(ii) loading and unloading of plant and materials; (iii) storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development; (iv) wheel washing facilities or an explanation why they are not necessary; (v) the erection and maintenance of security hoarding including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing, where appropriate; (vi) measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction; (vii) a scheme for recycling and disposing of waste resulting from construction work; and (viii) the management and coordination of deliveries of plant and materials and the disposing of waste resulting from construction activities so as to avoid undue interference with the operation of the public highway, particularly during the Monday to Friday AM peak (08.00 to 09.00) and PM peak (16.30 to 18.00) periods. 9) The dwelling hereby permitted shall not be occupied until details of a scheme for the storage (prior to disposal) of refuse and recycling, and details of a refuse/recycling collection point provided not more than 15 metres carrying distance from a highway which is a carriageway have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. The approved details shall be fully implemented before occupation of the dwelling and shall be thereafter maintained. 10) The dwelling hereby permitted shall not be occupied until the parking and turning areas shown on the approved plans have been laid out and surfaced in a material to be first agreed under condition 4. The parking provision shall include secure bicycle parking for 2 long and 1 short stay places. 11) No work relating to the construction of the development hereby approved, including preparation prior to operations, or internal painting or fitting out, shall take place before the hours of 0730 nor after 1800 Monday to Friday, before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays nor on Sundays or bank holidays. 12) No deliveries of construction materials or plant and machinery and no removal of any spoil from the site shall take place before the hours of 0730 nor after 1800 Monday to Friday, before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays nor on Sundays or bank holidays. 13) The windows at first floor in the east and west elevations of the dwelling hereby permitted shall be glazed with obscured glass and shall be permanently maintained in that condition. 14) Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no additional openings, other than those shown on the approved plans, shall be inserted at first floor in the east and west elevations of the dwelling.
www.planningportal.gov.uk/planninginspectorate 7
APPENDIX 6
Landscape Officer comments
Grounds of Appeal Statement 41 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire LANDSCAPE TEAM RESPONSE PLANNING APPLICATION REFERENCE: 16/02187/FUL SITE: Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures
Anne
I refer to your memo dated 27 June 2016, regarding the above.
Comments of: Landscape Team Comments relate to the following/document no(s): Planning Statement Proposed Site Plan 168_P_10_01 P1 Proposed Elevations
Recommendation:
Application: Acceptable, subject to the following conditions: Details of soft and hard landscape details should be provided to include new tree and shrub planting, fencing and surfacing.
Comments: The site is located along the A30 between Basingstoke and Newnham, within Nately Scures, outside of the settlement policy boundary. Consent has already been given for the erection of a single house to the west of this proposal, still in the grounds of Nately Scures House.
Existing Environs Nately Scures is a small linear settlement, with a number of properties located within large plots with a mature vegetation structure, set back some distance from the road. The area immediately around the site, is well vegetated with extensive areas of woodland extending further into the countryside, creating an enclosed character within the area. A smaller field exists beyond the well vegetated southern boundary to Nately Scures House, and is contained by woodland or hedgerows on all sides.
Nately Scures House is a large property set within well vegetated grounds. It is bound by vegetation and a close boarded fence along the road frontage, with woodland extending between the road and property and along all other boundaries. The views of the tree team should be sought in relation to the importance of the trees.
The grounds to the house comprise a mixture of lawn, rougher cut grass, ornamental and native trees and a large shed. The land falls to the south away from the house, however, there are some slopes with steep gradients that appear to have been engineered.
Existing Landscape Character There are two significant influences on the wider character of the area, the A30 and the local pattern of development. The A30 is a dual carriageway, passing immediately in front of the property to the north, and limits any sense of remoteness or rural character. It is a very busy road with a proliferation of street lights and signage that impose a more urban influence.
Secondly, the existing pattern of development within this part of Nately Scures includes a number of larger dwellings/buildings that have subsequently been subdivided into smaller plots and have been developed. This exists to the immediate east of the site within The Baredown and residential development within a wooded setting exists to the west of the site. The property which was granted consent recently (15/04234/FUL) is located to the west of this application, beyond which are a number of other properties along the main road, set in verdant grounds. It is considered that the area has a leafy residential character, distinct from the countryside beyond.
The character of the site itself is considered to relate strongly to the settlement of Nately Scures itself rather than the wider countryside. The vegetation within and surrounding the site creates a strong sense of enclosure, separating it from the wider countryside. The features within the gardens are also more akin to a settlement character. There are a number of engineered slopes, with steep gradients that do not reflect the more naturally flowing slopes within the surrounding countryside. There are numerous trees within the site that are ornamental and fruiting species that are more characteristic of a residential setting rather than that of the countryside.
