LANCASTER TOWN HALL Time

Committee: PLANNING AND HIGHWAYS REGULATORY COMMITTEE

Date: MONDAY, 23 AUGUST 2010

Venue: LANCASTER TOWN HALL

Time: 10.30 A.M.

A G E N D A

1 Apologies for Absence.

2 Minutes of the Meeting held on 26 th July, 2010 (previously circulated).

3 Items of Urgent Business authorised by the Chairman.

4 Declarations of Interest.

Planning Applications for Decision

Community Safety Implications

In preparing the reports for this agenda, regard has been paid to the implications of the proposed developments on Community Safety issues. Where it is considered the proposed development has particular implications for Community Safety, this issue is fully considered within the main body of the report on that specific application.

Category A Applications

Applications to be dealt with by the District Council without formal consultation with the County Council.

5 A5 10/00230/FUL Ellel House, Chapel Lane, Galgate Ellel Ward; (Pages 1 - 11)

Alterations and extension to create a two-storey 29 bed nursing home with 21assisted living apartments for Mr J Ayrton

6 A6 10/00231/LB Ellel House, Chapel Lane, Galgate Ellel Ward; (Pages 12 - 19)

Alterations and extension to create a two-storey 29 bed nursing home with 21 assisted living apartments for Mr J Ayrton

7 A7 10/00338/FUL Top Moor Ridding Cottage, The Lower (Pages 20 - Gars, Wray Lune Valley 26) Ward;

Erection of detached dwelling in land to the rear for Mr & Mrs John Robinson

8 A8 10/00396/RENU Woodlands, Garstang Road, Ellel Ward; (Pages 27 - Cockerham 30)

Application for extension of time on application 07/00350/REM for the erection of a detached dwelling for Mr E Cowperthwaite

9 A9 10/00222/FUL Rose Tavern, 52 Ullswater Road, Bulk Ward; (Pages 31 - Lancaster 37)

Erection of 4 apartments and associated parking for Mitchells Brewery

10 A10 10/00646/FUL Agricultural Building Field 1563, (Pages 38 - Wyresdale Road, Quernmore 42)

Construction of new access track and a new bridge, top dressing to existing hardstanding adjacent to pond and retention of the new access for Mr Anthony Gardner

11 A11 10/00545/VCN A B C Lancaster (disused), King Duke's (Pages 43 - Street, Lancaster Ward; 46)

Variation of condition which limits the use of the ground and first floor to use class A1 (Non-food) retail to allow use class B1 (Office) at first floor for Mr M Fuerst

12 A12 10/00542/FUL 2 Sunny Hill, Westbourne Road, (Pages 47 - Lancaster 56)

Erection of a five bed dwelling house for Mr D Howard

13 A13 10/00129/REM Land To The Rear Of 1 St Bolton-Le- (Pages 57 - Michaels Grove, Bolton Le Sands, Sands 60) Carnforth Ward;

Reserved matters application for the erection of a work/live unit for Mr David Hall

14 A14 10/00598/FUL Burrowbeck Grange Nursing Skerton (Pages 61 - Home, Scotforth Road, Lancaster East Ward; 68)

Erection of a two storey extension for Optima Care Ltd

15 Planning Enforcement Schedule (Pages 69 - 75)

16 Delegated Planning Decisions (Pages 76 - 81)

ADMINISTRATIVE ARRANGEMENTS

(i) Membership

Councillors Eileen Blamire (Chairman), Joyce Pritchard (Vice-Chairman), Ken Brown, Keith Budden, Anne Chapman, Chris Coates, John Day, Roger Dennison, Sheila Denwood, Mike Greenall, Emily Heath, Helen Helme, Andrew Kay, Geoff Marsland, Robert Redfern, Peter Robinson, Bob Roe, Sylvia Rogerson, Roger Sherlock and Peter Williamson

(ii) Substitute Membership

Councillors Jon Barry, Abbott Bryning, John Gilbert, Janice Hanson, Tony Johnson, Ian McCulloch, Keith Sowden, Joyce Taylor, Malcolm Thomas and Paul Woodruff

(iii) Queries regarding this Agenda

Please contact Jane Glenton, Democratic Services - 01524 582068 - [email protected].

(iv) Changes to Membership, substitutions or apologies

Please contact Members’ Secretary, telephone 582170, or alternatively email [email protected].

MARK CULLINAN, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, TOWN HALL, DALTON SQUARE, LANCASTER, LA1 1PJ

Published on Wednesday 11 August 2010. Page 1 AgendaAgenda Item Item 5 Committee Date Application Number

A5 23 August 2010 10/00230/FUL

Application Site Proposal

Ellel House Alterations and extension to create a two-storey 29 bed nursing home with 21 assisted living apartments Chapel Lane

Galgate

Lancaster

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr J Ayrton Mr Anthony Hills

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

6 May 2010 Committee Cycle

Case Officer Petra Williams

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Refusal

Procedural Matters This application was deferred from the last Planning Committee meeting to allow for a site visit on 16 th August.

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The site that forms the subject of this application is a Grade II listed building which is situated within a 0.48 hectare plot between St John’s Church and Galgate Mill on Chapel Lane in the village of Galgate. The two storey building has 29 no. rooms and the grounds which extend 68m to east of the rear elevation of the property are significantly overgrown. The property is currently vacant and following its last occupation in 2004 has subsequently fallen into a serious state of disrepair due to neglect, vandalism, arson attempts and theft of lead from the roof which has led to rain water ingress. The exterior white rendered walls show signs of decay with areas of rubble stone walling visible in parts. The roof is slated and the timber, sash windows have a vertical emphasis with bay features to the front elevation.

1.2 The main core of the village is situated to the south of the site with the main shops, services and bus route being within a short walking distance. Chapel Lane runs north-east from the site with residential properties dotted sporadically along its route. To the immediate south of the site lies the Grade II listed Galgate Mill which comprises small industrial units and an associated parking area. The building to the immediate north of the site is the Grade II listed St John’s Church which also has an associated parking area.

1.3 The village is within a Countryside Area as designated on the Lancaster District Local Plan proposals map. There are mature trees established to the side and rear of the existing building that are subject to Tree Preservation Order (No. 1 (1974) Ellel House, Galgate), and as such they are protected in law. Land levels rise beyond the eastern boundaries of the site which is open countryside.

Page 2

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 Ellel House itself was originally a residential property but was last in use as a nursing home. The application retains the last use of the site and involves alterations to the existing building and an extension to create a two-storey 29 bed nursing home with 21 assisted living apartments. The scheme will involve the restoration of the existing property and the site to the rear of the building.

2.2 The building shows signs of neglect and vandalism with window and door frames of the property in poor condition and lead removed from the roof. Extensive internal and external repair and refurbishments will be necessary in order to bring the listed building back into use. Refurbishments will include the insertion of new timber window and door frames, the making good of exterior walls, the repair of the slate roof and the renewal of lead guttering. Internally the works will include the removal of some non-original partition walls, making good of plaster cornices and the retention of timber floors. As part of the scheme an outhouse to the north west elevation of the house will be demolished. It is envisaged that the extent of the removal of defective render could be considerable. The plans propose the removal of the porch additions which are not original features of the property. The existing sash and case windows will be retained where possible and replacement windows will be like for like. Where possible the existing roofing slates shall be reused, however this will depend on their condition and any replacement slate would match the existing slates. The renewal of the lead roll ridges and hips and gutter linings is also proposed. All replacement rainwater goods to the existing building will be conditioned cast iron with a paint finish.

2.3 The land around the property which would have historically been laid out as a formal garden also shows signs of neglect and is significantly overgrown. There is a mature Beech tree to the northern end of the building and various smaller trees dotted around the site. However many of these trees are in close proximity to one another and this has resulted in their development being suppressed. In order to accommodate the scheme 20 trees will be removed and although replacement planting is proposed, a landscape scheme has not been submitted but could be the subject of a condition.

2.4 The existing house will be renovated and developed to provide four double bedroomed assisted living units as well as visitor accommodation, lounge and laundry, ancillary toilets and utility areas. A key part of the proposal also involves the development of the site to the rear of (and attached to) the listed building. This aspect of the scheme represents a significant extension and will utilise the majority of the plot behind the listed building. The two storey extension will incorporate a further 17 assisted living apartments and 29 single ensuite bedrooms which will form part of the nursing home aspect of the scheme. Other facilities associated with the nursing home such as communal lounge/dining room, treatment rooms, reception meeting areas and mobility bathrooms will also be incorporated into the extension.

