Minor and Other Application

Cttee: 14/03/2012 Item No. 01

Application no: BDB/75375 For Details and Plans Click here

Site Address Bullsdown Farm, German Road, Bramley, Tadley, RG26 5AR Proposal Conversion of farm buildings to 3 no. four bedroom live-work dwellings, erection of 2 no. two bedroom live-work dwellings following demolition of existing outbuildings, conversion of 1 no. farm building to car ports and work unit with associated parking and alterations to existing access road

Registered: 08/11/2011 Expiry Date: 03/01/2012 Type of Full planning Case Officer: Robert Franks Application: permission 01256 845681 Applicant: Mr Hare The Lord Agent: Hives Architects LLP Douro 1991 Settlement Ward: Bramley and Ward Member(s): Cllr R M Jayawardena Sherfield-on-Loddon Cllr R P Vaughan* Parish: Bramley OS Grid Reference: 466312,158689

Recommendation: Approve subject to Legal Agreement

RECOMMENDATION:

It is RECOMMENDED that the application be APPROVED subject to the applicant entering into a legal agreement (in accordance with Circular 05/05 and Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 and Saved Policies E1, C1, A2, C7 and C9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011) between the applicant and the Borough and County Councils to secure community and infrastructure contributions and planning obligations relating to:  Basingstoke Environmental Strategy for Transport,  Open Space and Playing Fields,  Community Facilities; and  Restrictions relating to the use and occupancy of the ‘work’ space approved. Should the requirements set out above not be satisfactorily secured, then the Head of Planning and Transport be delegated to REFUSE permission for appropriate reasons.

On completion of the legal agreement(s) the Head of Planning and Transport be delegated to grant planning permission subject to the conditions detailed at the back of the Committee Report.

Reasons for Approval:

1. The proposed development is of an appropriate design and means of conversion, relates to the surrounding development in a sympathetic manner and would not cause an adverse impact on the setting of the Grade II listed buildings, curtilage listed buildings or any buildings or features of historic or architectural interest and as such complies with Planning Policy Statement 5 ‘Planning for the Historic Environment’;

1 of 72

Saved Policy E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011; and the Councils Supplementary Planning Guidance – 'The Historic Environment: Listed Buildings’ (2003). 2. The proposed development would be of an appropriate design, form and layout in order to respond to the local context of buildings. As such the proposed development would be in compliance to with Saved Policies E1 i), ii), E2 and E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council Local Plan 1996-2011 and Planning Policy Statement 5 ‘Planning for the Historic Environment’ (PPS5). 3. Taking into account the level of existing alternative provision of the locality; limited prospect of achieving a sole employment development; the constraints imposed by the proximity of neighbouring residential land uses; the desire to preserve and therefore re-use the listed buildings; and in addition to the modest employment benefit proposed by the creation of live/work units, it is considered the specifics of this development meet the aims and intentions of Planning Policy Statement 4: Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth; and Saved Policy EC4 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. 4. The proposed development respects the landscape character of its surroundings and as such complies with Planning Policy Statement 1 'Delivering Sustainable Communities' (PPS1) and Saved Policies E1 and E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. 5. The proposed development would not result in an undue loss of privacy or cause undue overlooking, overshadowing, overbearing or noise and disturbance impacts to neighbouring properties and as such complies with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. 6. The development would not cause an adverse impact on highway safety and adequate parking would be provided to serve the proposed development and as such the proposal complies with Saved Policy A1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. 7. It is considered that the proposal is acceptable in ecological terms and as such the proposed development would comply with Saved Policy E7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 and the Government guidance contained within Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation. 8. The proposal would not increase the risk of flooding at the site or on adjacent land and would therefore accord with the aims of Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk 9. Through the provision of a Section 106 agreement the development will provide adequate infrastructure to mitigate the impact of the development and secure the future use of the approved 'work' spaces. The development therefore complies with Saved Policies E1, C1, C7, and C9, and A2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996 - 2011, the Community Infrastructure Levy regulation 2010 and Hampshire County Council ‘s adopted Transport Contributions Policy (September 2007).

General Comments

The application is brought to the Development Control Committee as a result of the number of objections received.

Planning Policy

The site is located within the Settlement Policy Boundary of Bramley and is positioned adjacent to the Grade II* Listed Bullsdown Farm House and Grade II listed Granary. The site relates to a collection of agricultural buildings and remnants of agricultural buildings that are curtilage listed in association to the Farm House.

2 of 72

Government Guidance

Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development (PPS1) Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (PPS3) Planning Policy Statement 4: Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth (PPS4) Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (PPS5) Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation (PPS9) Planning Policy Guidance Note: 13 Transport (PPG13) Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk (PPS25)

Adopted Local Plan 1996 – 2011

Policy D5 (Development within Settlements) Policy EC2 (Employment Areas) Policy EC4 (Loss of Local Employment Opportunities) Policy E1 (Development Control) Policy E2 (Buildings of Architectural and Historic Interest) Policy E3 (Conservation Areas)

Policy E6 (Landscape Character) Policy E7 (Nature/Biodiversity Conservation) Policy A1 (Car Parking) Policy C1 (S106 Contributions) Policy C9 (New Leisure or Open Spaces) Policy A2 (Encouraging Walking, Cycling, and the Use of Public Transport)

Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG’s) and interim planning guidance

Appendix 14 - 'Countryside Design Summary' of the Design and Sustainability SPD Landscape and Biodiversity SPD 'Residential Parking Standards' SPD Landscape Assessment SPG Listed Buildings SPG The Council's Interim Guidance Note 'S106 Planning Obligations and Community Infrastructure'

Other material documents

The Council’s Natural Environmental Strategy 'Living Landscapes' 2010 - The Council and Hampshire County Council `Basingstoke Environment Strategy for Transport’ (BEST) CIL Regulations 2010 Circular 05/05: Planning Obligations Circular 11/95: Use of Conditions in Planning Permission

Description of Site

The site is situated towards the eastern end of the village of Bramley south of Sherfield Road and directly to the north of German Road. The sites surrounding context is therefore one that is dominated by residential housing estates, which can be seen above and beyond the existing boundaries of the site.

3 of 72

The site comprises the former farmyard and part of the former farmland associated to Bullsdown Farmhouse. The Farmhouse is a Grade II* listed building, which in addition to the Grade II listed Granary, lie to the west and outside of the application site.

The application site itself relates to the access lane, range of redundant former agricultural buildings, derelict piggeries, a duck pond and the surrounding agricultural land. The most significant agricultural buildings are arranged around a central courtyard area forming a traditional square farmstead. These buildings are curtilage listed by virtue of the association with the former farmhouse.

The northern and southern range of buildings are oak framed with low brick plinth walls, timber board cladding and partially roofed by the remaining original slates and replacement corrugated sheeting. The agricultural buildings on the southern side of the farmyard are two storey brick built former stables with slated roofs, and adjoining light weight timber clad lean-to structures.

On the western side of the farmyard abutting the access is a low shallow farm building of a mainly brick construction with a replacement corrugated roof and timber boarding that has in filled the original open fronted bays facing the farmyard. To south and south west of this farmyard lie the remnants of former piggeries that appear to vary in age.

The site is generally flat and its boundaries are marked by a mix of timber wooden panel fencing and vegetation. Access is gained from a single broken tarmac road which connects Bramley Road and the application site, crossing the Green.

Proposal

Conversion of farm buildings to 3 no. four bedroom live-work dwellings, erection of 2 no. two bedroom live-work dwellings following demolition of existing outbuildings, conversion of 1 no. farm building to car ports and work unit with associated parking and alterations to existing access road.

The conversion scheme relates to the curtilage listed courtyard of agricultural buildings which are proposed to house live/work units A, B, and C together with ancillary car port and work, office spaces serving the units. The new build development is proposed to be located to the south western corner and south of the farmstead, following the replacement of the existing derelict former agricultural buildings. This part of the development relates to live work units D and E.

The applicant has submitted a Design and Access Statement, Landscape Proposals Report, Schedule of Works, Structural Fabric Inspection Report, Heritage Statement, Preliminary Site Walkover, Bat, Barn and Owl Building Inspection and Great Crested Newt Survey, Update Bat and Barn Owl Report, Bat Survey and Report of Pre-Application correspondence.

A S106/Legal Agreement also forms part of the application.

Application BDB/75676 has also been submitted and seeks Listed Building Consent for the above proposals.

4 of 72

Amended Plans/Additional Information 13.01.12 submission incorporating:  A Marketing Report of existing employment space in the Bramley area to demonstrate that the site, in totality, could not be used for an employment use.  A statement from SLR Ecology Consultants regarding the ecological implications of the development.  A statement regarding the inability to access the site from the German Road and Hampshire County Council Highway records to confirm ownership of the land.  Amended location plan to include visibility splay within Sherfield Road.  Amended layout plans to include a revised scheme of boundary treatment, external lighting, hard landscaping and the inclusion of an electronic entry gate.  Amended layout and elevations for Units A and B to omit separate front entrance door, and externally board rear utility doors.  Amended layout and elevations for Unit C to reduce stair window.  Amended layout and elevations for Unit D to reduce west facing living/dining window.  Amended layout and elevations for Unit E to provide alternate window/room arrangement.

13.02.12 submission incorporating:  Amended layout plans to include a revised scheme of boundary treatment and hard landscaping and the submission of an illustrative fencing detail.  Amended layout and elevations for Unit D to remove canopy porch.  Amended layout and elevations for Unit E to provide alternate window/room arrangement.

28.02.12 submission incorporating:  Amended elevation plans to reduce height of Unit E and amend window proportions.  Amended layout plans incorporating the provision of brick garden walls.  Reduction in size of southern parking area serving Unit E and D.  Addition of speed control measures at junction between access road and footpath.

Consultations

Local Development Framework Team (Additional Information): No objection. It has been demonstrated that an appropriate level of alternative provision exists within the settlement to justify the loss of employment use. I have balanced this view against the fact that live/work units are being provided so an element of employment provision would remain, and the fact that the existing historic structures will be reused and retained, which is favourable

Hampshire County Council (Highways): No comment. Due to the nature/scale of the development judgement is deferred to the council’s Local Highway Authority.

Local Highway Authority (Amended Plans): No objections subject to conditions.

English Heritage: No comment. Due to the nature/scale of the development judgement is deferred to the council’s Conservation Team.

Conservation Team: No objection to the proposed conversion works to Units A, B, and C and new build development associated to Unit C and D. Objection raised to the erection of Unit E.

5 of 72

The harm caused by conversions is justified on grounds of being minimum necessary to secure preservation of the affected heritage assets. The harm caused by new-build of Unit E is not justified as being necessary for securing the preservation of the affected heritage assets.

Conservation Team (Amended Plans): Objection raised to the erection of Unit E. The design and overall layout have improved. However, the design of Unit E remains domestic and this unit is harmful on listed building grounds.

Landscape Team (Amended Plans): No objections to the principle of the development subject to conditions to secure hard and soft landscaping details including boundary treatment, notwithstanding the development as proposed.

Biodiversity Team (Additional Information): No objection subject to a condition to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with approved ecological survey and associated supporting documents; and the submission of further information to satisfy the Derogation Tests of the Habitats Directive.

Tree Section: No objection.

Environmental Health: No objection subject conditions.

Property Services: Comment. I would concur with the opinion that current market conditions combined with the capital cost of refurbishment do not offer the possibility of a commercially viable office conversion.

Natural England: No objection. The proposal does not affect any statutorily protected sites or landscapes, or have significant impacts on the conservation of soils, nor is the proposal EIA development. Regard should be given to Natural England’s standing advice in relation to the developments impact on bats.

Environment Agency: No comment. The application is deemed to be a low environmental risk.

Public Observations

Six letters of objection have been received raising the following comments:

 Details of the construction phases of the development and working hours should be provided.  There are concerns in relation to the work element of the ‘live-work’ units.  If the work areas are unfettered this could involve hazardous materials, a significant increase in vehicles, the movement of industrial vehicles, dust and noise and disturbance to the residential area.  The work areas could be used late into the evening resulting in disturbance.  Restrictions should be placed on the hours worked on the site, and controls imposed regarding visitors and any dust and noise produced.  The management plans to control the dirt from lorries should be detailed. Pot holes are already appearing in Bramley Road following closure of the A33 and this will be exacerbated by the development.  The access lane crosses a footpath at its entrance gate and its increased use will result in the conflict of users.

6 of 72

 The footpath is heavily use by families and school children and at points in Bramley Road is the only means to safely walk east to west. This will be compromised by the development.  The access point to Bramley Road is at a corner point in the road and is unsuitable for increased use.  Access should be achieved from German Road to resolve the residents concerns.  The lane is unsuitable for lorries and trucks relating to industrial uses.  There are 4 proposed passing places that would be located directly to the rear of No’s 1, 3, and 4 Bramley Green Road. These should be moved further away from the properties to minimise noise and disturbance.  The access alterations will affect the aesthetics of the Village Green and the quiet village feel of the area.

Relevant Planning History BDB 75376 - Concurrent application for Listed Building Consent To be considered by Committee Assessment Principle of Development Location The application site lies within the Settlement Policy Boundary (SPB) of Bramley and therefore Saved Policy D5 of the Adopted Local Plan (ALP) applies. This policy permits the delivery of proposals which contribute to the social, economic and environmental well- being of settlements. The principle of development and redevelopment within the SPB is therefore accepted subject to the development according to the applicable saved policies of the development plan. Employment Opportunities Policy EC4 of the ALP seeks to retain sites in an employment use for employment purposes, within settlements outside of Basingstoke Town to maintain a prosperous economy. This broad approach is also set out by the aims and intentions of the Government guidance held within PPS4. In this instance, although it is unusual for a range of former agricultural farm buildings to remain within an SPB, this policy remains relevant here as the proposals will result in the loss of an existing agricultural employment use and potential alternate employment use.