With respect to the borough Landscape Character Assessment, this site lies within the Loddon and Lyde Valley and there are few key characteristics of this that relate directly to this site, except for acknowledging the fact that the rural nature of the character area in general is influenced by road corridors.
Existing Visibility Visibility of the site is limited. The woodland and vegetation around the boundaries generally limits views to glimpses from the section along the frontage. Aside from pedestrians, the speed of traffic is likely to make these views fleeting.
The proposal The proposal is for the construction of three new dwellings to the south of Nately Scures House, which are to be accessed by extending the drive from the recently consented development to the west. The proposal will require the removal of a number of trees and the views of the Tree Team should be considered relating to their importance. No details have been provided to detail any soft landscaping, fencing or surfacing.
Effects on Landscape Character Having reviewed this application, it is not considered that the proposal would result in an adverse effect on the landscape character. The character of the area is strongly influenced by the road corridor and properties, including infill properties in adjacent developments. It is considered that this proposal reflects that pattern and would do so without significant effect on the character of the wider area. Additionally, the existing planting on the property boundary is robust and is shown to remain and therefore it is not considered that any significant effects on the wider character beyond the site will arise.
The proposal is contained within the grounds of the existing house and it is considered that form a landscape perspective, the grounds are large enough to accommodate the level of additional development – each new property would be set within its own plot with gaps between each new dwelling that would allow the vegetated character of the area to remain. The views of the tree team should be taken into account here to ensure that any likely effects on the physical health of the trees are acceptable. Subject to these views, the vegetated character of the site would remain.
With respect to effects on the character of the site itself, it has a character that relates more closely to the settlement and the more manicured gardens of properties within it. This is evident with the ornamental trees, the shed and engineered slopes within the garden. Even though a large part of the grass is cut longer, it is considered that this relates more closely to the settlement character rather that of the wider countryside.
In addition, the proposed properties would be located on lower ground and they are relatively low in height. It is considered that both of these factors would also result in a reduced effect on the character of the area.
Therefore, it is considered that there will be limited effect on the landscape character of the area and that subject to the views of the views of the tree team and through a planting condition that the intrinsic vegetated character of the area would remain. Similarly, the countryside character could still remain with appropriately designed boundary treatments.
Effects on visual amenity As noted above, there is a limited area from which the site can be seen and as the buildings are set back in the plot behind the existing building and therefore there are not likely to be any significant and adverse visual effect.
Mitigation It is considered that any residual effects on landscape character and visual amenity could be mitigated through appropriate soft landscape proposals to replace lost trees. Details of surfacing and fencing materials should also be provided and should be more akin to a countryside character. For example, these could include post and rail fences/gates, and gravel/shingle driveways.
Key Issues: Impact on landscape character and visual amenity in accordance with Policy EM1.
I trust that the above is clear, however, if you have any queries please contact me.
Regards The Landscape Team
APPENDIX 7
Email from case officer to Bell Cornwell LLP on 22 September 2016
Grounds of Appeal Statement 42 Nately Scures House, Scures Hill, Nately Scures, Hook, Hampshire Kristina Wall
From: Anne Wilkinson < Sent: 22 September 2016 15:10 To: Kristina Wall Subject: RE: 16/02187/FUL - Nately Scures House
Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged
Hi Kristina,
Thank you for the email below which is currently being considered.
In relation to your query about the community infrastructure contribution the relevant officer has advised as follows:
“The figure is what is generated by the development: 3x4bed x £1874.96 (the figure appears to be wrong on the scoping response sheet - I will amend this to match the approved fees & charges on-line) = £5624.88.
This figure was used as all landscape projects are estimates of the cost, and when this was calculated it was only slightly above the rate. By asking around different landscaping companies, the parish will be able to fit the project within that budget.
The rates used to calculate the project were based on a mid-range contract rate as follows: Grade, cultivate & seed 1600m2 @ £1.26/m2 = £2000 Apply topsoil to a depth of 100mm to create a level surface = 160m3 @ £25/m3 = £4000/ Total estimated cost = £6000”
Regard Anne
Anne Wilkinson Senior Planning Officer Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council www.basingstoke.gov.uk Follow us on Twitter @twitter.com/BasingstokeGov
From: Kristina Wall [mailto Sent: 15 September 2016 09:44 To: Anne Wilkinson Subject: 16/02187/FUL - Nately Scures House
**** PLEASE NOTE: This message has originated from a source external to Basingstoke & Deane Borough Council, and has been scanned for viruses. Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council reserves the right to store and monitor e-mails ****
1