2.5 Of the 20 trees to be removed, a number of these have relatively low value. The proposals by and large include the retention and protection of the most visually important trees/beech hedgerow to the front, and to the side of the existing building and the retention and protection of a large, mature beech tree immediately to the north of the existing dwelling.

2.6 The remaining landscaping of the site will include a tree screen to the southern boundary with a grassed area around the exterior of the new development. The existing driveway will be altered and extended to facilitate on site car parking for 26 vehicles. An internal courtyard shown on amended plans will provide a communal amenity space for residents.

3.0 Site History

3.1 Although originally built as a gentleman’s residence the property has had a varied planning history over the last 30 years.

Page 3 Application Number Proposal Decision 79/00905/HST Conversion of student flats and bedsits into hotel and Permitted restaurant. 80/01517/HST Change of use from house to old peoples home. Permitted

88/00239/HST Erection of 19 bedroom extension to nursing home Refused (Appeal Dismissed) 88/00240/HST Erection of 19 bedroom extension to nursing home – not Permitted implemented

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response Strategic Housing The number of assisted living units proposed triggers the threshold for affordable housing. Therefore more information or evidence of a financial appraisal is required in order to demonstrate why the normal percentage of 40% on site affordable housing cannot be achieved.

If the scheme is approved properties should be built to Lifetime Homes Standard along with the Code for Sustainable Homes relevant at the time of the development.

County Highways Requests a highway contribution of £6,000 for general highway improvements in the vicinity and also recommends that the developer is required to carry out footway improvements along the site frontage as part of any planning permission. Other standard conditions relate to: Provision of Car Parking Areas; Mobility Car Parking Spaces; Cycle storage details to be agreed; Protection of visibility splays site frontage.

Environment Recommend that a sustainable drainage system (SUDS) is considered. Details of Agency drainage to be conditioned.

County Ecologist Following receipt of further information the consultant has evaluated the potential for great crested newts and concluded that there is a low likelihood of newts being present within the application area. Impacts upon European Protected Species thus seem unlikely.

Tree Protection Provision must be made for new planting within and around the boundaries of the site Officer in part to mitigate the proposed tree losses and contribute to the greening and screening of the site and to contribute to the amenity of the wider area. Trees should be replaced at a ratio of 3:1 (3 x new trees for each removed). A landscape proposal has not been submitted but could be covered by condition.

United Utilities This site must be drained on a separate system.

Access Officer Advice given regarding internal layout (these comments were subsequently taken on board in drafting amended plans).

County Travel Plan As this development falls below recommended thresholds there is no requirement for Co-ordinator a Travel Plan and therefore no request is made in this respect.

Conservation The Conservation Officer has been involved in pre-application discussions with the agent regarding this 'At Risk' grade II listed building. Key comments:

• The prospect of a development scheme which includes a full restoration of the house has so far prevented the present owners being issued with a formal Urgent Works Notice. • Satisfied with building recording report. Page 4 • Whilst this development does impact on the listed house in terms of the scale of the roof it does provide a solution that provides an economic future for the listed building. • Satisfied with design and proposed materials- details could be covered by condition.

Parish Council No specific observations to make about the plans but would like to see the refurbishment incorporate footpaths in the vicinity of the development.

North Lancs Bat No comments received within consultation timescale. Any comments subsequently Group received will be reported verbally.

County The submitted building record is considered to be more than adequate and Archaeologist consequently LCAS does not see any need for any further archaeological work on this site.

Environmental Environmental Health Services recommends refusal as no desk study has been Health submitted as required by Planning Policy Statement 23 - Planning and Pollution Control.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 One member of the public suggested that the site be used for the development of local authority housing.

5.2 Following the deferral of this application a letter has been submitted by the applicant in an attempt to make Members aware of additional background information. This letter is discussed in Section 9 of this report.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 National Planning Policy Statements and Policy Guidance –

Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1 - Delivering Sustainable Development) - sets out the overarching planning policies on the delivery of sustainable development, advocating high quality design, accessibility to services and facilities, reducing the need to travel, inclusiveness, efficient use of land and improvements and enhancing biodiversity and landscape character.

6.2 Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3 - Housing) – seeks to ensure that housing is developed in suitable locations which are easily accessible, well connected to public transport or other means of transport other than the private car and offers a good range of community facilities.

6.3 Planning Policy Statement 4 (PPS4 - Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth) - seeks to ensure that the countryside is protected for the sake of its intrinsic character and beauty, the diversity of its landscapes, heritage and wildlife, the wealth of its natural resources and to ensure it may be enjoyed by all. Furthermore this document advocates that most new development should be located in or on the edge of existing settlements where employment, housing (including affordable housing), services and other facilities can be provided close together.

6.4 Planning Policy Statement 5 (PPS5 - Planning for the Historic Environment) - outlines the Government’s overarching aim for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment and its heritage and states that in considering the impact of a proposal on any heritage asset,(e.g. listed building) local planning authorities should take into account the particular nature of the heritage asset.

6.5 Planning Policy Statement 7 (PPS7 - Sustainable Development in Rural Areas) establishes the Government’s objectives for rural areas and reiterates that d ecisions relating to development proposals should be based on sustainable development principles and ensures effective protection of the environment. Page 5

6.6 Planning Policy Guidance 13 (PPG13 - Transport) Promotes sustainable transport choices and accessibility to jobs, retail and leisure facilities by the public.

6.7 Lancaster District Core Strategy –adopted July 2008

Policy SC1 (Sustainable Development) seeks to ensure that new development proposals are as sustainable as possible; in that it is convenient to walk, cycle and travel by public transport; the site is previously developed and is well integrated into the landscape and where appropriate enhances biodiversity.

6.8 Policy SC3 lists Galgate as one of the eight key villages where an allowance of 10% of new homes and 5% of employment is made to accommodate development to meet local needs.

6.9 Policy SC5 - Achieving Quality in Design – This policy seeks to ensure that new development contributes to the positive characteristics of its surroundings and the quality of life of the District by improving the quality of development and promoting good urban design.

6.10 Policy E1 –Environmental Capital – refers to the importance of conserving and enhancing the built heritage and minimising the adverse effects of development on such assets.

6.11 Policy E2 – Transportation measures – Highlights transport as a key priority and advocates that major developments should be resisted in car dependent locations.

6.12 Lancaster District Local Plan adopted April 2004 (saved policies)

Policy E4– Relates to development within the Countryside Area and states that development will only be permitted where it is appropriate to its surroundings and has no adverse effect on nature conservation.

6.13 Policy E33 – Relates to proposals involving external and internal alterations to listed buildings and advocates that new extensions should be sympathetic in scale, materials and position.

6.14 Policy H19 – New residential development within existing housing areas should provide a high standard of amenity, make satisfactory car parking arrangements and not impact unduly on neighbouring residential amenities.

6.15 Supplementary Planning guidance Note 12 : (SPG12) The Residential Design Code offers general guidance and design principles.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The Heritage Asset

The Government’s overarching aims for the historic environment are set out in PPS5 which advocates that heritage assets (which includes listed buildings) should be conserved and enjoyed for the quality of life they bring to this and future generations. To achieve this, the Government’s objectives for development relating to heritage assets is that it should recognise that heritage assets are a non-renewable resource and take account of the wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits of the conservation of the heritage asset. PPS5 also states that wherever possible, heritage assets should be put to an appropriate and viable use that is consistent with their conservation and the positive contribution of such heritage assets to local character and sense of place should be recognised and valued.

7.2 The application states that the house has been marketed but it is not ideally suited to be reinstated as a large residential house due to its proximity to neighbouring industrial units and uses within the adjacent Galgate Mill site which are considered unsightly and unneighbourly. The deterioration of the building over recent years has prompted the Conservation Officer to consider serving an Urgent Works Notice on the owners. However the prospect of the renovation of the building as part of this scheme has temporarily alleviated the concerns of the Conservation Officer. Page 6 7.3 Impact of the Proposal on the Heritage Asset

Although the restoration of the existing listed building is much needed and is seen as a key benefit of the scheme, the development of the plot immediately to the rear of the building raises significant concerns with regard to the overdevelopment of the site, as the scale of the new build is dominant in relation to the listed building to which it will be attached. The new build will occupy the majority of the plot to the rear of the existing building leaving a border of 5 metres between the development and the site boundary. The new build will be over three times the size of the existing building and as a result the proposal will have an adverse and dominant impact on the setting of the heritage asset.