Policy EC4 states, the loss of sites in an employment use will not be permitted unless one of the following specific criteria have been met: either, (i) the submission of a marketing exercise for a period of 12 months to demonstrate that there is no realistic demand for the use of the site for employment purpose, or (ii) an appropriate level of alternative provision already exists in the settlement or it can be provided in an acceptable alternative location, and the relevant criteria of Policy EC2 can be satisfied.

The loss of an employment opportunity is acknowledged by the applicant. The information submitted with the application seeks to justify the loss of employment provision, due to the constraints of the site relative to: the cost of conversion; the need to retain the historic fabric of the listed and curtilage listed buildings; the surrounding residential dwellings on all sides of the site; and that a pure employment centred development would not be viable or appropriate in historic building and residential amenity terms.

7 of 72

The applicant has proposed to offset the loss of an employment use, through the provision of live/work units, to maintain a benefit to the economy. The provision of ‘live/work’ units are supported by Saved Policy EC5 and it is considered that the ‘work’ elements of the scheme would provide a degree of employment use to the benefit of the local economy. The 'live/work' units therefore to some degree satisfy the appropriate requirements of Policy EC2. To demonstrate that there is no realistic demand for the use of the site for economic purposes, the applicant has also submitted an appraisal of existing employment uses within the Bramley area that has been carried out by a local estate agent. This survey details that there are 29 vacant B1 employment premises within a 5 mile radius of the site ranging in floor area of between 400sqm to 1,500sqm. Whilst, no commentary has been provided to accompany this survey, the council’s Property Services Team (PST) have stated that ‘the office demand that does exist for locations such as Bramley, tends to be low in volume, relatively modest in volume compared with Basingstoke town and very small scale’. It has also been stated that the, ‘economic climate which has stifled demand for offices not just in Basingstoke but throughout the South East will have had an added negative impact on office demand for small towns such as Bramley where the office stock is considerably older and of inferior quality/specification than say in Basingstoke and whatever commercial advantage it might have held when compared to Basingstoke has been eroded by the oversupply of good secondary space in Basingstoke and very competitive letting packages that are now readily on offer’. It is continued, that, ‘...the farm buildings in their current condition are not fit /suitable for office occupation’, and that, ‘given the current office market and level of rents being paid, it is reasonable to assume any form of speculative office conversation in the current market would not be a viable option, at very least not without a pre-let in place and even then the level of rent payable would (in my opinion) have to be considerably above the market norm to make this commercially viable. It is most unlikely a single office occupier would be identified to take all of the farm buildings as a single letting. Whilst the nature of these effectively individual buildings could offer the potential to deliver a phased refurbishment on a building by building basis, in reality given the condition of the farm courtyard overall, any occupier would in my opinion require the scheme to be completed as a single phase or substantially completed before committing to take actual occupation. Commercially, this would leave the potential developer so exposed to risk to render the development financially unviable.’ In summary, the PST therefore conclude that the current market conditions combined with the capital cost of refurbishment do not offer the possibility of a commercially viable employment conversion. Taking into account this limited prospect of achieving an employment conversation; the constraints imposed by the proximity of neighbouring residential land uses; in addition to the desire to preserve and therefore re-use the listed buildings; and the modest employment benefit proposed by the creation of live/work units, it is considered reasonable to conclude that the specifics of this development meet the aims and intentions of the policy criteria of Saved Policy EC4. On this basis no objection to the development is raised. As an additional point, it should be acknowledged that even if an employment use accommodating the entire site was proven to be viable, it would be of such a scale and resultant intensity of use that it may not pose an appropriate relationship to the neighbouring residential developments. To ensure that the modest employment benefit would be maintained in perpetuity within the site the applicant has entered into a legal agreement to ensure that the ‘work’ element of the development remains restricted to a B1 employment use in perpetuity.

8 of 72

Historic Environment, Landscape Character and Design Saved Policy E2 of the ALP states that proposals for development will not be permitted if they would harm a building or feature of a historic or architectural interest or adversely affect its setting. The guidance given by Planning Policy Statement 5 ‘Planning for the Historic Environment’ (PPS5) is also relevant in regard to the historic environment and Policy HE9 of PPS5 is considered to be the most relevant to the application setting out that the impact of a development on designated heritage assets is a material consideration. It also sets out that there should be a presumption in favour of the conservation of designated heritage assets subject to the absence of any significant harm or loss occurring to the asset. In this instance, the primary historic significance of the application site is that of an historic farmstead of considerable built and landscape character. In landscape terms, due to the heavily treed northern perimeter of the site and narrow access lane linking the Green and Bramley Road, the site does have a wider historic and character relationship with the Bramley Conservation Area, despite being outside of its boundary by some distance. Within the site, whilst the primary listed buildings on the site (Bullsdown Farmhouse and the Granary) do not form part of the development, the farm buildings are nevertheless of considerable historic character, and provide the main bulk of the site's agricultural character. As such, the 'curtilage listed' status of the farm buildings is material, albeit whilst still recognising that they are not listed in their own right. It is therefore necessary to ensure that the setting of the listing building and character of the curtilage listed buildings are not compromised by the proposed conversion scheme and new build proposals. Layout and Landscape Proposals The existing curtilage listed agricultural buildings are laid out in an inward facing square layout, that is framed by each of the remaining agricultural buildings on all sides, and traditional for such a historic farmstead. The proposed development seeks to retain these structures and convert them into dwellings (Units A, B, and C) with ancillary work space and open car ports. To the south of the site lie a range of brick built derelict agricultural buildings. It is proposed to remove this range of structures and replace them with two further live/work units (Units D and E). As proposed, the development would seek to retain the inward facing nature of the historic buildings, providing the front door entrances to the dwelling and offices spaces within the courtyard and the private rear gardens to the rear of the buildings. This has allowed the main yard to be kept clear of all but the most necessary of domestic features, and clear of boundary treatments. The new build development would further respect this character by positioning the rear gardens behind the buildings and minimising the openings within the outer edges of the new build development, thereby maintaining the existing grassed verge to the access lane. The general layout proposed is therefore considered in historic terms to provide a good combination of domestic necessities whilst retaining an agricultural open character. The rear garden subdivisions meanwhile are wide, and although do become tighter to the southern 'yard' area due to the provision of Units D and E, cumulatively it is considered that they are of a sufficient size to enable an open character to be maintained. Given this relationship and the limited amount of encroachment into the farmyard, this arrangement is considered to be acceptable in historic building terms. It is, however, considered to be necessary to remove permitted development rights via condition given the harm that could be created by the provision of domestic paraphernalia within the courtyard and areas of grassed verge and incidental open space.

9 of 72

In terms of boundary treatments private rear gardens are proposed to be bounded by a mix of hedging and post and rail fencing with wire infill and high quality 'rustic' agricultural style fencing proposed to bound the rear boundaries and brick wall boundaries to act as privacy screens where a more solid boundary treatment is required. Given the need to preserve the setting of listed buildings it is considered appropriate to remove permitted development rights to provide future control over the boundary treatments.

In order to bring the existing access lane up to a sufficient standard to accommodate the future development it is proposed to re-surface the existing tarmac drive with a further layer of tarmacadam, in addition to provide newly created passing places at appropriate intervals to enable cars to pass one another when entering and exiting the site. These elements of the landscaping scheme have raised concern with the Landscape Officer and Conservation Officer, given the worn and informal appearance of the existing single track. In this respect it is noted that the re-surfacing work together with the passing places would result in a sense of formalisation, which would change the existing character of the lane. However, the provision of these works are necessary in terms of highway safety and the practical use of the lane; it is not proposed to extend the work to the introduction of kerbs and other highway features such as drains and gullies, which would further formalise the character. An alternative approach to include the ad-hoc infilling of potholes and the provision of a looser bound material, whilst visually more appropriate, have been discounted by the applicant due to the overall length of the drive, the cost and maintenance implications and the associated impact of noise and disturbance to the neighbouring residents.

The concept provided for the hard surfacing around the buildings (gravel and stone setts) would be acceptable in terms of character and appearance. The Landscape Officer has therefore confirmed that the hard and soft landscaping scheme is acceptable, subject to a condition controlling the detail of the scheme.

The Conservation Officer has stated that the proposed screen planting to the southern boundary currently proposed is inadequate, and will need to be further strengthened to provide a greater buffer to aid the retention of the site's historic setting. It is considered that this bolstered planting proposal, together with the submission of materials can be secured by a detailed hard and soft landscaping condition in accordance with Policies E1 and E6 of the Local Plan.

Main barns and attached cowsheds (Units A and B)

In relation to the design and layout of the individual buildings, the proposed internal and structural subdivision of the main barns is considered to be a generally good means of providing the required room uses and party walls for new dwellings. The Conservation Officer has confirmed that the avoidance of small housing units in these barns is a particular success, allowing the preservation of the large internal volumes which characterise historic barns and enable the reuse of all existing openings, and the positions and sizes of new openings to be adequately minimised.

The proposed fenestration of the barns is generally considered to be a respectful insertion of new, innovatively designed windows and doors, to avoid breaking the visual solidity of walling. The number, positions and sizes of rooflights are considered to be acceptable, bearing in mind that the high level shallow pitched slate roofs of these barns (in this instance) are unusually secondary in character to the prominence of the historic fabric of the walls on these barns (for older aisled barns the roof is the dominant feature due to the low eaves heights).

10 of 72

The Conservation Officer did raise concern that the original proposal to insert secondary front doors, next to the main glazed screens to the large cart entrances, appeared overly domestic and the glazing to the rear access doors unnecessary. The design of these units has since been revised omitting the secondary front doors to the benefit of the agricultural character of the buildings and is now considered to be acceptable. To safeguard the agricultural character of the building in perpetuity it is considered appropriate to remove permitted developments to control future insertions, additions or alternations to the building.

Stables (Unit C [conversion works])

The proposed internal subdivision of the stables to provide bedrooms and a corridor does not preserve the buildings present internal character. However, the Conservation Officer has confirmed that this arrangement does make the best use of existing openings whilst minimising the requirement for new openings, in addition to providing new structural partitions which will assist to resolve the structural problems of the existing roof. The treatment of existing openings is also considered to be a good interpretation of agricultural styles.

On this basis it is considered that the new openings proposed are acceptable in number, size and positioning, and would be of an appropriate agricultural character.

Car Ports

While the ‘car port’ building is of a much lesser significance than the other existing agricultural buildings it remains of agrarian character. Its main contribution is that of dividing the farmyard from the access drive and Farmhouse and completing the enclosure of the courtyard.

The proposal to re-front the timber-framed eastern elevation to provide open car bays is a substantial change in character and this would include the removal of the 'original' timber frame. However, the Conservation Officer has confirmed that there is a strong likelihood that this frame is a later insertion to what was originally an open fronted building. Given that the proposal would re-create this open fronted appearance it is considered to be an acceptable change that would benefit the site whilst avoiding the need for additional new build garaging. The stable conversion to the northern end to a home office is also considered to be a good reuse which will preserve the integrity of the entire building.

Overall Restoration and Structural works

A structural survey has been submitted as part of the application. The structural works proposed (as part of the conversion works) are considered to be appropriately restrained and not significantly beyond that which would be required in order to preserve the buildings given their current state of disrepair. It is however evident that the buildings will retain the substantial majority of their historic fabric and thus would represent a beneficial conservation scheme allowing for the retention and long term re-use of the curtilage listed buildings.

The stables (Unit C) are in a particularly poor state due to a severe roof spread and lateral movement problem. Despite being substantial the partial reconstruction works proposed to address this are considered to be necessary and justified in order to retain and re-use the structure where possible. Close monitoring will be required in order to ensure that the extent of historic fabric works to this building are adequately controlled and it is considered appropriate to secure this by condition.

11 of 72

The Conservation Officer has noted that while nearly all brick plinth walls to the timber- framed buildings will require rebuilding some can be simply underpinned to take the additional loading imposed by the conversion and then isolated from damp penetration as part of an overall floor-slab and damp proof course design. Whilst this would represent extensive work to historic fabric, this is accepted by the Conservation Officer as being an essential consequence of barn conversion and Officer’s agree with this view.

Eastern Most New Build (Unit D and corner of Unit C)

The proposed reconstruction of the existing derelict buildings west and south-west of the stables is considered to be adequately designed to provide a largely blank corner and outward face towards the house and drive, enabling the building to appear agricultural in character and provide enclosure to the south western corner of the courtyard. This design and layout therefore provides a largely effective visual screen to the newly created domestic uses from public views that could be achieved from the ground around the farm house and northern yard. The rear (east and south) elevations are much more freely designed, with extensive glazing. Whilst this is a substantial deviation from the existing buildings agricultural character it is equally not of a common domestic form, and would also not be visible from the farm house or northern yards. The Conservation Officer has therefore raised no objections to this unit. Furthermore, as this element of the scheme relates to the new build housing, it is considered to be an appropriate modern addition that is representative of the site's development to housing.

New Build Unit E

Unit E would be sited in the southern most part of the site. The Conservation Officer originally raised concern with this element of the proposal on the grounds that:

 Unlike Unit D, the buildings that remain in the location proposed for the unit are modern (c.1950s) piggeries that would not justify the principle of building on historic precedent grounds;  The dwelling is going to be noticeably greater in footprint and scale and visible from parts of the southern part of the site and from the rear grassed areas to the east of the barns.  The introduction of this new unit would limit the belt of screen planting from being implemented to the southern boundary of the site, to bolster the southern screening from the suburban development German Road.  The unit increases the amount of parking and land subdivision and moves the parking for Unit D out to an area visible to the access drive, and  The design of the unit is ambiguous and does not succeed as a modern house design, or a barn design.