7.4 There are also the neighbouring listed buildings to consider and the development will have an adverse impact on the setting of these heritage assets due to its size and massing. The church will overlook the northern elevation of the new development which is considered incongruous in relation to the adjacent listed church and mill. Although there is limited tree screening between the church and the application site it is envisaged that the northern approach to the site along Chapel Lane will afford some limited views of the two together. PPS5 acknowledges that development within the setting of a heritage asset can harm the asset's significance. The development proposed will be detrimental to the setting of the two neighbouring heritage assets. This argument may be countered to some degree by the current condition of the site around Galgate Mill to the south which houses a number of industrial and storage uses. Despite this, the view held is that the proposed new development would adversely affect the setting of the listed church and mill buildings.

7.5 The renovation of the building is considered to be not just preferable, but a more sustainable alternative than demolition. Policy HE1 of PPS5 advocates the re-use and where appropriate the modification of the heritage asset in order to secure sustainable development. By permitting development which keeps the heritage asset in use, it avoids the consumption of building materials and generation of waste from the construction of replacement buildings. However this benefit is significantly outweighed by the amount of construction which is proposed on the remainder of the site.

7.6 Public Benefit of the Proposal

PPS5 states that where a proposal has a harmful impact on the significance of a heritage asset local planning authorities should weigh the public benefits against the harm, and that the greater the harm the more justification is required for the proposed development. This derelict listed building has in recent years been a focus for vandalism and anti-social behaviour and the restoration and re-use of the property is likely to end this situation which would be of benefit to residents in the vicinity. Furthermore the application states that the completed development would provide 30 full time and 10 part time jobs. There is, therefore, some recognisable public benefit arising from the proposal.

7.7 Enabling Development

PPS5 refers to enabling development as the means of securing the long-term future of a heritage asset when conservation through development in compliance with policy cannot do so. Local planning authorities are required to assess whether the benefits of an application for enabling development to secure the future conservation of a heritage asset outweigh the ‘disbenefits’. In doing this the local planning authority will take into account whether:

• A proposal will materially harm the significance of the heritage asset or setting; • It will avoid detrimental fragmentation of the management of the heritage asset; • It will secure a long term future for the heritage asset; • It is necessary to resolve problems arising from the inherent needs of the heritage asset, as opposed to the circumstances of the owner or purchase price paid; and • The level of development is the minimum necessary to secure the future conservation of the heritage asset and of a design and type that minimises harm to other public interests.

7.8 In order to allow the local planning authority to make an assessment the applicant is required to demonstrate what the minimum level of development is to secure the future conservation of the heritage asset. This is done via the submission of a financial appraisal so that the local planning authority is able to make a balanced judgement on the scale of the development proposed. A financial appraisal has now been submitted in which the applicant defends the scale of the proposed Page 7 development as they would not be able to financially break-even if the scale of the development was reduced below that proposed due to the poor state of repair of the building. It is estimated that the likely costs of refurbishments of the building fabric including internal and external repairs such as replacement lead work and timber frames will be between £500,000 and £750,000. It is concluded by the applicant that 17 new Assisted Livi ng Units are required to show a small return and that less than 17 new Assisted Living Units would result in a loss.

7.9 The financial appraisal has been assessed by City Council Officers. The purchase price plus the repair and refurbishment costs (to the listed building) and site clearance works (to the garden areas) exceeds the site’s value. This means that, in our opinion, the purchase price does not reflect the condition of the listed building and its curtilage. The purchase price would appear to be unrealistically high given the costs of repair and the property’s appeal, given its proximity to the commercial Mill buildings. To recover the large financial outlay of the purchase price, the applicant would need to provide additional units/bedrooms. A more realistic purchase price would mean the number of units/bedrooms could be reduced, thereby reducing the scheme’s scale. No evidence has been put forward indicating that other funding sources have been explored to support the heritage asset that would negate the need for enabling development.

7.10 It is therefore concluded that the level of development necessary to secure the future conservation of the heritage asset should be significantly less than that proposed in this application.

7.11 Refurbishment of Existing Building

The application proposes significant improvements to the fabric of the property through the repair and refurbishments of the existing building whilst retaining the general layout. The replacement external render along with other materials and finishes would be controlled by condition. The proposed refurbishment of the listed building is considered as being much needed and appropriate with this view being supported by the Conservation Officer. Although this is a positive aspect of the scheme it must be balanced with the effects of the new development to the rear of the site.

7.12 Design of the New Build

The new development will extend to cover the majority of the site to the rear of the existing building and will incorporate a number of projecting bays, with a mix of hipped and pitched roofs to the northern elevation and hipped roof projections to the eastern and southern elevations. It is our view therefore that the design of the new build lacks consistency in terms of its form and appearance. Critically, the main roofline will be higher than the existing building which is an indication of the dominance of the new development. The development will connect to the listed building at the southern end of the rear elevation and extend towards the rear of the site along the southern boundary. The point at which the existing and new elements connect will be punctuated by a narrow projecting pitched roof gable which is considered as unsympathetic in relation to the listed building.

Aside from the PPS5 concerns in this regard, it can be argued that the proposal fails to adhere to the design principles advocated by PPS1, which seeks to ensure high quality development.

7.13 The new development will have rendered wall finishes, but the Conservation Officer has requested that consideration should be given to the provision of linings to simulate ashlar walling to the facades that can be seen in conjunction with the listed building. This was thought to be unsuitable by the agent and therefore not included in amended plans. Precast door and window surrounds are proposed and white timber window frames will be incorporated into the scheme. Plans also indicate the use of natural slate roofing, aluminium gutters and similar rainwater goods which are considered acceptable. Notwithstanding this, the design, size and scale of the development and the mix of hips and gable roofs - including their differing heights and widths - are unsatisfactory and do not create a visually-pleasing arrangement. The revisions to the original submission still do not address the design concerns raised with the applicant. These concerns are echoed by comments submitted by the Ancient Monuments Society on the accompanying application for Listed Building Consent. They refer to the proposed new development as a “vast, bland box” and that the “listed building becomes a mere adjunct to a vast newcomer”. We concur with this view and have concluded that the scheme fails to adhere to the advice contained in PPS5.

7.14 Site Layout

Page 8 Section 2 of this report explains the scale of the proposal, and paragraphs 7.7-7.9 refers to the enabling development proposed. Drawing this together, despite its currently neglected state, the property currently enjoys a detached setting within relatively extensive grounds. However the layout proposed is, by virtue of its sheer footprint and orientation, overwhelming. When combined with the proposed car parking areas, and the general loss of landscape surrounding the building, the cumulative impact is both significant and negative.

7.15 Tree Protection/Landscaping

The main amenity space for residents will be a courtyard created within the development to the rear of the site. The courtyard will be designed as a sensory garden with a gated access for maintenance. The development proposal includes the removal of 20x trees in order to accommodate the development and the removal of an additional 4x trees in the interest of good arboriculture practice. The proposals include the retention and protection of the most visually important Beech tree to the northern side of the existing property and the development has been designed to protect the root system of this tree. A Beech hedgerow to the front of the site will be trimmed back and maintained at a height of 1 metre. Although the existing site is overgrown and untidy the planting within it does contribute to the greening of the surrounding environment. It is the local planning authority’s adopted practice to request replacement tree planting at a ratio of 3:1 which would require the planting of 60 trees in this case. However, given the level of development proposed within the site it is difficult to ascertain how this amount of planting could be achieved as a landscape proposal has not been submitted but could be conditioned.

7.16 Highways

The plans propose 26 car spaces mainly to the front and side of the existing building, which would be allocated on the basis of 1 space per assisted living unit with the balance of 5 spaces for use by the nursing home, which is reasonable in highway terms. 5 cycle parking spaces are also included in the scheme which would appear to accord with PPG13 in promoting sustainable transport choices. Staff shower and changing facilities are not included within the scheme. However, although the property is within a short walking distance of a bus route, visitors and employees may still be reliant on private motor vehicles, thus resulting in increased pressure on the limited on-site car parking provision and therefore putting undue pressure on the neighbouring car park at the adjacent mill. Nevertheless the proposed shift pattern (8am to 2pm, 2pm to 8pm and 8pm to 8am) outlined in the submitted Transport Statement means that there will be no more than ten staff on site at any one time.

In terms of public transport there are three buses an hour in each direction along the A6 during peak hours. Due to the limited service (despite the geographical spread of the locations that the buses serve - Lancaster, Morecambe, Garstang, Preston and Blackpool) staff and visitors from outside the immediate locality are unlikely to use the buses in any significant numbers.

It is acknowledged that increased pressure on parking may occur at evenings and weekends when there may be more visitors to the site. It is likely that parking off-site would be more readily available when neighbouring business would be closed. It is considered unlikely that all the allocated resident parking will be taken up by the occupants of the assisted living units and on balance the on-site parking provision is considered to be adequate.

The scheme would still undoubtedly lead to additional pedestrian and traffic movements as a result of visitors, residents and workers moving to and from the site. Given the scale of the proposal the Highway Authority has requested a contribution to highway improvements and suggests that the developer should contribute towards mitigating measures in the vicinity. The monies would be used to implement a scheme of signage and road-lining in Chapel Lane, at the narrow section where it passes by the Mill. Any excess would contribute to securing the delivery of the proposed 20 mph zone in the Chapel Lane area. This is considered a reasonable request that would also be of benefit to the wider community. These physical highway improvements would be secured by Section 278 Agreement.

The Highway Authority is satisfied that the application has demonstrated (via the submitted Transport Statement) that trip generation by the development will not have a negative impact on Chapel Lane and therefore highway objections would not be warranted. However, the Highway Authority requests that the developer is required to carry out footway improvements along this Page 9 section of Chapel Lane to serve the development. This, along with the speed restrictions, would seem a reasonable request given the narrow nature of Chapel Lane in the vicinity of Ellel House coupled with the potential for increased pedestrian and traffic movements.

7.17 Affordable Housing

The Strategic Housing Market Assessment for Lancaster District shows that there will be a local need for more accommodation for older persons within the district, particularly in rural areas, and a need for specialist provision. Initial enquiries reveal that Social Services have been informally contacted about the proposals and whilst they do not have any objections to this scheme and generally support what is being proposed, they do not necessarily favour it over and above any other proposals.

The 21 assisted living units are effectively open market housing and developments consisting of over 10 residential units in the rural area are the threshold which would trigger the requirement for affordable housing to be included in the scheme. As the threshold is exceeded and the housing type does not meet any specific housing need, the Strategic Housing Officer has requested further information or evidence of a financial appraisal if the normal percentage of 40% on site affordable housing cannot be achieved. However, the pursuance of this issue would result in extra costs for the applicant which would consequently increase the need for additional development on the site. Given the fact that the development proposed is already considered to be intensive, further development within the site would not be acceptable.

7.18 Rural Employment

When considering schemes involving economic developments in rural areas, PPS4 states that local planning authorities should adopt a positive approach to proposals which secure sustainable economic growth with particular regard to accessibility, quality of design, impact on the economic and physical regeneration of an area and the impact on local employment. It is acknowledged that in terms of rural employment the scheme will be beneficial. However the heritage and design issues arising from the proposal remain unsatisfactory.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 Two potential planning obligations are discussed in Section 7. These relate to highways and affordable housing.

A contribution of £6,000 is requested by County Highways towards mitigating measures in the vicinity of the development. However, as the 2 measures proposed relate to works on highway land (see paragraph 7.15 of this report) they should be secured by way of a s278 agreement. Both would also be of benefit to the wider community.

In terms of affordable housing provision, although the number of assisted living units triggers the threshold for the affordable housing it is not considered to be feasible to pursue this given the intensive nature of the development proposed. Therefore, no affordable housing is proposed.

9.0 Discussion of Points raised by the applicant

9.1 Since the application was deferred the applicant has submitted further supporting information. They state that a successful application would result in the creation of jobs. However the applicant is not the present owner of the building and in the event of a refusal is unlikely to purchase the property.

The applicant refers to extensive pre-application discussions with an Officer who is no longer employed by the LPA and is of the opinion that the original submitted scheme reflected the advice given in terms of design and scale. However pre-application discussions do not bind the Council in any way. Furthermore the publication of PPS5 since the pre-application discussions means that the potential impact of development on the listed building must be considered in more depth and a financial appraisal must be submitted to demonstrate the need for the amount of development proposed within the site.

Page 10 The applicant states that all the relevant information and amendments were submitted during the determination period and as a result was surprised that the scheme has been recommended for refusal. However the application could not be assessed accurately in the absence of a financial appraisal. When an appraisal was finally submitted it was judged that it did not satisfactorily demonstrate that the amount of development proposed was absolutely necessary in order to refurbish the listed building.

However, the scheme remains recommended for refusal for the reasons stated at the end of this report.

10.0 Conclusions

10.1 It is without argument that Ellel House is in a deteriorating state and as such the heritage asset is under threat. As a vacant property the future of the building is at risk and the situation has been aggravated by the unwanted attention of vandals. The poor state of the building coupled with the overgrown nature of the plot within which it is situated means that the whole site has an air of dereliction which makes a negative contribution to the surrounding area. There would be clear benefits following the refurbishment of the listed building. The scheme would allow the building to be retained and reused rather than face the risk of demolition. Along with the revitalisation of the property a further benefit would be the subsequent provision of additional employment within Galgate. The scheme would environmentally improve this part of Chapel Lane and has the potential to deliver improvements which would accommodate the extra demands of pedestrians that would result from the proposal.

10.2 However, the scheme is considered to be unsympathetic and excessive in scale in relation to the listed building to which it will be attached, and is considered as overdevelopment of the site with the new element being more than three times the size of the existing property. Insufficient justification has been submitted by the applicant to warrant the substantial harm which would be inflicted on the setting of the listed building as a result of the development. Although PPS5 advocates that there should be a presumption in favour of the conservation of designated heritage assets, local planning authorities are also required to assess whether the benefits (which in this case is the refurbishment of the listed building) of the enabling development (the number of units) outweigh the disbenefits (scale, massing and overdevelopment of the site). It is considered that the submitted scheme exceeds the development capacity of the site and is considered as an over-intensive form of development which would have a detr imental impact on the significance of the heritage asset. Therefore Members are advised that this application should not be supported in its present form.

Recommendation

That Planning Permission BE REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. The property that forms the subject of this application is a grade II listed building which is situated between two additional listed buildings and as such is considered to be within a setting of historic significance. Due to the scale and massing of the proposed development within the site the submitted scheme would be unduly injurious to the architectural character and appearance of the grade II listed building to which it would be attached and also detrimental to the character and setting of the adjacent listed buildings. Consequently the proposal is contrary to Lancaster District Local Plan saved policies E33 and National Planning Policy Statement 5 - `Planning for the Historic Environment’.

2. The proposal would constitute an undesirable, over-intensive form of development by virtue of its excessive depth and width in relation to the size of the existing building and dimensions of the site. The scheme would therefore constitute an unsatisfactory and inappropriate form of development and is contrary to the provisions of Planning Policy Statement 1 – ‘Planning for Sustainable Development’ and Lancaster District Core Strategy (LDCS) Policy SC5.

3. The proposed extension by reason of the mix and design of the hips and gable ends on the side projections would constitute an incongruous addition which would be unduly detrimental to the visual amenities of the area, and to the setting of Ellel House. As such the proposal is considered to be contrary to Planning Policy Statement 1, Planning Policy Statement 5, saved Policy H19 and Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 12: Residential Design Code of the Lancaster District Local Page 11 Plan and Policy SC5 `Achieving Quality in Design' of the Lancaster District Core Strategy.

Human Rights Act

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

Background Papers

None.

Page 12 Agenda Item Committee Date AgendaApplication Item Number 6

A6 23 August 2010 10/00231/LB

Application Site Proposal

Ellel House Alterations and extension to create a two-storey 29 bed nursing home with 21 assisted living apartments Chapel Lane

Galgate

Lancaster

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr J Ayrton Mr Anthony Hills

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

6 May 2010 Committee Cycle

Case Officer Petra Williams

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Recommended for Refusal

Procedural Matters

(i) This application was deferred from the last Planning Committee meeting to allow for a site visit on 16 th August.

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The site that forms the subject of this application is a Grade II listed building which is situated within a 0.48 Ha plot between St John’s Church and Galgate Mill on Chapel Lane in the village of Galgate. The two storey building has 29 no. rooms and the grounds which extend 68m to east of the rear elevation of the property are significantly overgrown. The property is currently vacant and following its last occupation in 2004 has subsequently fallen into a serious state of disrepair due to neglect, vandalism, arson attempts and theft of lead from the roof which has led to rain water ingress. The exterior white ren dered walls show signs of decay with areas of rubble stone walling visible in parts. The roof is slated and the windows have a vertical emphasis with bay features to the front elevation.