Whilst, the Conservation Officer’s concerns are acknowledged, it should be noted that the site is located within a defined SPB where there are no principle restrictions against residential development. As such unlike a countryside location, justification is not required to demonstrate the development is either a replacement structure, or forms part of a conversation scheme. Within an SPB it is considered favourable to maximise the efficient use of such land and make a further contribution to address housing shortages within the Borough.

Notwithstanding, it is considered to be material that the Unit would be located discreetly in the least visible part of the site and would only be seen from within the rear gardens of Unit C and D and once you’re directly facing the parking area serving it. On this basis it is not

12 of 72 considered that the unit would be seen from the listed Farmhouse or Granary unless you’re within the Farmhouse; or noticeable other than from the additional vehicular and pedestrian movements associated to it. It is acknowledged that private views of heritage assets are a consideration in terms of their significance or impact on its setting. However, given the general acceptance of the redevelopment of the wider farmstead to a predominant residential use, in addition to the surrounding suburban residential developments within German Road to the east and south of the site (that already to a degree compromise the buildings setting) it is not considered the addition of a fifth unit, in place of the existing piggery structure, would unacceptably tip the balance of the development to cause significant harm to the heritage assets.

It should also be acknowledged that there is an existing structure located within the site of Unit E. Whilst modern in age the structure is the remnant of a substantial brick built piggery and evidences the presence of an existing building that once formed part of the working farm. This structure would be removed as a result of the development and the proposed unit would be of a scale that is reflective of Unit D and of a smaller size to that of curtilage listed barns that are proposed to be converted to Units A, B, and C. It is considered that the unit would therefore appear as a subordinate modern addition to the range of agricultural buildings rather than compete against the setting of the existing structures.

Notwithstanding the erection of the additional unit, it is considered that sufficient space would remain along the remainder of the southern boundary to enable the bolstering of the existing screen planting along the southern boundary to screen the surrounding development.

In design terms the unit has been amended to reflect the character and appearance of Unit D and reduce the height of the building. It is considered that the proposed building would resemble a building of agricultural character and design, in accordance with the remainder of the scheme.

The Conservation Officer remains of a view that the amended design of Unit E would still appear of a domestic nature. Having balanced these specific concerns with the context of the site in terms of the design of the unit in question, the overall re-use of buildings, and efficient use of land, it is considered the proposals are acceptable and Unit E would not cause any significant harm to the curtilage listed and listed buildings.

As per each of live/works units proposed it is considered necessary to impose stringent material and window detailing conditions, to secure a high quality finish is also achieved for Unit E.

Summary

The proposed new build development is considered to be of an appropriate design, sympathetic to the landscape character of its surroundings and the barns would be sympathetically converted as a result of the development in order to preserve the special architectural, or historic interest, of the curtilage listed buildings and the setting of the Grade II* and II Listed Buildings. As such, it is therefore considered that the proposed development would be in compliance to Policies EC6 i), E1 i), ii), E2 and E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council Local Plan 1996-2011 and Planning Policy Statement 5 ‘Planning for the Historic Environment’ (PPS5).

13 of 72

Highway Safety

There are no objections in relation to the principle of additional development on site with regards to impact on highway safety.

The Highway Officer considers that the resurfacing work to the lane, the provision of passing places for vehicles and the partial widening of the entry point into the lane are necessary to cater for additional traffic generated by the development and the opposing flows of vehicles. The passing places are considered to be of a sufficient dimension to accommodate a small lorry or fire tender and therefore would again provide sufficient means of access to the site and aid highway safety. However, the suitability of the passing bays could be questionable if the 'work' element of the live/work units were unfettered.

Taking into account this concern, a Legal Agreement has been drafted to include obligations that tie each of the ‘work’ areas of the proposed ‘live/work’ units to each of the residential dwellings. In the respect of each unit, the obligations have been drafted to ensure that the work space shall be used for a Class B1 (Office Use) only and no other purpose that could otherwise by permitted within Class B1 of the Town and Country Planning Use Classes Order (Amendment) 2005 (or in any statutory instrument revoking and re-enacting that Order) and by the occupiers of the relative residential dwelling. This includes restriction of the otherwise permitted change of use of Class B1 floor space to Class B8 (Storage and Distribution Use) that might otherwise be possible under Permitted Rights.

By definition of the drafted obligation, the end user of each of the work spaces would be restricted to be the owner/occupier of the residential dwelling and the nature of the business being restricted to a B1 office use. In each instance the work space areas are considered to be modest and range between 16m to 30m² in size. This obligation as drafted together with the size of the areas in question is considered to appropriately restrict the intensity of the use of the business that could occupy the work spaces, limit scale of the business and the number of staff associated to it. Although the Legal Agreement has yet to be completed, the applicant has agreed the draft wording of the agreement. On this basis, it is not considered the traffic movements associated to each unit would be significant and whilst a business run from such a unit may attract ad-hoc visits from clients or delivery vehicles it is not considered that they would be frequent for such a work space or harmful to the residential element of the proposal.

In access terms, the private access lane serving the site currently crosses a footpath just before the exiting gated entrance into the site. Public concern has been raised in terms of the increase in traffic movements along the lane and the potential for conflict with the users of the footpath. It is material however, that the farm access road has been long established on the present route, linking the farm buildings to Sherfield Road and that this would have been used by the various vehicles servicing the farm when the buildings were used for agricultural purposes. No objections have been received from the Highway Officer in this respect other than acknowledging a need to slow vehicle speeds down within the lane by virtue of the fact that the existing manual 5 bar entrance gate is more often than not left open enabling vehicles to continue uninterrupted from the start to the end of the lane.

The applicant has explored effective means of speed reduction in the vicinity of the footpath crossing to aid pedestrian safety, whilst not introducing overly engineered highway interventions that would change the character of the road. On this basis an amended layout plan has now been submitted introducing the replacement of the existing gated entrance with an electronic gate and two speed humps either side of the footpath,

14 of 72 the detail of which would be secured by condition. The Highway Officer has confirmed that such a measure would be appropriate, subject to a review of the specification of the speed control by condition. Subject to detail, it is therefore considered that such a measure would effectively reduce the speed of vehicles approaching the path from entrance or exit into the site and enable the continued safe passage of pedestrians.

Neighbour comments have also been received in relation to the suitability of the access junction with the highway. In this respect it is acknowledged that toward the east of the entrance point Sherfield Road curves and that visibility in that direction can be increased by trimming-back the clump of boundary trees adjacent to the footway on the eastern boundary. The applicant has included the required visibility splays within the proposals and on this basis the Highway Officer is satisfied that a condition can be imposed to adequately control the maintenance of the sightlines in either direction.

In parking terms, a designated parking provision of a total 16 space is proposed. This parking provision is appropriate in consideration of the adopted parking standards, and there is space to provide for the parking of cars around the buildings and within the courtyard for visitors when required.

Taking the above into account the Highway Officer has raised no objection to the development subject to the completion of a Section 106 and conditions. Accordingly for the reasons outlined above the development would accord with Saved Policy E1 of the adopted Local Plan.

Residential Amenity

A number of comments have been received from the neighbouring owner/occupiers in the respect of the potential for noise and disturbance that would be created by the proposed development. It is noted the development would result in an increase in activity by comparison to the single residential use of the existing Farmhouse and vacant agricultural buildings. However, given the developed residential nature of the surrounding area it is not considered that the residential element of the 5 ‘live/work’ units would have an undue impact on the nearest neighbouring dwellings.

In relation to the ‘work’ element of the development, as discussed under the ‘Highway’ subsection of this report, the ‘work’ areas are each of a modest size and a Legal Agreement has been drafted to include obligations that tie each of the ‘work’ areas of the proposed ‘live/work’ units to each of the residential dwellings and ensure that the work space shall be used for B1 office purposes only and to a maximum size. On this basis, it is not considered the traffic movements associate to each unit would be significant, or of a nature that they would cause excessive noise and disturbance to the neighbouring residential dwellings.

The Environmental Health Team have been consulted, and they have raised no objections in relation to noise and disturbance, subject to conditions restricting the hours of construction and the delivery hours associated to the construction of the development. Given the noise and vehicles associated to the construction works these conditions are considered to be reasonable. Given the scale of the development, however, it is not considered necessary to require further details of the construction phases of development as requested by a local resident.

Further conditions have also been recommended by the Environmental Health Team requested requiring a contaminated land investigation into the site and associated verification works. In the interests of the amenity of the future residents of the site it is considered that these conditions are reasonable.

15 of 72

As such it is considered the proposed development would meet the provisions of Policy E1 of the Local Plan 1996-2011.

Biodiversity

A Preliminary Site Walkover, Bat, Barn and Owl Building Inspection and GCN Survey and Update Bat and Barn Owl Report have been submitted as part of the application which indicate that bats are prevalent within the buildings.

The Council’s Biodiversity Officer has confirmed that sufficient ecological surveys have been carried out (and submitted) so that the impacts on biodiversity from the proposed development can be adequately assessed. Suitable biodiversity enhancements have also been incorporated into the development proposal which will contribute to biodiversity conservation, together with appropriate mitigation proposals.

The bat survey confirmed that the buildings are being used as bat roosts and as all species of bats are European Protected Species, the Biodiversity Officer requested that more information was submitted to satisfy the derogation tests contained in the EU Habitats Directive and UK Habitats Regulations.

It is considered the first test is to determine that the development ‘will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range’ has been met. The Biodiversity Officer has stated that given the suggested mitigation proposals sufficient mitigation has been provided to address any potential impacts on bat populations subject to a condition to secure the necessary mitigation. The second and third test relate to whether there is ‘no satisfactory alternative’ and that the development would ‘be of sufficient public benefit’. In this respect it has been confirmed that if planning permission is not granted for the barn conversion scheme it is likely the existing barns will remain vacant which in time could lead to decay and the possible reduction in their suitability to be used by bats with no provision for mitigation. As such a 'do nothing' approach could have a detrimental effect on the bats using the site over time. Furthermore, given the Grade II status of the building there is an overriding public interest in favour of the preservation and long-term use of the barn, which the current proposal would achieve. As such, for these reasons it is considered by Officer's that there is no satisfactory viable alternative to the proposed development and the necessary enhancement and mitigation measures (secured through a planning condition) will maintain the favourable conservation status of the protected species. On this basis the Council’s Biodiversity Officer has confirmed that in accordance with Planning Policy Statement 9: ‘Biodiversity and Geological Conservation’ and the Habitat Regulations, an adequate assessment of the impacts of the proposed development on biodiversity and the required mitigation measures have been undertaken and the proposal is therefore considered to be compliant against Policy E7 of the Local Plan. Planning Obligations Under Saved Policies C1, A2 and C9 of the Local Plan planning permission will only be granted where there are adequate infrastructure and community facilities to mitigate against the impact of the development. Additional guidance is contained within the Borough council's interim planning guidance note `Section 106 Planning Obligations and Community Infrastructure`, the Hampshire County Council documents ‘Highways Contributions Policy’, Basingstoke Environment Strategy for Transport (BEST), in addition to Circular 05/05: 'Planning Obligations' and the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)

16 of 72

Regulations 2010. These documents set the framework to enable councils to require provisions in the form of planning obligations in conjunction with a planning application. Where existing provision is inadequate developers are required to provide the infrastructure and community facilities and/or a contribution to the provision of any new or enhanced off-site infrastructure or facilities, where it is necessary to meet the needs of the future residents of the development. The development has been scoped to assess the required planning obligations. It has been identified that contributions towards transport infrastructure improvements (through BEST), open space, playing fields and community facilities are required to offset the impact of the development. These requirements, in addition to a further obligation restricting the future use of the ‘work’ element of the ‘live/work’ units, are considered to be necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; directly related to the development; and, related in scale and kind to the development premises. A legal agreement has been drafted to secure these provisions, which has been agreed in principle by the Applicant. Subject to the completion of the agreement, it is considered the impact of the development would appropriately be offset, in accordance with Saved Policies C1, A2 and C9 of the Local Plan and the above guidance.

Housing Mix

Policy C3 of the Local Plan states that planning permission for residential development will only be permitted provided that between 30% and 50% of the market dwellings provided on site are small units (1&2 bedrooms), with the highest proportion sought on sites in or adjoining centres of settlements with a good or reasonable range of services and public transport opportunities. The supporting text of Policy C3 also outlines that the council will aim to achieve a standard of 80% of the small dwellings on any development having a gross floor area not exceeding 70 square metres and a 15% provision of the dwellings to be designed to Lifetime Homes Standards.

The development relates to the conversion of agricultural buildings to create 3 no. four bedroom live-work dwellings, and the erection of 2 no. new build two bedroom live-work dwellings, thereby providing a 40% provision of ‘small units’. This accords with the ALP Policy requirement. Although these units would not be designed to Lifetime Homes Standards the floor area of the unit would be limited to below 70m2 in size.

As such it is considered the proposed development would provide a sufficient mix of accommodation in terms of dwelling sizes and would otherwise accord with the aims and intentions of Policy C3 of the ALP and the Councils Housing Mix and Lifetime Mobility Standards SPD.

Other Matters

The council’s Strategic Flood Risk Assessment identifies that the site is within a Critical Drainage Area and therefore surface water should be managed as part of the development. A Flood Risk Assessment accompanies the application. The Environment Agency has raised no objection to the proposed development subject to standing advice.