1.2 The main core of the village is situated to the south of the site with the main shops, services and bus route being within a short walking distance. Chapel Lane runs north-east from the site with residential properties dotted sporadically along its route. To the immediate south of the site lies the grade II listed Galgate Mill which comprises small industrial units and an associated parking area. The building to the immediate north of the site is the grade II listed St John’s Church which also has an associated parking area.

Page 13

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 This is the Listed Building submission that accompanies application 10/00230/FUL, which also appears on this committee agenda. Ellel House itself was originally a residential property but was last in use as a nursing home. The application retains the last use of the site and involves alterations to the existing building and an extension to create a two-storey 29 bed nursing home with 21 assisted living apartments. The scheme will involve the restoration of the existing property and the site to the rear of the building.

2.2 The building shows signs of neglect and vandalism with window and door frames of the property in poor condition and lead removed from the roof and extensive internal and external repair and refurbishments will be necessary in order to bring the listed building back into use. Refurbishments will involve the insertion of new timber window and door frames, the making good of exterior walls, the repair of the slate roof and the renewal of lead guttering. Internally the works will include the removal of some non-original partition walls, plaster cornices made good and existing tiled and timber floors retained. As part of the scheme an outhouse to the north west elevation of the house will be demolished. It is envisaged that the extent of the removal of defective render could be considerable. The plans propose the removal of the porch additions which are not original features of the property. The existing sash and case windows will be retained where possible and replacement windows will be like for like. Where possible the existing roofing slates shall be reused, however this will depend on condition and any replacement slate would match the existing slates. The renewal of the lead roll ridges and hips and gutter linings is also proposed. All replacement rainwater goods will be conditioned cast iron with a paint finish.

2.3 The land around the property which would have historically been laid out as a formal garden also shows signs of neglect and is significantly overgrown. There is a mature Beech tree to the northern end of the building and various smaller trees dotted around the site. However many of these trees are in close proximity to one another and this has resulted in their development being suppressed. In order to accommodate the scheme 20 trees will be removed and this matter is assessed in the 10/00230/FUL report.

2.4 The existing house will be renovated and developed to provide four double bedroomed assisted living units as well as visitor accommodation, lounge and laundry, ancillary w.c.s and utility areas. A key part of the proposal also involves the development of the site to the rear of (and attached to) the listed building. This aspect of the scheme represents a significant extension and will utilise the majority of the plot behind the listed building. The two storey extension will incorporate a further 17 assisted living apartments and 29 single ensuite bedrooms which will form part of the nursing home aspect of the scheme. Other facilities associated with the nursing home such as communal lounge/dining room, treatment rooms, reception meeting areas and mobility bathrooms will also be incorporated into the extension.

3.0 Site History

3.1 Although originally built as a gentleman’s residence the property has had a varied planning history over the last 30 years.

Application Number Proposal Decision 79/00905/HST Conversion of student’s flats and bedsits into hotel and Permitted restaurant. 80/01517/HST Change of use from house to old peoples home. Permitted

88/00239/HST Erection of 19 bedroom extension to nursing home Refused (Appeal Dismissed) 88/00240/HST Erection of 19 bedroom extension to nursing home – not Permitted implemented

Page 14 4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response County Archaeology The Archaeological Building Recording report by Greenlane Archaeology has indicated that there are a number of original features surviving within the building and LCAS would support the recommendations made in 5.4.1 of the report with regards to their preservation. The record is considered to be more than adequate in addressing any need for recording that might have been recommended by the Archaeology Service.

English Heritage The application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance.

Ancient Monuments Whilst we welcome the repair of this fine but boarded up listed building, we must Society express dismay at the quality of the new extension. The listed building becomes a mere adjunct to a vast newcomer. This is in clear violation of the advice in PPS5.

Society for the No comments received within consultation timescale. Any comments subsequently Protection of received will be reported verbally. Ancient Buildings The Victorian No comments received within consultation timescale. Any comments subsequently Society received will be reported verbally.

Georgian Group No comments received within consultation timescale. Any comments subsequently received will be reported verbally.

The British Council No comments received within consultation timescale. Any comments subsequently for Archaeology received will be reported verbally.

Parish Council Parish Council would like to see the refurbishment incorporate footpaths in the vicinity of the development.

Conservation The Conservation Officer has been involved in pre-application discussions with the Officer agent regarding this 'At Risk' grade II listed building. Key comments:

• The prospect of a development scheme which includes a full restoration of the house has so far prevented the present owners being issued with a formal Urgent Works Notice. • Satisfied with building recording report. • Whilst this development does impact on the listed house in terms of the scale of the roof it does provide a solution that provides an economic future for the listed building. • Satisfied with design and proposed materials- details could be covered by condition.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 One member of the public suggested that the site be used for the development of local authority housing.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 The national planning policy statements relevant to the overall proposal are reported in the previous 10/00230/FUL report. In relation to the Listed building, the following national and local advice is considered to be of critical importance:

PPS5 (Planning for the Historic Environment) - outlines the Government’s overarching aim for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment and its heritage and states that in considering the impact of a proposal on any heritage asset,(e.g. listed building) local planning authorities should take into account the particular nature of the of the heritage asset.

6.2 Lancaster District Local Plan Saved Policy E33 – Relates to proposals involving external and internal alterations to listed buildings and advocates that new extensions should be sympathetic in scale, materials and position.

6.3 Lancaster District Core Strategy (LDCS) Policy E1 – Environmental Capital – refers to the importance of conserving and enhancing the built heritage and minimising the adverse effects of development on such assets.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The Heritage Asset

The Government’s overarching aims for the historic environment are set out in PPS5 which advocates that heritage assets (which includes listed buildings) should be conserved and enjoyed for the quality of life they bring to this and future generations. To achieve this, the Government’s objectives for development relating to heritage assets is that it should: recognise that heritage assets are a non-renewable resource and take account of the wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits of the conservation of the heritage asset. PPS5 also states that wherever possible, heritage assets should be put to an appropriate and viable use that is consistent with their conservation and the positive contribution of such heritage assets to local character and sense of place should be recognised and valued.

7.3 Impact of the Proposal on the Heritage Asset

Although the restoration of the existing listed building is much needed and is seen as a key benefit of the scheme the development of the plot immediately to the rear of the building raises significant concerns with regard to the overdevelopment of the site as the scale of the new build is dominant in relation to the listed building to which it will be attached. The new build will occupy the majority of the plot to the rear of the existing building leaving a border of 5 metres between the development and the site boundary. The new build will be over three times the size of the existing building and as a result the proposal will have an adverse impact on the setting of the heritage asset.

7.4 There are also the neighbouring listed buildings to consider and the development will have an adverse impact on the setting of these heritage assets due to its size and massing. The church will overlook the northern elevation of the new development which is considered incongruous in relation to the adjacent listed church and mill. Although there is limited tree screening between the Church and the application site it is envisaged that the northern approach to the site will afford some limited views of the two together. PPS5 acknowledges that development within the setting of a heritage asset can harm its significance and it is the view of the Case Officer that the development proposed in this case will indeed affect the setting of two heritage assets. This argument may be countered to some degree by the current condition of the site around Galgate Mill to the south which houses a number of industrial uses. Despite this, the view held is that the proposed new development would Page 16 be adversely affect the setting of the listed church and mill buildings.

7.5 The renovation of the building is considered to be a more sustainable alternative than the resulting impacts of demolition. Policy HE1 of PPS5 advocates the reuse and where appropriates the modification of the heritage asset in order to secure sustainable development. By permitting development which keeps the heritage asset in use avoids the consumption of building materials and energy generation of waste from the construction of replacement buildings. However this benefit is significantly outweighed by the amount of construction which is proposed on the remainder of the site.

7.6 Public Benefit of the Proposal

PPS5 states that where a proposal has a harmful impact on the significance of a heritage asset local planning authorities should weigh the public benefits against the harm and that the greater the harm the more justification is required for the proposed development. This derelict listed building has in recent years been a focus for vandalism and anti-social behaviour and the restoration and re-use of the property is likely to end this situation which would be of benefit to residents in the vicinity. Furthermore the application states that the completed development would provide 30 full time and 10 part time jobs. There is, therefore, some recognisable public benefit arising from the proposal.