A number of local residents have queried why access cannot be provided from German Road. However, the land immediately to the southern boundary of the site, adjacent to the road, remains in private ownership and third-party control, therefore the applicant has no control to secure an access in this location. Notwithstanding, the application has to be determined on its own merits and Officer’s remain of the view that the existing access point is acceptable in both highway safety and residential amenity terms.

17 of 72

Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority: 2482 121 Rev A received on the 13.01.12 2482 122 Rev D received on the 28.02.12 2482 123 Rev D received on the 28.02.12 2482 124 Rev A received on the 13.01.12 2482 125 Rev A received on the 13.01.12 2482 126 Rev D received on the 28.02.12 2482 127 Rev D received on the 28.02.12 2482 130 received on the 04.11.11 8055t/100 Rev A received on the 04.11.11 8055t/101.1 received on the 04.11.11 8055t/101.2 received on the 04.11.11 8055t/102 received on the 04.11.11 8055t/103 received on the 04.11.11 0440.1.1 received on the 04.11.11 REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this planning permission. REASON: To comply with Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

3. No development shall commence on-site in relation to the demolition, conversion, restoration and erection of the hereby approved Units A, B C, D and E and ancillary car ports and accommodation until full working drawings of the related works at an overall scale of 1:20 with window, door and rooflight details at 1:5, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted details must be referenced against the approved plans, and must show the context of individual details (e.g. with window reveals, framing, heads and sills where applicable). The development must proceed in accordance with the approved details unless agreed otherwise in writing with the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To preserve the special architectural and historic interest of the curtilage listed buildings and setting of adjacent listed buildings, in accordance with Saved Policy E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

4. No development shall commence on-site in relation to the demolition, conversion, restoration and construction of the hereby approved Units A, B C, D and E and ancillary car ports and accommodation until a fully-detailed materials schedule for the implementation of those units has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The submitted schedule must include details of samples and/or sample panels submitted to and/or inspected by the Local Planning Authority on-site, along with details of brick bonding and mortar / plaster mixes. REASON: To preserve the special architectural and historic interest of the curtilage listed buildings and setting of adjacent listed buildings, in accordance with Saved Policy E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

5. No development relating to the construction of the hereby approved Unit E may commence on-site until the conversion works to implement approved Units A to C have been completed to an externally weather-tight stage or better, and in accordance with a Programme of Works to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning

18 of 72

Authority before any development commences on-site. The development must then proceed in strict accordance with approved Programme of Works, unless agreed otherwise in writing with the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To secure the conservation benefit of the conversion enabling the preservation of the special architectural and historic interests of the listed buildings, and in accordance with Saved Policy E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

6. No development shall take place until full details of both 'hard and soft landscape details' have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. - 'Hard landscaping details' shall include, the design, type, position and scale of boundary treatments, boundary treatment materials, hardsurfacing materials (including the submission of samples) and residential car parking areas, layout and design. - 'Soft landscape details' shall include planting plan, specification (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment), schedules of plants, (including replacement trees where appropriate), noting species, planting sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate In addition, to implementation timetables detailing all operations to be carried out to allow successful establishment of soft landscaping. - 'The approved Hard Landscaping Scheme shall be carried out prior to the Soft Landscaping Scheme and the Soft Landscaping Scheme shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the first occupation of the building or when the use hereby permitted is commenced. Any trees or plants which, within a period of five years after planting, are removed, die or become seriously damaged or defective, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of species, size and number as originally approved, to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of landscape, in the interests of the character of the area, and designated historic buildings and in accordance with Saved Policies E1(ii), E2 and E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 and Planning Policy Statement 5 ‘Planning for the Historic Environment’ (PPS5).

7. The development, including any demolition works, soil moving, temporary access construction/widening, or storage of materials, shall be carried out in accordance with The Update Bat & Barn Owl Report, by SLR Consulting dated September 2011, section 4, pages 9 and 10, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: Low numbers of bats are known to be roosting in the existing buildings. All species of bats are protected by law under the Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 and the Conservation of Species & Habitats Regulations 2010 and are a material consideration under Saved Policy E7. The implementation of the recommended Mitigation Scheme will ensure that reasonable measures are taken to prevent any harm to bat populations identified to be using the site and that roosting facilities are retained in accordance with the Conservation of Habitats & Species Regulations 2010, Saved Policy E7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 and Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation (PPS9) .

8. The development, including any demolition works, soil moving, temporary access construction/widening, or storage of materials, shall be carried in accordance with the statement on reptile mitigation by SLR Consulting, dated 10th January 2012, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: Habitats on site have potential to support common reptile species such as slow-worms and viviparous lizards. These are protected under the Wildlife and

19 of 72

Countryside Act 1981 and are a material consideration under Saved Policy E7. In addition, reptiles are listed under Section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act, which by virtue of Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation (PPS9), makes them a material consideration within the planning system. This condition is necessary to ensure reasonable effort is taken to avoid harm to such animals.

9. No works pursuant to this permission shall commence until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:-

(a) a desk top study carried out by a competent person documenting all the previous and existing land uses of the site and adjacent land in accordance with national guidance as set out in Contaminated Land Research Report Nos. 2 and 3 and BS10175:2001;

and, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority,

(b) a site investigation report documenting the ground conditions of the site and incorporating chemical and gas analysis identified as being appropriate by the desk study in accordance with BS10175:2001- Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites -,Code of Practice;

and, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority,

(c) a detailed scheme for remedial works and measures to be undertaken to avoid risk from contaminants/or gases when the site is developed and proposals for future maintenance and monitoring. Such scheme shall include nomination of a competent person to oversee the implementation of the works.

(d) if during any works contamination is encountered which has not been previously identified then the additional contamination shall be fully assessed and an appropriate remediation scheme, agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To ensure any soil, gas or water contamination on the site is remediated to protect the proposed occupants of the application site and/or adjacent land and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

10. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied/brought into use until there has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority verification by the competent person approved under the provisions of condition 9(c) that any remediation scheme required and approved under the provisions of condition 9(c) has been implemented fully in accordance with the approved details (unless varied with the written agreement of the Local Planning Authority in advance of implementation). Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority such verification shall comprise;

 as built drawings of the implemented scheme;

 photographs of the remediation works in progress;

 certificates demonstrating that imported and/or material left in situ is free of contamination.

20 of 72

Thereafter the scheme shall be monitored and maintained in accordance with the scheme approved under condition 9(c), unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996- 2011

11. No development shall commence on site until details of measures to be taken to prevent spoil/mud being deposited on the public highway from vehicles leaving the site during the construction works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such measures shall be fully installed and implemented before the development commences and shall be retained for the duration of the construction period in order that no vehicle shall leave the site unless it has been cleaned sufficiently to prevent mud/spoil being deposited onto the highway. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

12. Prior to commencement of development the developer shall ensure that there is provision to be made for the parking and turning on site of operatives' and construction vehicles together with storage on site of construction materials. The provision shall be retained and used for the intended purpose for the duration of the construction period and that area shall not be used for any purposes other than the parking and turning of vehicles and storage of construction materials respectively. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

13. No works shall take place on site until the areas of land defined by the sightlines marked in red on the drawing 2482.122 Rev D have been cleared of vegetation and obstacles so that the land and anything on it shall not be more than 0.6 metres above the level of the carriageway and overhanging vegetation shall be no lower than 2.5m above the level of the carriageway and the resultant visibility splays shall thereafter be kept free of obstacles. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

14. No development shall commence on site until details of alteration works to the access road, including details of measures of speed control and passing bays, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved access details shall be constructed and fully implemented before the commencement of any other works otherwise approved by this permission on the site and shall be thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To ensure that a satisfactory means of access to the highway is constructed before the approved buildings in the interest of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

15. No development shall take place on site until details of a refuse collection strategy and locations of refuse collection points have been submitted and approved. The approved details shall be implemented before the occupation of any of the dwellings affected. REASON: To ensure convenience of arrangements for refuse collection in the interests of Health and Safety and highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

21 of 72

16. No development shall commence including demolition and restoration work until full details of the turning area(s) provided within the site, to enable vehicles using the site to enter and leave in a forward gear, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved turning area(s) shall be fully implemented prior to commencement of development including demolition and restoration work. The area[s] shall be thereafter kept available for turning at all times, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

17. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied, or the use commence, whichever is the sooner, until provision for the turning, loading and unloading of vehicles and the parking of vehicles has been made within the application site in accordance with the approved plans and particulars and the areas of land so provided shall not be used for any purpose other than the turning, loading and unloading and parking of vehicles, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policies E1 and A1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

18. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 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 building, structure or other alteration permitted by Class A, B, C, D, E, F, G and H of Part 1 and Class A and C of Part 2 of Schedule 2 of the Order shall be erected, inserted or constructed on or within the application site, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To preserve the character and appearance of the historic buildings and prevent an overdevelopment of the site in accordance with Saved Policies E1, E2, and E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 and Planning Policy Statement 5 ‘Planning for the Historic Environment’ (PPS5).

19. No work relating to the construction of the development hereby approved, including works of demolition or preparation prior to operations, 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 recognised public holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

20. 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 recognised public holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

Notes to the Applicant:

1. 1.1 The applicant’s attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if any), must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated.

22 of 72

1.2 This permission may contain pre-commencement conditions which require specific matters to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before a specified stage in the development occurs. This means that a lawful commencement of the approved development CANNOT be made until the particular requirements of the pre-commencement conditions have been met.

1.3 The applicant’s attention is drawn to the fact that the Local Planning Authority has a period of up to eight weeks to determine details submitted in respect of a condition or limitation attached to a grant of planning permission. It is likely that in most cases the determination period will be shorter than eight weeks, however, the applicant is advised to schedule this time period into any programme of works. A fee will be required for requests for discharge of any consent, agreement, or approval required by a planning condition. The fee chargeable is £85 per request or £25 where the related permission was for extending or altering a dwelling house or other development in the curtilage of a dwelling house. A fee is payable for each submission made regardless of the number of conditions for which approval is sought. Requests must be made using the standard application form (available online) or set out in writing clearly identifying the relevant planning application and condition(s) which they are seeking approval for.

2. Information on where to find a suitably qualified ecologist / wildlife consultant to carry out a reptile survey can be found on the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management’s (IEEM) website - www.ieem.org.uk (from the main page, select ‘About IEEM’ and then ‘Directory’).

3. The applicant is reminded that this consent should be read in conjunction with the Listed Building Consent BDB/75376.

4. This Decision Notice must be read in conjunction with a Planning Obligation completed under the terms of Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). You are advised to satisfy yourself that you have all the relevant documentation.

23 of 72

Minor and Other Application

Cttee: 14/03/2012 Item No. 02

Application no: BDB/75376 For Details and Plans Click here

Registered: 08/11/2011 Expiry Date: 03/01/2012 Type of Listed Building Case Officer: Robert Franks Application: Consent 01256 845681 Applicant: Mr Hare The Lord Agent: Hives Architects LLP Douro 1991 Settlement Ward: Bramley and Ward Member(s): Cllr R M Jayawardena Sherfield-on-Loddon Cllr R P Vaughan* Parish: Bramley OS Grid Reference: 466312,158689

Recommendation:

It is RECOMMENDED that the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report.

Reasons for Approval:

1. The proposed development is of an appropriate design, layout, form, and means of conversion, relates to the surrounding development in a sympathetic manner and would not cause an adverse impact on the setting of the Grade II listed buildings, curtilage listed buildings or any buildings or features of historic or architectural interest and as such complies with Planning Policy Statement 5 ‘Planning for the Historic Environment’; Saved Policy E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011; and the Councils Supplementary Planning Guidance – 'The Historic Environment: Listed Buildings’ (2003).

General Comments

The application is brought to the Development Control Committee in conjunction with the application for planning permission, which is to be heard by the Committee as a result of the number of objections received.

Planning Policy

24 of 72

Government Guidance

Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (PPS5)

Adopted Local Plan 1996 – 2011

Policy E2 (Buildings of Architectural and Historic Interest)

Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG’s) and interim planning guidance

Listed Buildings SPG

Other material documents

Circular 11/95: Use of conditions in planning permission Circular 05/05: Planning Obligations The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010 Hampshire County Council Transport Contributions Policy EU Habitats Directive and the UK Habitat Regulations

Description of Site

Dunsford Crescent is a cul-de-sac and is also a private road. Rose Hudson Place is also a private road serving 6 dwellings and is accessed to the west of the application site. An area of open space lies to the west. The area has a predominantly residential character.

38 of 72

The site comprises part of the garden area of No.8 Dunsford Crescent, a semi-detached property. The property is set back from the road and has a large rear and side garden. The garden to the side contains a number of overgrown shrubs and appears to have been used as a vegetable patch. Along the western boundary of the site is a mixed hedgerow and several mature trees, none of which are protected. Proposal The application proposes the erection of a detached three bedroom dwelling of hipped roof design to the west of the existing dwelling at No. 8 Dunsford Crescent. The proposed dwelling would have an enclosed garden to the rear and would share access with the existing dwelling. Parking would be provided to the front of the property. An integral garage is proposed to serve the dwelling. Consultations Local Highway Authority: No objection. Environmental Health: No objection subject to conditions. Biodiversity: No objection subject to a condition and informative. Tree Officer: No objection subject to conditions. Public Observations Twelve letters of objection have been received raising the following concerns:

 Dunsford Crescent has been subject to additional builds over the years.  The road is not adopted and is subject to traffic that is detrimental to its surface.  Proposal will add to the wear and tear of a private road that is maintained by residents.  Permission needs to be gained from all residents before any large construction work and this has not yet been requested.  If the proposal is permitted, the road should be adopted by the council.  The council should pay for the resurfacing of the road.  On street parking restricts access.  Difficulty for emergency vehicles to access Rose Hudson Place.  Lack of parking.  Parking for 1.5 cars is not sufficient.  People don't use a garage.  Disruption to residents during works.  Noise impact for those who work shifts.  Loss of view.  Loss of light.  Well-being and views of residents should be considered.  Overlooking and loss of privacy.  Impact on sense of space.  Dwelling is not in keeping with existing character and will spoil the estate.  Detrimental to the distinctive character of Dunsford Crescent.  Development will create a cramped and claustrophobic environment.  Lack of space between development.  Development will not improve character or environment for existing residents.  New property would be more intrusive than the existing situation.  The proposed property will be imposing to those opposite to the rear.  Impact on trees.  Possible tree removal.