7.7 Enabling Development

• A proposal will materially harm the significance of the heritage asset or setting; • It will avoid detrimental fragmentation of the management of the heritage asset; • It will secure a long term future for the heritage asset; • It is necessary to resolve problems arising from the inherent needs of the heritage asset, as opposed to the circumstances of the owner or purchase price paid; • The level of development is the minimum necessary to secure the future conservation of the heritage asset and of a design and type that minimises harm to other public interests.

7.8 In order to allow the local planning authority to make an assessment the applicant is required to demonstrate what the minimum level of development is required to secure the future conservation of the heritage asset by the submission of a financial appraisal so that the local planning authority is able to make a balanced judgement on the scale of the development proposed. A confidential financial appraisal has now been submitted in which the applicant defends the scale of the proposed development as they would not be able to financially break-even if the scale of the development was reduced below that proposed due to the poor state of repair of the building. It is estimated that the likely costs of refurbishments of the building fabric including internal and external repairs such as replacement lead work and timber frames will be between £500,000 and £750,000. It is concluded by the applicant that 17 No new Assisted Living Units are required to show a small return and that less than 17 new Assisted Living Units would result in a loss.

7.9 The financial appraisal has been assessed by one of the Council’s Senior Regeneration Officers. The purchase price plus the repair and refurbishment costs (to the listed building) and site clearance works (to the garden areas) exceeds the site’s value. This means that the purchase price does not reflect the condition of the listed building and its curtilage. The purchase price is unrealistically high given the costs of repair and the property’s appeal given its proximity to the commercial Mill buildings. To recover the large financial outlay of the purchase price, the applicant would need to provide additional units/bedrooms. A more realistic purchase price would mean the number of units/bedrooms could be reduced, thereby reducing the scheme’s scale. No evidence has been put forward indicating that other funding sources have been explored to support the heritage asset that would negate the need for enabling development.

7.10 It is therefore concluded that the level of development necessary to secure the future conservation of the heritage asset should be significantly less than that proposed in this application. Page 17

7.11 Refurbishment of Existing Building

The application proposes significant improvements to the fabric of the property through the repair and refurbishments of the existing building while retaining the general layout. The replacement external render along with other materials and finishes would be controlled by condition. The proposed refurbishment of the listed building is considered as being much needed and appropriate with this view being supported by the Conservation Officer. Although this is a positive aspect of the scheme it must be balanced with the effects of the new development to the rear of the site.

7.12 Design of the New Build

The new development will extend to cover the majority of the site to the rear of the existing building and will incorporate a number of projecting bays with a mix of hipped and pitched roofs to the northern elevation and hipped roof projections to the eastern and southern elevations and the design of the new build therefore lacks consistency. The main roofline will be higher than the existing building which is an indication of the dominance of the new development. The development will connect to the listed building at the southern end of the rear elevation and extend towards the rear of the site along the southern boundary. The point at which the existing and new elements connect will be punctuated by a narrow projecting pitched roof gable which is considered as unsympathetic in relation to the listed building.

Aside from the PPS5 concerns in this regard, it can be argued that the proposal fails to adhere to the design principles advocated by PPS1, which seeks to ensure high quality development.

7.13 The new development will have rendered wall finishes, but the Conservation Officer has requested that consideration should be given to the provision of linings to simulate ashlar walling to the facades that can be seen in conjunction with the listed building. This was thought to be unsuitable by the agent and therefore not included in amended plans. Precast door and window surrounds are proposed and white timber window frames will be incorporated into the scheme. Plans also indicate the use of natural slate roofing and aluminium gutters and rainwater goods which are acceptable. Although materials are acceptable the design size and scale of the development and the mix of hips and gables, including their differing heights and widths are poorly arranged and revisions to the original submission still do not address the Case Officer’s concerns. These concerns are echoed by comments submitted by the Ancient Monuments Society. They refer to the proposed new development as a “vast, bland box” and that the “listed building becomes a mere adjunct to a vast newcomer”. As such the scheme is considered to be a clear violation of the advice in PPS5. We concur with this view and have concluded that the scheme fails to adhere to the advice contained in PPS5.

7.14 Site Layout

Section 2 of this report explains the scale of the proposal, and paragraphs 7.7-7.9 refers to the enabling development proposed. Drawing this together, despite its currently neglected state, the property currently enjoys a detached setting within relatively extensive grounds. However the layout proposed is, by virtue of its sheer footprint and orientation, overwhelming. When combined with the proposed car parking areas, and the general loss of landscape surrounding the building, the cumulative impact is both significant and negative.

7.15 Although a detailed landscaping scheme has not been submitted the works will involve some clearance of overgrown vegetation within the site which will improve the setting of the listed building. The existing stone wall to the front of the site would be retained. A landscape scheme could be requested by condition to the satisfaction of the Conservation Officer..

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 The planning obligations in respect of highways and affordable housing are reported on the full application. There are no obligation requests relating to the Listed Building or other heritage matters.

Page 18

9.0 Discussion of points raised by the applicant

The applicant states that all the relevant information and amendments were submitted during the determination period and as a result was surprised that the scheme has been recommended for refusal. However the application could not be assessed accurately in the absence of a financial appraisal. When an appraisal was finally submitted it was judged that it did not satisfactorily demonstrate that the amount of development proposed was absolutely necessary in order to refurbish the listed building.

However, the scheme remains recommended for refusal for the reasons stated at the end of this report.

10.0 Conclusions

10.1 It is without argument that Ellel House is in a deteriorating state and as such the heritage asset is under threat. As a vacant property the future of the building is at risk and the situation has been aggravated by the unwanted attention of vandals. The poor state of the building coupled with the overgrown nature of the plot within which it is situated means that the whole site has an air of dereliction which makes a negative contribution to the surrounding area. There would be clear benefits following the refurbishment of the listed building. The scheme would allow the building to be retained and reused rather than face the risk of demolition. Along with the revitalization of the property a further benefit would be the subsequent provision of additional employment within Galgate. The scheme would environmentally improve this part of Chapel Lane and has the potential to deliver improvements which would accommodate the extra demands of pedestrians that would result from the proposal.

10.2 However, the scheme is considered to be unsympathetic and excessive in scale in relation to the listed building to which it will be attached and is considered as overdevelopment of the site with the new element being more than three times the size of the existing property. Insufficient justification has been submitted by the applicant to warrant the substantial harm which would be inflicted on the setting of the listed building as a result of the development. Although PPS5 advocates that there should be a presumption in favour of the conservation of designated heritage assets, local planning also authorities are required to assess whether the benefits (which in this case is the refurbishment of the listed building) of the enabling development (number of units) outweigh the disbenefits (scale, massing and overdevelopment of the site). It is considered that the submitted scheme exceeds the development capacity of the site and is considered as an over intensive form of development which would have a detrimental impact on the significance of the heritage asset. Therefore Members are advised that this application should not be supported in its present form.

Recommendation

That Listed Building Consent BE REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. The property that forms the subject of this application is a grade II listed building which is situated between two additional listed buildings and as such is considered to be within a setting of historic significance. Due to the scale and massing of the proposed development within the site the submitted scheme would be unduly injurious to the architectural character and appearance of the Page 19 grade II listed building to which it would be attached and also detrimental to the character and setting of the adjacent listed buildings. Consequently the proposal is contrary to Lancaster District Local Plan saved policies E33 and National Planning Policy Statement 5 - `Planning for the Historic Environment’.

2. The proposed extension by reason of the mix and design of the hips and gable ends on the side projections would constitute an incongruous addition which would be unduly detrimental to the visual amenities of the area, and to the setting of Ellel House. As such the proposal is considered to be contrary to Planning Policy Statement 1, Planning Policy Statement 5, saved Policy H19 and Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 12: Residential Design Code of the Lancaster District Local Plan and Policy SC5 `Achieving Quality in Design' of the Lancaster District Core Strategy.

Human Rights Act

Background Papers

None.

Page 20 Agenda Item Committee Date AgendaApplication Item Number 7

A7 23 August 2010 10/00338/FUL

Application Site Proposal

Top Moor Ridding Cottage Erection of detached dwelling in land to the rear

The Gars

Wray

Lancaster

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr & Mrs John Robinson Mr Greg Gilding

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

30 June 2010 Rise in application numbers

Case Officer Petra Williams

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Grant permission with conditions

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The application site is situated within the village of Wray and forms part of the residential curtilage of the applicant’s house Top Moor Ridding Cottage. The plot comprises an area of 315 square metres and is bounded by a mix of treatments. There is a 1.8 metre timber fence along the northern and eastern boundary and a stone wall forms the western boundary and is punctuated by an existing opening which allows vehicular access to and from the site. The site itself is rather unkempt and consists of overgrown shrubs and bushes as well as rough ground and is fairly flat and level with the surrounding area. There are three timber outbuildings (one of which forms part of the eastern boundary) sited within the plot as well as a trailer, building materials and garden paraphernalia. There is also an old car on the site which, judging by the surrounding vegetation growth has not moved for some considerable time.

1.2 The building to the south of the site is a stone under slate cottage (Top Moor Ridding Cottage) and attached barn which is in the ownership of the applicant. To the immediate rear of the cottage is an associated private garden area of adequate size and double garage which borders the adjacent lane to the east. The garden area borders the application site with the northern elevation of the garage and large shrubs and bushes forming a boundary between the two areas. The nearest property to the east is 13 metres away. The property to the north of the plot is a 1960s bungalow (Deer Park View) which differs from the typical Wray property in that it has a dash render exterior. There is also a second garage associated with Top Moor Ridding Cottage which fronts The Gars. This is a traditional stone under slate building which is known as the Carriage House. This building is set slightly forward of Top Moor Ridding Cottage at the opposite side of the lane. There is also further car parking area associated with Top Moor Ridding Cottage to the east of the property.

1.3 The Gars is a short loop road to and from the main road through the village. The Gars itself has an intimate feel and is bounded on both sides by properties of varying styles but a sense harmony is retained by the prevalence of traditional stone and slate materials. The plot is set back from The Gars which runs perpendicular to the lane that provides vehicular access to the application site and Page 21 rear garden and garage of Top Moor Ridding Cottage as well as the property to the north of the site, Deer Park View. The lane, which is bounded on both sides by stone buildings or walls, is 75 metres long, 14 metres at the widest point and 6.3 metres wide at its narrowest which is one particular point between Top Moor Ridding Cottage and the garage which fronts The Gars. As well as providing vehicular access to two properties the lane is also a Public Right of Way (PRoW) and allows access to the fields and countryside to the north of the village.

1.4 The northern edge of the application site forms part of the boundary to the Wray Conservation Area and the Countryside Area as designated by the Lancaster District Local Plan proposals map lies to the north. The village is also within the Forest of Bowland Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. Wray is also identified in the Lancaster District Core Strategy as one of the eight key villages which have the five basic services.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The application proposes the erection of a modest, three bedroomed, detached dwelling within the plot following the demolition of the three outbuildings. External materials will be slate roof and a mix of natural local stone and rough cast render. The layout of the property will comprise three bedrooms, bathroom and toilet facilities at ground floor with living, kitchen and dining areas in the first floor roof space. Timber windows and doors are also proposed. The dwelling will be 12.5 metres long x 6.6 metres wide, 2.1 metres to eaves and 6 metres to the pitched roof.

2.2 The pitched roof will run west to east with the main windows of the first floor facing the field to the west of the plot. The window of the eastern elevation will be significantly smaller. Three rooflights are proposed for both roof planes. A key feature of the design is the insertion of elongated windows at ground floor which reflect the style of traditional barn openings.

2.3 Importantly this application differs from the previous refusal in respect of vehicular arrangements. Access to the site will be via the lane with car parking for the new dwelling being incorporated into the applicants existing garage which will split. The access to the rear of Top Moor Ridding Cottage will be walled up in order to prevent vehicles entering the site. A turning area will be provided within the site and new parking provision for Top Moor Ridding Cottage will be located within the Carriage House.

2.4 Adequate amenity space is proposed around the property and details of landscaping and surfacing will be conditioned. The existing stone wall on the east of the site will be lowered to a height of 750mm and a new opening will be created in the rear of garage of Top Moor Ridding Cottage. The remaining boundary treatment around the site will be a 1.8 metre natural stone wall.

3.0 Site History

3.1 There are two relevant planning applications and one appeal relating to this site.

Application Number Proposal Decision 07/00980/FUL Erection of a detached bungalow Refused 08/01357/FUL Erection of a detached bungalow Refused 09/00011/REF Erection of a detached bungalow Dismissed

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response County Highways No objections - The current scheme addresses the previous Highway refusal reasons. The use of the Carriage House as a garage would result in regular reversing movements to and from The Gars although it is also acknowledged that this building could be used for such purposes at any time without the need for planning permission. Environmental No objections subject to the addition of an ‘hours of construction’ condition and a Health condition for a preliminary risk assessment regarding soil contamination. Page 22 Parish Council No comments received Ramblers No comments received Association Conservation No objections subject to the conditioning of details and materials Forward Planning No objection - the Housing Needs Survey identifies an under supply of 3 bedroom Team houses in rural areas, and Wray is one of the key villages with the five key services identified in the Core Strategy.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 There have been a total of 26 objections and concerns received from members of the public. Ten of these representations came from the occupant of one residential property. At the time of compiling this report that person was the were the only resident of the village to submit objections. Six items of objection were submitted from a resident of Singapore. The reasons for opposition:

• The narrow and unlit lane puts public safety at risk when using the public footpath. • The single track road would not be able to accommodate an increase use of vehicles without posing danger to pedestrians and highway safety • Application does not seek to assist the increasing problems of the lane and the lack of visibility at The Gars when exiting. • The development may affect the amenity of the area especially being in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. • Issues of change of use. The carriage house serves the use of a wood shed and farmers barn with two different owners, not that of a garage. • Emergency vehicles will be unable to access The Gars with the proposed additional parking. • Planning Policy Guidance 13 Transport (PPG13) emphasises that the public should be able to travel in a safe manner. The narrow and unlit lane along with the increase of vehicles does not comply with this. • The development will result in “many more people” using the lane. • The applicant has created an opening in the wall between the public footpath and the site. Without planning permission.

5.2 In addition, 2 letters of support have been received. Comments that support the development are:

• The lane and exit/ entrance of the lane is not unusual in the area due to the age and rural aspects of the village. • The nature of the lane is self regulating in relation to speed. • The development is on a small scale and could not generate a large amount of traffic that would be noticeable or pose danger on the public. • There has been no previous traffic incident in the area.

5.3 The applicant has also submitted comments in response to the objections which have been raised:

• Only one of the objectors’ lives in Wray and the applicant feels that the volume of other negative comments has been generated by this one person. • There have been no objections from the Parish Council or other residents of the village.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 Lancaster District Core Strategy (LDCS):

Policy SC1 (Sustainable Development) - seeks to ensure new development proposals are sustainable in terms of both location and design. This policy, albeit a generic overriding policy, states that the proposed use would be compatible with the character of the surrounding landscape and accessible to public transport, education and community facilities.

Policy SC3 (Rural Communities) - seeks to build healthy sustainable communities by empowering rural communities to develop local vision and identity, identify and need local needs and manage Page 23 change in the rural economy and landscape. Development should protect, conserve and enhance rural landscapes and the distinctive characteristics of rural settlements. This Policy also identifies eight key villages which have the five basic services which are considered necessary to sustain new residential development.

Policy SC5 (Achieving Quality in Design) - seeks to ensure that new development contributes to the positive characteristics of its surroundings and the quality of life of the District by improving the quality of development and promoting good urban design. This policy supports regional and national agendas for raising the profile of good design in spatial planning.

Policy ER7 (Renewable Energy) - seeks to promote and ensure the integration of renewable energy within new development, subject to acceptable impacts on townscape, landscape and residential amenity.

Policy E1 (Environmental Capital) – its purpose to improve the District’s environment by protecting and enhancing nature conservation sites and landscapes of national importance, Listed buildings, conservation areas and archaeological sites.

Policy E2 (Transportation Measures) – development should be focused in sustainable locations and should improve walking and cycle networks.

6.2 Saved policies of the Lancaster District Local Plan (LDLP):

Policy E3 (Development affecting Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty) - this policy seeks to ensure that development within the AONB is appropriate in terms of scale and materials.

Policy E35 (Conservation Areas and their Surroundings) - this policy states that development proposals which would adversely affect important views into and across a conservation area or lead to unacceptable erosion of its historic form and layout, open space and townscape setting will not be permitted.