39 of 72

 The 'listed' tree should be preserved.  Impact on wildlife.  Access through garden to neighbouring land will be lost.  Impact on ability to open doors and windows during construction.  Safety risk given proximity to open space.  One three bed house will not solve the supposed housing shortage.  Why are small plots continually considered for development?  Enough larger development sites in Basingstoke.

One letter of comment has been received raising the following points:

 Do not object to this development.  Road is private and in a terrible state of repair.  The road condition will worsen with heavy construction traffic.  Residents will have to pay to repair the road.  Can a bond be set aside to cover the costs of repair?  Is there an alternative method of access?

Relevant Planning History

None

Assessment

Principle of development

The principle of a new dwelling adjacent to No.8 Dunsford Crescent is considered acceptable given the sites location within the Settlement Policy Boundary for Basingstoke, in accordance with Policy D5 of the Local Plan. The proposed development is on land that falls within the private residential garden of the existing property. Amendments to Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (PPS3) made in June 2010 have removed private gardens from the definition of previously developed land. However, the site remains within the Settlement Policy Boundary wherein the principle of development is acceptable under Policy D5.

Impact on the Character of the Area

As a well-established residential area, the principle of an additional dwelling is considered to be acceptable subject to considerations on siting, design, scale and layout.

The proposed dwelling would respect the pattern of development in the locality. Whilst being a detached dwelling, its design would relate sympathetically to the rhythmic line of development along Dunsford Crescent. The proposed dwelling would be located 1m off the western boundary and the development would maintain space to either side, such that the dwelling would sit comfortably within its plot without appearing cramped. As such it is considered that the proposal would relate positively to the pattern of development along this part of Dunsford Crescent.

The site currently contains a semi-detached dwelling, one of a line of residential properties on similarly sized plots. The proposed dwelling would be 7.9m high and the submitted streetscene demonstrates that the height will match the existing property to the east. It is considered that the height of the proposed dwelling would not be out of context with the surrounding development and therefore not harmful to the character of the area.

40 of 72

The footprint of the proposed dwelling would be deeper than the existing dwelling and therefore extends into the rear garden. However the depth of the proposal is in line with other properties in the vicinity that have been extended, though principally at ground floor level. It is considered that the depth of the dwelling would not be discernible from the streetscene, being concealed to the rear of the property.

The proposed dwelling is designed with a hipped roof and although of a differing design to the existing property to the east, it is considered that the style of the property is appropriate to the character of the area where some of the dwellings have hipped roofs. The dwelling would not stand out within the streetscene, and would be considered to have a neutral impact, in terms of its design, on the character and appearance of the area. The proposed dwelling would also be constructed in materials to match the dwelling to the east.

In summary, it is considered that the overall size and design of the property would respond positively to the local context of the area and would therefore accord with Policy E1 of the Local Plan.

Impact on Trees and Biodiversity

There is a hedgerow along the western boundary containing several trees. In accordance with Policy E6 of the Local Plan, it is necessary to consider the quality and landscape importance of the existing tree cover on and adjacent to the site and the impact of the proposed development in physical and relationship terms on the existing tree cover.

The application proposes to retain two Hawthorns to the front of the site, and an Elder Tree growing in the adjacent open space will also be retained. Several smaller trees, three Hawthorns and a Silver Birch, will be removed from the site and the Tree Officer raises no objection to this. Whilst some arboricultural information has been submitted to support the application, the Tree Officer has recommended a condition requiring a Tree Protection Plan to be submitted to ensure that the development is carried out appropriately with regard to protecting the health and stability of the retained trees.

It is therefore considered that with the imposition of the condition as noted above, the proposal would accord with Policies E1(iii) and E6 of the Local Plan in relation to the protection of trees.

The proposed development involves the construction of a new dwelling within an area of land used as a garden. It will involve the removal of two sections of hedgerow which may have the potential to support nesting birds. These are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and are a material consideration under Saved Policy E7 of the Local Plan. The Biodiversity Officer therefore recommends a condition be imposed to ensure reasonable effort is taken to avoid harm to such animals.

Impact on Neighbouring Amenities

The proposed dwelling would have a rear garden depth of around 13m, and a window to window separation distance of 45m from the properties to the rear (south) of the site on Beech Way. It is considered that this separation distance is sufficient to prevent any direct overlooking or loss of privacy to the neighbours to the rear. Whilst there would be some overlooking from first floor windows over the garden of the existing dwelling (no.8), this is typical of any urban situation and is not considered to be significantly different to the views available from existing neighbouring properties or detrimental to amenity or privacy.

41 of 72

The proposed dwelling would be located over 40m from the properties to the north of the site, on the opposite side of Dunsford Crescent (Nos. 11 and 13 Dunsford Crescent) and approximately 22m from the properties at Nos. 10 and 12 Dunsford Crescent which would be at an oblique angle to the siting of the proposed dwelling. These distances and building relationships are therefore considered to be sufficient to mitigate against any impact of overlooking. It is acknowledged that objections have been raised to this proposal on the ground of overlooking and loss of privacy, the separation distances are similar to those of existing properties and are considered sufficient to minimise overlooking. As such, it is not considered reasonable to refuse this application on the grounds of amenity, or to impose conditions requiring the windows to be obscure glazed under the tests of Circular 11/95. Overall it is considered that given the orientation of the property and its separation from neighbouring properties, there would be no undue overlooking or loss of privacy to the occupants of any neighbouring property. As such, it is considered that the proposal would accord with Policy E1 of the Local Plan in this regard. Impact on Highway Safety and Parking Provision The site is located within the outer urban parking zone where a three bedroom property is required to provide 2 parking spaces as set out within the Residential Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document 2008. Secure cycle parking for 2 long and 1 short stay places plus refuse and recycling storage (prior to disposal) and collection facilities for 2 nos 240ltr wheelie bins is also required. The proposed detached dwelling is positioned alongside the existing 3 bedroom semi and the proposal will affect the existing properties vehicle parking and refuse/recycling arrangements. The new dwelling would have an integral garage with internal dimensions scaling (2.5m by 5.5m). The normally accepted internal dimension of a new garage is 3m by 6m with a minimum clearance between the frames of the vehicular doors being 2.3m. The distance between the garage doors and the boundary of the property scales at 5.5m with a vehicle also required to turn through 90 degrees to access the garage. The Highway Officer considered that it is unlikely that a private motor vehicle could access/egress the proposed garage. However, the proposed garage would serve as storage for bicycles. In addition, the application documents refer to the garage being used as a motorcycle, cycle and garden store. Two external vehicle parking spaces are proposed for the property plus two external spaces proposed for the existing property. Each space is considered to be of the appropriate dimensions for regular domestic use and general vehicle maintenance, etc. The Highway Officer has therefore raised no objection on parking grounds as, although the proposed garage is substandard, adequate space is provided within the site for the parking of two vehicles for each property. The existing property is not being provided with additional secure cycle parking, however it has none specifically at present. Side access to this property is maintained and there is adequate space in the rear garden to accommodate a small shed should cycle parking be required. Refuse/recycling storage and collection points are shown for both properties although the floor area of each will need to be increased to cater for 2 nos 240ltr wheelie bins each with a required floor area of 780mm by 940mm. This matter can be secured via a condition.

42 of 72

A condition is recommended to ensure that the final details of the proposed means of access to both properties will contain the proposed shingle surfacing and measures to prevent it from migrating out onto the adjoining carriageway. It is noted that Dunsford Crescent is an unadopted and privately maintained carriageway, however in planning terms, this does not preclude the Authority from granting planning permission for an additional dwelling subject to normal considerations in terms of highway safety and parking. The Highway Officer raises no objection to the widening or increased use of the access to serve an additional dwelling and sufficient parking in accordance with the standards would be provided. However, it should be noted that the granting of planning permission by the LPA does not remove the need for the applicant / land owner to seek the appropriate consents under the terms of any covenants on the land relating to the privacy access. In summary, Officers are satisfied that the proposal would accord with Policies A1 and E1(iii) of the Local Plan. Community Infrastructure Contributions A Unilateral Undertaking has been submitted which secures contributions towards local infrastructure and community facility improvements in the vicinity of the site. The Council's legal team has confirmed that this is acceptable. The proposed development therefore accords with Policy C1 of the Local Plan. Other matters The objections received have been noted and have, to a large extent, been addressed above. It is noted that there have been numerous building projects in Dunsford Crescent over the years, however this is not reason in itself to refuse planning permission for this development The provision of one additional dwelling in this area would not result in increased traffic generation to the detriment of the locality. In any event, the property would be provided with sufficient parking for its needs in accordance with standards. Any damage caused to this private unadopted road is a matter for the relevant land owners. As above, the fact that the road is private does not mean that planning permission should be refused. The granting of any planning permission does not however remove the need for the applicant to comply with any covenants on the land. Conditions are recommended regarding the hours of construction work and deliveries to minimise impact on neighbouring properties. It is noted that the proposed construction work will impact on those who work night shifts and sleep during the day, however it is unreasonable to refuse this application on this basis. There is no right to a view in planning legislation. Whilst some residents currently enjoy a view across the side garden of no. 8, there is no reason in planning terms that this view should be maintained. As above, it is considered that the proposed development can be accommodated acceptably within the plot without detriment to the character or appearance of the area. Whilst it is noted that there are large development sites being considered across Basingstoke, small scale infill development does also contribute to the council's need to deliver housing. As above, the site is within a Settlement Policy Boundary where the principle of additional residential development is acceptable.

43 of 72

Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority: Drawing no. 11/04/267/LP received 3 January 2012 Drawing no. 11/04/267/01(P) received 3 January 2012 Drawing no. 11/04/267/02(P) received 3 January 2012 Drawing no. 11/04/267/03(P) received 3 January 2012 Drawing no. 11/04/267/SP received 3 January 2012 REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3. No development including site clearance, demolition, ground preparation, temporary access construction/widening, material storage or construction works shall commence until a scheme for the protection of the trees/hedge on the western boundary of the application site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No development or other operations shall take place other than in complete accordance with the approved tree protection scheme, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The tree protection scheme shall include the following information:

(a) A tree protection plan comprising of a drawing at a scale of not less than 1:500 showing, with a solid line, all trees and other landscape features that are to be retained and, with a dashed or dotted line, those that are to be removed. This drawing shall also show the position of protection zones, fencing and ground protection measures to be established for retained trees and hedge. (b) The specification for protective fencing and ground protection measures together with a timetable to show when these will be put in place and when they will be removed; (c) Details of any levels changes within or adjacent to the protection zone; (d) Provision for briefing construction personnel on compliance with the plan; (e) Provision for signage of the protection zone; (f) Provision for the appointment of an arboriculturist to supervise construction activity occurring on the site. The arboriculturist will be responsible for the implementation of temporary protective measures and shall be responsible for organising a pre- commencement meeting with the Local Planning Authority Tree Officer (contact 01256 845 742) once the temporary tree and ground protection is in place and ready for inspection. REASON: To ensure that reasonable measures are taken to safeguard trees in the interests of local amenity and the enhancement of the development itself in accordance with Policy E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

4. No development shall take place, including any works of demolition, 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);

44 of 72

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. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

5. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied or the approved use commence, whichever is the sooner, until details for 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, each of the two properties, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be fully implemented before occupation or the use commences, whichever is the sooner, and shall be thereafter maintained, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of general amenity, to ensure convenience of arrangements for refuse and recycling storage and collection and to ensure that no obstruction is caused on the adjoining highway, in the interest of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

6. No development shall commence on-site until details of the method of construction of the new means of access, including visibility sightlines, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved access details shall be constructed and fully implemented before the commencement of building and other operations on the site and shall be thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To ensure that a satisfactory means of access to the highway is constructed before the approved buildings in the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

7. The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match, in type, colour and texture those on the adjacent dwelling (No. 8 Dunsford Crescent) unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

8. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied or the approved use commence, whichever is the sooner, until 2 vehicle parking spaces have been provided within the curtilage of the new dwelling and within the curtilage of no.8 Dunsford Crescent in accordance with the approved plans and the areas of land so provided shall not be used for any purposes other than the loading, unloading and parking of vehicles, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policies E1 and A1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

45 of 72

9. Notwithstanding the provision 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 gates shall be erected across the approved access unless details have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

10. No trees or shrubs shall be removed between 1 March and 31 August unless first checked by an ecologist for active birds nests. If a nest is discovered, the tree or shrub must not be removed until the young have left the nest. REASON: To avoid impacts on urban bird populations in the interests of urban wildlife conservation and the council's duty to have regard to biodiversity conservation in carrying out its duties and in accordance with Saved Policy E7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council Local Plan 1996-2011.

11. No work relating to the construction of the development hereby approved, including works of demolition or preparation prior to operations, 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 recognised public holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

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 recognised public holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

13. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 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 building, structure or other alteration permitted by Class A and B of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Order shall be erected on the application site without the prior written permission of the Local Planning Authority on an application made for that purpose. REASON: To prevent the overdevelopment of the site in the interests of the amenity of the area and to safeguard the amenities of the adjoining properties, in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

Notes to the Applicant:

1. 1.1 The applicant’s attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if any), must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated. 1.2 This permission may contain pre-commencement conditions which require specific matters to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before a specified stage in the development occurs. This means that a lawful commencement of the approved development CANNOT be made until the particular requirements of the pre-commencement conditions have been met.

46 of 72

2. Where possible we would welcome and encourage any biodiversity enhancement proposals within the proposed development site, such as additional plantings of native species to compensate the removal of the sections of hedgerow.

3. This Decision Notice must be read in conjunction with the Planning Obligation completed under the terms of Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). You are advised to satisfy yourself that you have all the relevant documentation.

47 of 72

Minor and Other Application

Cttee: 14/03/2012 Item No. 05

Application no: BDB/75746 For Details and Plans Click here

Site Address Land to rear of Yew Tree House, Baughurst Road, Baughurst, Tadley, RG26 5LL Proposal Erection of stables and change of use of land for equestrian purposes (part retrospective)

Registered: 19/01/2012 Expiry Date: 15/03/2012 Type of Full planning Case Officer: Katherine Miles Application: permission 01256 845249 Applicant: Mrs K Lynch Agent: Southern Planning Practice Ward: Baughurst and Ward Member(s): Cllr M J Bound* Tadley North Cllr G Round* Parish: Baughurst OS Grid Reference: 458336,161034

Recommendation:

It is RECOMMENDED that the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report.

Reasons for Approval:

1. The proposed development would be of an appropriate design and relates to surrounding development in a sympathetic manner and as such complies with Saved Policies E1 and E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. 2. The proposed development would preserve the landscape character and scenic quality of the area and as such is considered to accord with Policy E6 of the Basingstoke & Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

General comments

This application has been brought to the Development Control Committee due to the number of objections received.

Planning Policy

The site is located within the countryside.

Government Guidance

Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development (PPS1) Planning Policy Statement 7: Sustainable Development in Rural Areas (PPS7)

Regional Planning Policy

Policy C4 (Landscape and Countryside Management)

48 of 72

Adopted Local Plan 1996 – 2011 (saved policies)

Policy E1 (Development Control) Policy E6 (Landscape Character)

Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG’s) and interim planning guidance

Baughurst Village Design Statement (VDS) SPG Landscape Character Assessment SPG Description of Site Yew Tree House is a modern replacement dwelling located to the east of Baughurst Road. The property sits within a line of existing residential properties which front the road. The property has a small garden area to the rear and is accessed via a private track which also serves West View Farm. To the west of the property is the application site, which comprises a 1.6ha field that has been subdivided into four paddocks. The land presently contains two mobile field shelters and two horses. The land can be accessed through the garden area of Yew Tree House via a field gate in the south eastern corner of the field. To the south and west of the application site is a public right of way. The site is also bounded to the east by residential properties. Proposal The application proposes the erection of a stable building comprising two boxes, a tack room and a hay store. The building would have an 'L' shaped footprint with an overall length of 9.6m and a width of 8.5m. The building would be of single storey height of 3.3m and would be of timber construction with a tiled roof. A hardstanding is proposed to the front of the building. The application also seeks to regularise the current use of land for equestrian purposes and in this respect is part retrospective. Consultations Baughurst Parish Council: Objection: "My Council wish to object to the above application on the following grounds:  the application will create an undesirable precedent in terms of backland development. There are a number of houses which front the Baughurst Road, all with farm land to the rear of their properties, to which similar applications could apply.  there will be a considerable loss of visual amenity to both local residents and users of the adjacent public right of way. This is also true of the proposed stable block within the application.  there will be a significant change in the rural character of the immediate adjacent neighbourhood. Grazing of horses may well fit the rural nature of the locality, whereas a equestrian centre could result in more traffic, both people and vehicular, onto the busy Baughurst Road.  Baughurst and Wolverton VDS refers to the fact that the sub-division of fields is not to be supported or encouraged.  a previous application to BDBC of lawful use for equestrian use of the field was rejected in December 2008, which creates a precedent."

49 of 72

Local Highway Authority: No objection.

Landscape: No objection.

Environmental Health: No objection subject to conditions.

Public Observations

Four letters of objection have been received raising the following concerns:

 Open land bounded by Rights of Way.  Detrimental to views from the footpaths.  Vague application that the council will have no control over in the future.  Will end up like situation at Violet Lane.  The area is too large for just a few horses.  The applicant owns all the land and could have sited the stables anywhere.  There are other livery yards in Baughurst which could be used.  No overriding need for the proposal.  Proposed stables will be overly intrusive from Beulah which is only 30m away.  Stables are a sizeable structure.  Precedent.  Yew Tree House appears to be on the market for sale.  One of the features referred to in the particulars is a stable block in the front garden  Previous application refused.  Proposed development fails to respect amenity.  Proposal will generate smells, noise, vermin and flies.  Muck trailer is unacceptable close to Beulah.  Council's Environmental Health Officer should be consulted.  Not suitable development for behind residential properties.  Development will encroach further and will be difficult to supervise.  Loss of privacy.  Loss of a view.  Proposed Beech hedge will not be an effective screen given height of the stables  Planting will take many years to grow.  Contrary to Baughurst VDS.  Inadequate sightlines.

One letter of comment has been received:

 No objection in principle.  Undesirable outcomes unless conditions are imposed to control use and intensity.  No commercial activity.  No further subdivision.  No further buildings / structures.

Relevant Planning History

BDB/69807 Application for Certificate of Lawfulness for use of Refused land parcel rear of Rose Cottage, The Farriers, 10/02/2009 Bankfield Beech Hey and Woodside as agricultural and equestrian mixed use and use of land to rear of Yew Tree Cottage for residential use

50 of 72

Assessment Principle of development The site is situated within the countryside, though bounded to the east by residential development fronting Baughurst Road. The site is currently accessed by a track off Baughurst Road serving the existing dwelling and the neighbouring West View Farm. The area to the west has an agricultural character of mixed fields and paddocks. The application site itself appears to have been used for the grazing of horses for several years. A previous application (BDB/69807) for a Certificate of Lawful Use was refused by the council on the grounds of lack of evidence. It is important to note that this application, due to its type, did not consider the merits of the use of the land for equestrian purposes, only evidence relating to the length of time the use has been in place. The land presently has an agricultural character and this field is currently separated from the residential properties fronting Baughurst Lane by a strong boundary line designated partially by native hedgerow and partially fencing. This boundary provides a clear definition between residential curtilage and the existing agricultural and equestrian use of the land. This proposal seeks to regularise the existing equestrian use of the land that has clearly been ongoing for some time. It is considered that the principle of equestrian use is acceptable in countryside locations, providing that the associated built form does not detract from the landscape character of the rural area. The area of land which has been changed from agricultural to land for the keeping of horses is relatively large, however, the proposed development is for private equestrian use rather than commercial use, and is therefore expected to be a small scale activity. Given the rural location of the site it is considered necessary to impose a planning condition restricting the use of the land to private equestrian use only. Furthermore a condition restricting floodlighting is also recommended. Therefore, this proposal would formalise the equestrian use of agricultural land and would in principle, subject to other considerations such as the impact on the landscape character and the highway, be acceptable. Impact on Landscape Character and Visual Amenity

The proposed stable building is considered to be of an acceptable size and bulk. The low profile design of the building and the proposed materials are considered to be inappropriate to the rural character of the area. Given the proposed scale and design of the stable building, it is considered that the proposal would not have a detrimental impact upon the visual amenities of the streetscene from Baughurst Road. The applicant proposes to provide additional planting along the southern boundary line to the rear of the stable building and this will aide in softening views of the building from the public right of way to the south. The proposed stable building, would preserve the landscape character and visual amenity of the area due to the rural form of the building and its siting and would accord with Saved Policies E1 and E6 of the Local Plan.

As noted above, there are public footpaths to the south and west of the site, where views of the proposed stable block and equestrian use will be prevalent, however it is considered that the level of activity associated with this site is typical in a rural area. Therefore, whilst the building and use will be seen, it is not considered that these views will be harmful, or out of character with the area. Planning conditions are also recommended to control the intensity of the use to protect the character of the area in the long term.

51 of 72

Impact on neighbouring amenities

Whilst the stable block will be seen from neighbouring properties, it is considered that the amenities of neighbouring properties will not be detrimentally affected in terms of loss of light or overlooking due to the location of the stable building and its modest scale. There is also no right to a view. The proposed stable building would at its closest be 25m from the dwelling known as Beulah and in excess of 30m to nearest part of the dwelling known as Rose Cottage. The size of the stable building and its distance from neighbouring properties is considered to be acceptable, and as noted above, not detrimental to visual amenity or character. In consultation on the planning application, the Environmental Health Team have raised no objection to the proposal on the grounds of odour or amenity. Whilst the concerns of the objectors are noted, there is no evidence that the existing use is or has caused harm to amenity. Given that this application does not seek an intensive equestrian use, it would be unreasonable to refuse the application on this basis. In addition, whilst there is no record of any existing nuisance complaint associated with this use, there is legislation under the Environmental Protection Act to deal with complaints if they do arise in the future. Therefore, whilst the concerns of the objectors are noted, it is considered that the proposal would not be detrimental to amenity and would therefore accord with Saved Policy E1 of the Local Plan. Highway Considerations The stable and field would be accessed through existing field gates within the garden area of Yew Tree House. The submitted plan shows a proposed track across the garden and whilst this is not included within the red line, the provision of a hardstanding within the curtilage of a dwellinghouse would not require planning permission. The Highway Officer has raised no objection to the use of the private drive off Baughurst Lane to serve this use, and it is considered that visibility is adequate at the junction of the access. A revised plan was received 22 February 2012 reducing the width of the stable by 3.5m to enable a larger area of hardstanding to the front of the building to provide space for accessing the site with a car/tractor and muck trailer/horse box. The Highway Officer is satisfied that this increased area of hardstanding is acceptable, noting that a vehicle could turn within the field to enable a vehicle to enter and exit the highway in a forward gear. On the basis of the above, it is considered that the proposal would accord with Saved Policy E1(iii) of the Local Plan. Other matters The proposed stable building includes the provision of stable doors which could be locked at night. Given that the applicant lives opposite the site where the stables will be in view of the existing dwelling, this is considered to be acceptable, with regards to surveillance. There are two field shelters on the site and the applicant confirms that these are moved between the paddock throughout the year. It is noted that these field shelters will be retained on the land, in addition to the stable building, however they are necessary for the welfare of the horses to provide shelter in cold/wet conditions and shade from heat in the summer. Given the temporary nature of the development, it is considered that planning permission is not required for them, provided that they do remain as movable structures and are moved regularly.

There are various comments which suggest that the application proposal is contrary to the VDS. It is acknowledged that the VDS states: "The creation of small enclosures within

52 of 72 fields, new entrances, and the assortment of buildings are not in keeping with the rural character of Baughurst". It is however considered this statement needs to be read in the context that it was written and that is in relation to the developments that have occurred on Violet Lane. It is not reasonable to state that any equestrian use in the countryside will be resisted as each application is assessed on its merits. Indeed the Baughurst VDS does recognise that the "keeping and riding of horses is a welcome activity in the Parish".

In this case, planning permission was not required to erect fences that have subdivided the existing larger field into smaller paddocks. Furthermore, planning permission is not required for the erection of field shelters provided that they are moved regularly and have no physical attachment to the ground, and also planning permission is not required to create additional accesses, where those accesses are not on to a classified road. This application therefore needs to focus on the development and land use applied for and whether that development is acceptable with regard to the Saved Policies of the Development Plan. With regard to the proposal submitted, it is the Officer's recommendation that the proposal does accord with the Saved Policies of the Development Plan and, subject to conditions, can be recommended for approval.

Conditions

1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority: Location plan BA/290/AK/001a received on 29/02/12; Block Plan No BA/290/AK/002c received on 28/02/12 and drawing No LYNCH K OCT -2011 A received on 22/02/12 REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3. The proposed planting to the southern boundary of the site shown on the approved plans BA/290/AK/002c received on 28/02/12 shall be carried out in full accordance with the submitted Planting Specification received 19 January 2012 within the first planting season following completion of the stable building and shall subsequently be maintained in accordance with the 5 year management plan. REASON: In the interests of amenity and in accordance with Saved Policy E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

4. The application site and stables hereby permitted shall only be used for private recreational equestrian purposes and shall not be used for any other purpose including commercial riding, breeding, livery or training purposes. REASON: The land and buildings which are the subject of this application are not considered suitable for general recreational or commercial equestrian use due to the sensitivity of this location in the open countryside and proximity to residential properties in accordance with the advice contained within Planning Policy Statement 7:Sustainable Development in Rural Areas and Saved Policies E1 and E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

5. The stables hereby permitted shall be occupied solely by horses within the management and control of the occupiers of Yew Tree House, Baughurst Road, only and shall not be sold off or sublet separately from this property. REASON: The land and buildings which are the subject of this application are not

53 of 72

considered suitable for general recreational or commercial equestrian use due to the sensitivity of this location in the open countryside and proximity to residential properties in accordance with the advice contained within Planning Policy Statement 7:Sustainable Development in Rural Areas and Saved Policies E1 and E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

6. No external lighting shall be installed within the site, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of the amenities of the area and adjoining residential properties in particular, in accordance with Saved Policies E1 and E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

7. No work relating to the construction of the development hereby approved 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 recognised public holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

8. 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 recognised public holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. Notes to the Applicant: 1. 1.1 The applicant’s attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if any), must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated.

54 of 72

2. The applicant is advised that there should be no burning on site of waste materials including demolished materials, trees, greenery etc. in the interests of preserving neighbouring amenity and in accordance with the advice of the Council's Environmental Health Team.

55 of 72

Minor and Other Application

Cttee: 14/03/2012 Item No. 06

Application no: BDB/75749 For Details and Plans Click here

Site Address Land at O/S ref: 466731 153295, The Street, Old Basing, Basingstoke, RG24 7DD Proposal Application for the retention of existing telecommunications equipment DSLAM cabinet W1200mm X D450mm X H1600mm

Registered: 18/01/2012 Expiry Date: 14/03/2012 Type of Full planning Case Officer: Gemma Page Application: permission 01256 845314 Applicant: Openreach Agent: Harlequin Ltd Ward: Basing Ward Member(s): Cllr Ms O V Cubitt Cllr S Godesen* Cllr S T Marks Parish: Old Basing & OS Grid Reference: 466731,153295 Lychpit

Recommendation:

It is RECOMMENDED that the application be APPROVED.

Reasons for Approval:

1. The development preserves the character of the Conservation Area and as such complies with adopted policies in particular Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment and Saved Policy E3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. 2. The development is of an appropriate design and relates to surrounding development in a sympathetic manner and as such complies with Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development; Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 and Appendix 13 of the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document 2008. 3. The development does not result in undue overlooking, overshadowing, or noise and disturbance impacts to neighbouring properties and as such complies with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

General Comments

This application has been brought before the Development Control Committee in accordance with the Council's Scheme of Delegation which requires planning applications for telecommunication works recommended for approval by officers to be determined by the Development Control Committee.

Planning Policy

The site is located within Old Basing Settlement Policy Boundary and within the Old Basing Conservation Area. Government Guidance

56 of 72

Planning Policy Statement 5: 'Planning for the Historic Environment' (PPS5) Planning Policy Guidance 8: Telecommunications (PPG8) The Governments Digital Britain White Paper (2006)

Adopted Local Plan 1996 – 2011

Policy E1 (Development Control) Policy E3 (Areas of Architectural or Historic Interest) Policy A4 (Telecommunications Development)

Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG’s) and interim planning guidance

Basingstoke and Deane's Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document 2008: Appendix 4 'Conservation Areas' Old Basing Conservation Area Appraisal (2003)

Description of Site

Highway verge and footpath adjacent to The Street. The site lies opposite the Bolton Arms Public House and adjacent to several Listed Buildings.

Proposal

The development comprises of the retention of a green cabinet measuring 1.2 metres in width, 0.45 metres in depth with an overall height of 1.6 metres. This piece of equipment provides super-fast broadband internet connection for the area.

Consultations

Conservation Officer: Objection

'It is considered that an additional cabinet in the location proposed would be harmful to this sensitive location within the conservation area adding to the existing level of visual clutter within the street scene caused by the presence of the existing cabinet, telegraph pole, bus stop and alike'.

Highways Officer: No Objection

Public Observations:

None

Relevant Planning History

BDB/74095 Installation of green DSLAM cabinet W1200mm X Raise D450mm X H1600mm Objection 27/04/2011 BDB/74582 Installation of green DSLAM cabinet W1200mm X Withdrawn D450mm X H1600mm 11/07/2011

57 of 72

Assessment

Site History

The Local Planning Authority raised an objection against a prior approval for a proposed broadband cabinet under BDB/74095 in April 2011, as a result of the siting and design of the proposed cabinet. The proposed cabinet was to be sited at the back edge of an open highway verge, adjacent to the car parking area of The Bolton Arms Public House. Given the stark design and prominent nature of the proposed development and as a result of its siting, the Local Planning Authority determined that the cabinet would cause visual harm to the character and appearance of the surrounding Conservation Area and would detrimentally impact upon the historic setting of the surrounding Listed Buildings.

Following the objection raised against BDB/74095, the applicant submitted an alternative site under a prior approval application (BDB/74582). However, following the Officers site inspection, it was clear that the cabinet had already been installed. As such, the application was retrospective and could not be considered under a prior approval application. Furthermore, the Local Planning Authority raised concerns regarding the alterative siting of the cabinet, as the Conservation Officer noted that it would add to existing level of visual clutter as a result of its close siting to existing street furniture. Following the comments made by the Conservation Officer, the applicant subsequently withdrew the application in order to discuss alternative appropriate sites with Officers.

The Conservation Officer made suggestions to alternative locations within the surrounding area and Officers met on site with the applicants to discuss these options. It became clear during this meeting that the alternative locations proposed by the Local Planning Authority were not viable options for the applicant, either as a result of the distances between the existing cabinet and the proposed cabinet or as a result of the topography of suggested sites. The applicant also considered alternative locations which were either considered to be more prominent or which may have impacted on sight lines from the access of the Bolton Arms Public House.

This current application therefore seeks to retain the siting of the cabinet as sought under withdrawn application BDB/74582.

Impact on the Character of the Area/ Design

The Conservation Officer has raised an objection to the retention of the cabinet in its current location, which is considered to be a sensitive location within the Old Basing Conservation Area, identified within the Old Basing Conservation Area Appraisal as a multiple viewpoint to an important building or groups of buildings (The Bolton Arms Public House, 89 The Street and 3 and 5 Milkingpen Lane, all of which are Listed Buildings). The site also lies within an Open Area of Townscape Significance, is a significant focal point of the village and adjacent to Trees of Townscape Significance, all identified in the Old Basing Conservation Area Appraisal.

The Conservation Officer has noted the presence of existing street furniture, which includes another existing cabinet, a telegraph pole, a highways signpost, a bus stop and post mounted post box, all of which are situated in close proximity to each other and creates a degree of visual clutter in the street scene. The Conservation Officer is concerned that the cabinet forming part of this planning application is an overly dominant feature within an Open Area of Townscape Significance, distracting from important views points and exacerbating the visual clutter of the existing street furniture, to the detriment of the visual character of the surrounding Conservation Area.

58 of 72

Although the concerns raised by the Conservation Officer are noted, the cabinet is modest in size and scale and does not appear to significantly harm the appearance of the existing street scene, as a result of its green finish and siting adjacent to a mature hedgerow. Although planning legislation does not extend to hedgerows and that the hedgerow can be removed by its owner without the need for consent, it is considered that the visual impact of the cabinet, when read in context with the existing street furniture, on an individual and cumulative basis, would not be significantly harmful to warrant a refusal of the application.

Whilst the Local Planning Authority agree that the addition of another cabinet to this site further impacts on the visual appearance of the existing street scene and wider Conservation Area, it is recognised that the visual impact of the cabinet would be very localised and the degree of harm to the Conservation Area has to be balanced against the public benefits that would result from proposal providing the area with superfast broadband internet connection. Therefore, on balance, given the limited impact visual impact, the siting and design of the cabinet is considered acceptable.

However, to ensure that the development is maintained in satisfactory condition throughout its installation, it is considered reasonable to recommend an informative to remind the applicant of their responsibility for the maintenance of the external appearance of the cabinet. This would seek to ensure that the cabinet does not become visually incongruous within the existing street scene in the future, to the detriment of the character and appearance of the surrounding area. Given that the application is retrospective, there is no requirement for the standard time period for implementation condition.

Impact on Neighbouring Amenities

Due to the size, scale and form of the cabinet, there is no undue harm to the amenities of the neighbouring properties. Although the cabinet contains a small cooling fan, given the overall distance of the proposal from the neighbouring residential properties, no objection is raised against in terms of noise/disturbance issues.

Highways

The Highways Officer has raised no concerns regarding the siting or design of the cabinet.

Notes to the Applicant:

1. The applicant is reminded of their responsibilities for the maintenance of the external appearance of all installed cabinets. It is also requested that the applicant provides clear identification and contact details on the outside of the cabinet in order for members of the public to report any maintenance issues, should they wish to.

59 of 72

Minor and Other Application

Cttee: 14/03/2012 Item No. 07

Application no: BDB/75790 For Details and Plans Click here

Site Address 2 Maple Crescent, Basingstoke, RG21 5ST Proposal Erection of two storey side extension and single storey front and rear extensions

Registered: 31/01/2012 Expiry Date: 27/03/2012 Type of Householder Case Officer: Claire Cook Application: Permission 01256 845444 Applicant: Mr J McRae Agent: Ward: Norden Ward Member(s): Cllr P Harvey Cllr G Hood* Cllr Mrs L James

Parish: OS Grid Reference: 463600,153198

Recommendation:

It is RECOMMENDED that the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report.

Reasons for Approval:

1. The proposed development would be of an appropriate design and relates to surrounding development in a sympathetic manner and as such complies with Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development; Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 and Appendix 13 of the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document 2008. 2. The proposed development is appropriate in design terms and would neither dominate or compete with the host building and as such complies with Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development; Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 and Appendix 13 of the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document. 3. The development would not cause an adverse impact on highway safety and adequate parking and cycle provision would be provided to serve the proposed development and as such the proposal complies with Saved Policies A1 and A2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. 4. The proposed development would not result in an undue loss of privacy or cause undue overlooking, overshadowing, overbearing or noise and disturbance impacts to neighbouring properties and as such complies with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

General comments

This application is brought to the Development Control Committee in accordance with the scheme of delegation as the applicant is a Council Officer within the Building Control Team.

60 of 72

Planning Policy

The application site is located within a Settlement Policy Boundary.

Government Guidance

Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development (PPS1).

Adopted Local Plan 1996 – 2011 (saved policies)

Policy E1 (Development Control). Policy A1 (Car Parking). Policy A2 (Encouraging Walking, Cycling and the Use of Public Transport).

Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG’s) and interim planning guidance

Appendix 13 of the Design and Sustainability SPD 'Extending Your Home and Replacement Dwellings. Residential Parking Standards SPD.

Description of Site

The application site is located at the far end of the residential development of Maple Crescent and adjacent to the Vyne Community School. The host dwelling is a semi- detached brick and tile dwelling with single storey elements to the side and accommodation in the roof space which is served by rooflights. There is existing parking to the front of the property and a side access to the rear garden. The residential area is characterised by semi-detached properties of a similar design.

Proposal

Erection of a two storey side extension and single storey front and rear extensions.

The two storey side extension would measure 4.3m in width, 6.8m in depth and 7.9m in height. The single storey rear extension would have a mono-pitched roof and measure 3.3m in depth, 8.9m in width and 3.4m in height. The single storey front extension would extend across the front of the existing dwellinghouse and the two storey side extension. The extension across the front of the host dwelling would measure 1.4m in depth and 3.2m in height with a mono-pitched roof.

Consultations

Highways Officer: No objection (subject to conditions).

Public Observations: 1 letter of objection received raising the following concerns:

 Well-designed area with open plan front gardens giving a spacious character.  Proposed development nearly doubles the footprint of the building.  Over-large extension would have an adverse impact on the character and appearance of the area and a precedent should be avoided.

61 of 72

Relevant Planning History

BDB/75411 Erection of two storey side extension and single Withdrawn storey front and rear extensions. 23/12/2011

Assessment

Previous planning application

Planning application BDB/75411 also proposed a two storey side extension and single storey front and rear extensions. This application was withdrawn in December 2011 as officers were concerned with the size and design of the two storey side extension. The two storey extension proposed under BDB/75411 was 5.1m wide and was designed with a lower roof height and included a large dormer window on the front and rear roofslopes. It was considered that the design of the extension did not respect the character and simple form of the property, that the width of the development was disproportional in relation to the host dwelling and that the development would as a result have appeared unduly prominent in the street scene.

Following discussions with Officers the two storey extension has been reduced in width from 5.1 to 4.3m (thus reducing the overall footprint of development) and re-designed to increase the height of the proposed extensions and remove the dormer windows. The extension has been set back from the front elevation of the host dwelling and set down from the roof of the main dwellinghouse. Furthermore, the design of the front extension has been simplified with the removal of the projection forward of the front door and a continual mono-pitch roof.

Impact on the character of the area/ design

The proposed two storey extension is considered to be of an acceptable size and design. Whilst the extension is relatively wide in comparison to the host dwelling it is considered that as a result of its design, including being set back from the front elevation and down from the main ridge, and the incorporation of a single storey mono-pitch element to the front, that it would appear a subservient addition and would not harm the appearance of the host dwelling or have a harmful impact within the street scene.

Furthermore, No.4 Sutton Road (one of the neighbouring semi-detached properties to the north of the host dwelling) has been extended by way of a similar two storey rear extension (under planning permission BDB/62583) which measures 4.1m in width at two storey height. As such, an extension of the width proposed would not be uncharacteristic of the area and the siting of the host dwelling within the street scene compared to this neighbouring property would be less prominent.

The proposed single storey front extension would add interest to the front of the host dwelling and is of an appropriate size and design. There are also other examples of front extensions on neighbouring properties including Nos. 1 and 2 Sutton Road to the north of the application site and therefore the development would not appear out of character within the street scene.

The proposed single storey rear extension is considered to be of an acceptable size and design. This rear extension is proposed to have a rendered finish, whilst the host dwelling has a brick finish and the other extensions are proposed to be constructed of brick to match the host dwelling. Given that the proposed rear extension would not be visible within

62 of 72 the street scene, and that it would complement the host dwelling providing a more contemporary element to the development, no objections are raised to the use of render on this element. Cumulatively the development does represent a significant increase in the footprint of the property, however, as a result of the design of these extensions it is considered they would have not harm the appearance of the host dwelling or street scene, or result in the overdevelopment of the application site. Furthermore, each application is assessed on its own merits and the approval of this development would not set an unacceptable precedent. The proposed development is therefore considered to comply with Saved Policy E1 of the Local Plan and Appendix 13 of the Design and Sustainability SPD. Impact on neighbouring amenities The proposed single storey rear and front extensions would extend up to the shared boundary with No.4 Maple Crescent to the north and the relevant notice has been served on this neighbouring property. The proposed rear extension by virtue of its single storey nature and mono-pitch roof would not result in any undue overbearing or overshadowing and a condition would be imposed to prevent any openings being inserted in the northern elevation to ensure no overlooking would be caused. Furthermore, it is worthy of note that the extension is only 0.3m deeper than the depth of an extension that could be erected under permitted development (3m). The single storey front extension as a result of its depth, mono-pitch design and proximity from the nearest ground floor window of No. 4 Maple Crescent would not result in any undue overbearing or overshadowing to this neighbouring property. Furthermore, the two storey side extensions would be screened from this neighbouring property by the host dwelling and the openings would not result in undue overlooking above and beyond the existing openings. The neighbouring properties to the west of the application site (separated by Maple Crescent Road) are over 20m away and the development would not result in any undue overbearing, overshadowing or overlooking to these neighbouring properties. The proposed development would be positioned 20m away from The Vyne Community School building and over 20m from The Cottage to the south. These properties are at a slightly higher ground level than the application site. The proposed development would not result in undue overbearing, overshadowing or overlooking to these properties. There is a first floor bedroom window proposed on the southern side elevation, however, it is considered that the distance between these properties is sufficient, taking into consideration the ground level changes, to ensure that no undue overlooking would result and a condition to obscure glaze the window is therefore considered not to be necessary or justified. The proposed development would not harm the amenities of neighbouring properties and therefore is considered to comply with Saved Policy E1 of the Local Plan and Appendix 13 of the Design and Sustainability SPD.

Parking

The application site is classified as 'inner urban' for the purposes of the Residential Parking Standards. The proposed dwelling would increase from a 3 to a 5 bedroom dwelling, requiring the provision of 3 parking spaces.

63 of 72

The application proposes an integral garage (which accords with the required size standards) and the provision of three external parking spaces. The Highways Officer has raised concerns that the three external spaces would not provide sufficient space to allow bins to be moved pass the parked cars to the highway or cycles to pass through to the rear garden. However, adequate space would exist on the driveway to make this possible and the application as it stands provides four parking spaces, 1 more than needed. As such, it is considered that subject to a condition to ensure that 3 parking spaces are provided within the application site, no objection be raised. The existing dropped curb would need to be extended to facilitate the proposed parking layout and a condition is proposed by the Highways Officer for details of this to be provided to the Local Planning Authority and for an informative to be added to make the applicant aware of the need to contact Hampshire County Council in this regard. Bicycle storage is shown within the rear garden and adequate space would also be provided within the integral garage for cycle storage, as such no objection is raised in this regard. The proposed layout also makes provision for bin storage. The Highways Officer has recommended a Construction Method Statement condition, however, given that the development is a householder application and that parking restrictions exist in the area in relation to the school it is not considered necessary or justified to impose this condition. The proposed development is therefore considered to comply with Saved Policies E1, A1 and A2 and the Residential Parking Standards SPD. Conditions 1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority:

Drawing No. 2-07 received 31/01/2012 Drawing No. 2-03 received 31/01/2012 Drawing No. 2-04 received 31/01/2012 Drawing No. 2-05 received 31/01/2012 Drawing No. 2-06 received 31/01/1012 REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

3. Unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority no development shall take place on site until details of the altered access to the premises have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved access details shall be constructed and fully implemented before the development hereby approved is occupied or the use commence, whichever is the sooner and shall be thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To ensure that a satisfactory means of access to the highway is constructed before the approved development is operational in the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. 4. The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the

64 of 72

development hereby permitted shall be as specified on the application forms, plans and particulars unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

5. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied or the use commence, whichever is the sooner, until provision for loading and unloading of vehicles and the parking of 3 vehicles and secure bicycle parking for 2 long and 1 short stay places have been made within the curtilage of the property and the areas of land so provided shall not be used for any purposes other than the turning, loading and unloading and parking of vehicles and bicycles, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policies E1, A1 and A2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

6. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 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 shall be inserted at ground floor level in the northern elevation of the single storey rear extension without the prior permission of the Local Planning Authority on an application made for the purpose. REASON: To protect the amenity and privacy of the occupiers of adjoining property in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

Notes to the Applicant:

1. 1.1 The applicant’s attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if any), must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated.

2. Consent under the Town and Country Planning Acts must not be taken as approval for any works carried out on any footway, including a Public Right of Way, carriageway, verge or other land forming part of the publically maintained highway. The development will involve works within the public highway. It is an offence to commence

65 of 72 those works without the permission of the Highway Authority, Hampshire County Council. In the interests of highway safety the development must not commence on- site until permission has been obtained from the Highway Authority authorising any necessary works within the publically maintained highway. Public Utility apparatus may also be affected by the development. Contact the appropriate public utility service to ensure agreement on any necessary alterations. Advice on this matter can be obtained from Hampshire County Council’s Area Office, telephone 0845 8504422.

66 of 72

Telecommunication Determinations

Cttee: 14/03/2012 Item No. 08

Application no: BDB/75791 For Details and Plans Click here

Site Address Longparish Road, Opposite The Hurstbourne, 34 Hurstbourne Priors, Whitchurch RG28 7SE Proposal Installation of Openreach broadband cabinet

Registered: 26/01/2012 Expiry Date: 21/03/2012 Type of Telecom works Case Officer: Gemma Page Application: determination 01256 845314 Applicant: Openreach Agent: Harlequin Group Ward: Whitchurch Ward Member(s): Cllr E Dunlop Cllr K Watts Parish: Hurstbourne Priors OS Grid Reference: 443750,146430

Recommendation:

It is RECOMMENDED that NO OBJECTION BE RAISED.

General Comments

Planning Policy

The site is located outside of any recognised Settlement Policy Boundary and within Hurstbourne Priors Conservation Area.

Government Guidance

Planning Policy Statement 5: 'Planning for the Historic Environment' (PPS5) Planning Policy Statement 7: 'Sustainable Development in Rural Areas’ (PPS7) Planning Policy Guidance 8: Telecommunications (PPG8) The Governments Digital Britain White Paper (2006)

Adopted Local Plan 1996 – 2011

Policy E1 (Development Control) Policy E3 (Areas of Architectural or Historic Interest) Policy E6 (Landscape Character) Policy A4 (Telecommunications Development)

67 of 72

Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG’s) and interim planning guidance Basingstoke and Deane's Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document 2008: Appendix 4 'Conservation Areas' Hurstbourne Priors Conservation Area Appraisal (2003) Description of Site The site lies on a highway verge adjacent to Longparish Road, sited hard up against the flank wall of 35A Hurstbourne Priors and adjacent to Longparish Road. Proposal The development comprises of the installation of a green cabinet measuring 0.8 metres in width, 0.45 metres in depth with an overall height of 1.3 metres. This piece of equipment is intended to be installed by BT Openreach so as to provide super-fast broadband internet connection for the area. Consultations Hurstbourne Priors Parish Council: No Objection Councillor Watts: No Objection 'I support this application which is in the best interests of the residents of Hurstbourne Priors and poses no threat to the character of the Conservation Area'. Conservation Officer: No Objection Highways Officer: No Objection Public Observations: None Assessment Principle of Development As the proposal involves the installation of apparatus and lies within a Conservation Area, the application is submitted under the prior approval procedure under Part 24 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 as amended. The Local Authority has 56 days in which to decide whether to raise no objections (and grant prior approval) or to raise objections to the siting and design only of the apparatus and refuse the application. As this is not a full planning application, the Local Planning Authority is unable to impose any conditions. Impact on the Character of the Area/Design

There is no objection to the proposal on the grounds of siting and design. The Conservation Officer notes that the proposed cabinet would be of a modest scale and would be clearly read as a modern and functional addition to the streetscene.

In noting the existing broadband cabinet adjacent to the site, the Conservation Officer acknowledges that the presence of an additional cabinet at the site would further impact upon the character and appearance of the surrounding Conservation Area, however, taking into account the small scale and neutral impact of the proposed cabinet when read

68 of 72 in context with the existing streetscene, it would not unduly harm the character and appearance of this part of the Conservation Area.

As a result of its modest scale and design, the proposed cabinet would not adversely affect the setting of 33 Longparish Road, a listed building to the south west of the site.

To ensure that the proposed cabinet is maintained in satisfactory condition throughout its installation, it is considered reasonable for the Local Planning Authority to recommend an informative to remind the applicant of their responsibility for the maintenance of the external appearance of the cabinet. This would seek to ensure that the cabinet does not become visually incongruous within the existing street scene in the future, to the detriment of the character and appearance of the surrounding area.

Impact on Neighbouring Amenities

Due to the size, scale and form of the proposed cabinet, there would be no undue harm to the amenities of the neighbouring properties. Although the proposed cabinet contains a small cooling fan, given the overall distance of the proposal from the neighbouring residential properties, no objection is raised against the proposal in terms of noise/disturbance issues.

Highways

The Highways Officer has raised no concerns regarding the siting or design of the proposed cabinet.

Other Matters

The Conservation Officer has raised a query as to why the proposed broadband facility cannot be combined with the existing cabinet. The agent has responded that the fibre optic technology of the proposed cabinet could not be physically housed alongside the technology held within the existing cabinet, as a larger space for the fibre optic cabling is required.

Notes to the Applicant:

69 of 72

Telecommunication Determinations

Cttee: 14/03/2012 Item No. 09

Application no: BDB/75847 For Details and Plans Click here

Site Address London Road, Opposite 11, Freefolk Priors, Freefolk, Whitchurch RG28 7NJ Proposal Installation of Openreach broadband cabinet

Registered: 07/02/2012 Expiry Date: 02/04/2012 Type of Telecom works Case Officer: Gemma Page Application: determination 01256 845314 Applicant: Openreach Agent: The Harlequin Group Ward: Overton, Laverstoke Ward Member(s): Cllr Mrs P Baker and Steventon Cllr I Tilbury* Parish: Laverstoke OS Grid Reference: 448346,148656

Recommendation:

It is RECOMMENDED that NO OBJECTION BE RAISED.

General Comments

Planning Policy

The site is located outside of any recognised Settlement Policy Boundary and within the Laverstoke and Freefolk Conservation Area.

Government Guidance

Adopted Local Plan 1996 – 2011

Policy E1 (Development Control) Policy E3 (Areas of Architectural or Historic Interest) Policy E6 (Landscape Character) Policy A4 (Telecommunications Development)

70 of 72

Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG’s) and interim planning guidance Basingstoke and Deane's Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document 2008: Appendix 4 'Conservation Areas' Laverstoke and Freefolk Conservation Area Appraisal (2003) Description of Site The application site forms a highway verge along London Road, adjacent to a public footpath. The site lies to the north east of 15 and 16 Freefolk Priors, a pair of listed buildings. The surrounding character of the area is semi rural. Proposal The development comprises of the installation of a green cabinet measuring 0.8 metres in width, 0.45 metres in depth with an overall height of 1.3 metres. This piece of equipment is intended to be installed by BT Openreach so as to provide super-fast broadband internet connection for the area. Consultations Conservation Officer: No Objection Relevant Planning History None Public Observations None Assessment Principle of Development As the proposal involves the installation of apparatus and lies within a Conservation Area, the application is submitted under the prior approval procedure under Part 24 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 as amended. The Local Authority has 56 days in which to decide whether to raise no objections (and grant prior approval) or to raise objections to the siting and design only of the apparatus and refuse the application. As this is not a full planning application, the Local Planning Authority is unable to impose any conditions. Impact on the Character of the Area/Design There is no objection to the proposed cabinet on the grounds of siting and design. The Conservation Officer notes that the proposed cabinet would be of a modest scale and would be clearly read as a modern and functional addition to the streetscene.

As a result of its modest scale, the proposed cabinet would not adversely affect the historical setting of 15 and 16 Freefolk Priors. Although it is recognised that the addition of a new cabinet to the site would have some impact to the streetscene, this part of the Conservation Area follows the relatively ribbon pattern of the roadside and can therefore accommodate small modern incursions without adversely affecting the Conservation Area and the wider rural character of the surrounding countryside.

To ensure that the proposed cabinet is maintained in satisfactory condition throughout its installation, it is considered reasonable for the Local Planning Authority to recommend an

71 of 72 informative to remind the applicant of their responsibility for the maintenance of the external appearance of the cabinet. This would seek to ensure that the cabinet does not become visually incongruous within the existing street scene in the future, to the detriment of the character and appearance of the surrounding area.

Impact on Neighbouring Amenities

Due to the size, scale and form of the proposed cabinet, there would be no undue harm to the amenities of the neighbouring properties. Although the proposed cabinet contains a small cooling fan, given the overall distance of the proposal from the neighbouring residential properties (the closest being 14 metres), no objection is raised against the proposal in terms of noise/disturbance issues.

Highways

The siting of the proposed cabinet would not impact upon the use of the existing footpath for pedestrians and wheelchair users. As such, no objection is raised against the proposed cabinet in terms of impact upon highway safety.

Other Matters

Notes to the Applicant:

72 of 72