6.3 National Planning Statements

In addition to the above local planning policies the following National Planning Policy Statements (PPS) and Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) Notes are relevant:

PPS1 (Sustainable Development) - sets out the overarching planning policies on the delivery of sustainable development, advocating high quality design, accessibility to services and facilities, reducing the need to travel, inclusiveness, efficient use of land and improvements and enhancing biodiversity and landscape character.

PPS3 (Housing) - illustrates the need for good quality residential development in sustainable locations which have good access to a range of services and facilities. The use of previously developed (brownfield) land is an explicit objective, as is the delivery of different types of affordable housing to meet local housing needs.

PPS5 (Planning for the Historic Environment) - outlines the Government’s overarching aim for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment and its heritage and states that in considering the impact of a proposal on any heritage asset, (e.g. conservation area) local planning authorities should take into account the particular nature of the of the heritage asset.

PPS7 (Development in Rural Areas) – acknowledges that many villages are of considerable historic and architectural value and highlights the need to ensure that development respects these policies. Planning authorities should take a positive approach to high quality designs that are sensitive to their immediate setting.

PPG13 (Transport) - encourages sustainable travel, ideally non-motorised forms of transport such as walking and cycling, but also other means like public transport. The use of the car should be minimised. This can be encouraged by the location, layout and design of new developments.

Page 24

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 Background

This application is a resubmission of a similar scheme which was refused solely on Highway grounds. This refusal was subsequently upheld by an Appeal Inspector. In his statement the Inspector stated:

“ The development would not harm the character or appearance, and thereby the objective of preserving or enhancing the Conservation Area would be met. Any overlooking of neighbours to the north could be overcome by obscure glazing the roof-lights. I do not consider that the activities and traffic arising from the proposed dwelling would cause unacceptable noise or disturbance to neighbours”.

Although the Inspector considered the scheme acceptable in all other respects he ultimately ruled that the development would be detrimental to highway safety because of the potential for increased traffic in the lane arising from a third dwelling. The current scheme aims to address the previous highway safety concerns.

The other key issue for consideration is the principal of the development in relation to the PPS 3 which was revised in June 2010.

7.2 Highways

The Gars is narrow with on-street parking serving a number of dwellings and due to the nature of the road, traffic levels and speeds are low. In his statement the Inspector acknowledged that the PRoW was used, albeit not heavily. This has been confirmed by the Case Officer who visited the site on four separate occasions and it was evident that the lane was not used by members of the public on either of these occasions. The plans propose to remove vehicular access to Top Moor Ridding Cottage via the lane. Consequently there will be no net change in the number of dwellings that the lane provides vehicular access to as a result of the development. Adequate off street parking for Top Moor Ridding Cottage will be provided in the Carriage House.

7.3 A number of objectors have raised highway safety issues. The fact that the applicant has already created an opening in the wall between the lane and the application site has been highlighted in a number of submitted comments. However planning permission would not required for this type of work and the applicant is within his rights to create an access within his boundary wall. The lane is narrow and PPG13 places emphasis on people being able to travel safely whatever their chosen mode of transport and emphasises that people should come before traffic. However in light of this revised scheme County Highways have raised no objections, subject to a condition which ensures that prior to the occupation of the new dwelling the existing vehicular access at the rear of Top Moor Ridding Cottage is stopped up to vehicular traffic by construction of the wall indicated on the submitted plans.

7.4 PPS3 – Housing

The revisions to PPS3 means that private residential gardens are no longer classed as brownfield land and therefore the principle of development being acceptable is no longer automatic. However the site is within the village boundary and considered appropriate for infill development and in a suitable location within Wray which is one of the eight key villages in which residential development in the rural area will be focussed. An adequate size garden area will be retained by Top Moor Ridding Cottage and the scheme is not considered to be an attempt at “garden grabbing”. The plot is well integrated and the development will compliment neighbouring buildings and the local area in terms of scale, density, layout and access. In this regard, the proposal is not out of keeping with the streetscene and the principle of development can be accepted.

7.5 Design

The property has been designed in order to maintain a relatively low roofline and the use of traditional materials and window designs are considered appropriate in this rural village setting. Page 25 Nevertheless the development will not be highly visible within the village and will not impact unduly on the surrounding Conservation Area (heritage asset) and the scheme therefore accords with the principles of PPS5.

7.6 It is considered appropriate to condition the windows of the northern roof plane to be obscure glazed and none opening to preserve the residential amenity of the occupiers of Deer Park View. Other windows of the development are not considered to raise issues of overlooking. The development will be fairly centrally located within the plot and adequate amenity space will be provided which will be comparable to many other private gardens with Wray. The main amenity space will be 8.5 metres by 4.5 metres with an additional smaller area to the north of the property. In addition a vehicular turning area will be provided within the site which allows access to the garage and the proposal accords with the principles of SPG12.

7.7 Sustainability

As a new build the property will be subject to the current legislative requirements regarding insulation and energy use. From a planning point of view the scheme will be conditioned to be constructed to meet at least the standards set out in Code 3 for sustainable homes and a scheme to be submitted which incorporates on-site renewable energy measures to provide at least 10% of the predicted energy requirements arising from the development. Furthermore the site is within a village location within close proximity to local shops and services.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 There are no planning obligations to consider.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 The scheme is considered appropriate in terms of design, siting and scale and will improve what is currently an untidy site within the Conservation Area. The proposed residential dwelling and its associated use will not cause unacceptable noise or disturbance to neighbours. The development will not impact unduly on the surrounding conservation area of surrounding AONB.

9.2 It is acknowledged that the proposal has generated numerous objections, primarily on highways grounds relating to the use of the lane by pedestrians and the potential for accidents arising from vehicular movements to and from the site. However the lane currently provides vehicular access to two properties and this situation will remain unchanged as a result of the scheme and therefore the previous highway refusal reason has now been removed. Members are therefore advised that the submitted scheme eliminates the issues of highway concern, and as such this application can be viewed favourably.

Recommendation

That Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard time limit 2. Development in accordance with plans 3. Samples of external materials 4. Details of the: • surfacing materials • eaves verge and ridge • the coursing and jointing • windows, including heads and cills • rooflights • doors, including garage doors • all boundary treatments

5. Obscure glazing to northern roof plane 6. Landscaping scheme 7. No occupation until vehicular turning space provided 8. No occupation until car parking provision within garage is provided 9. Provision of garage for Top Moor Ridding Cottage Page 26 10. Garage use condition 11. Details of foul and surface water drainage 12. Existing vehicular access to the garage and garden area at the rear of Top Moor Ridding Cottage shall be stopped up to vehicular traffic 13. At least scheme for 10% on-site renewable energy 14. At least Code 3 for Sustainable Homes 15. Preliminary risk assessment regarding soil contamination 16. Unforeseen soil contamination 17. Removal of permitted development rights

Human Rights Act

Background Papers

None.

Page 27 AgendaAgenda Item Item 8 Committee Date Application Number

A8 23 August 2010 10/00396/RENU

Application Site Proposal

Woodlands Application for extension of time on application 07/00350/REM for the erection of a detached dwelling Garstang Road

Cockerham

Lancaster

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr E Cowperthwaite Helen Helme

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

25 June 2010 Rise in application numbers

Case Officer Mr Daniel Ratcliffe

Departure Yes

Summary of Recommendation Approval

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The application site is located within a row of detached properties to the south side of Cockerham village centre. The site proposed for development lies within the curtilage of the property known as The Woodlands. The site is garden land to the south of the existing property enclosed by large mature trees and other forms of vegetation.

1.2 The application has been brought before Members because the agent is an Elected member and the applicant is an immediate relative.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The proposal seeks the renewal of a previous application 07/00350/REM for the erection of a four bedroomed detached dormer bungalow. Access would be gained off Main Street and a turning head provided for vehicles. The same application was approved in 1986 and although no work has ever commenced the application has been renewed several times since. However the application recently expired and this proposal looks to renew the most recent Reserved Matters application for the new dwelling.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The site has a historic Approval for Outline Consent and Approval of Reserved Matters for a detached bungalow and garage. Permission for Outline Approval was originally granted in 1986 and renewed a number of times until a Reserved Matters application was submitted and approved in 2007. This permission has now expired. The Outline Application in 2003 was initially refused by the planning authority due to the over supply of housing approvals at that time. This was allowed by the Planning Inspectorate at appeal in 2004. The most recent applications are shown below.

Page 28

Application Number Proposal Decision 03/01275/OUT Renewal of application 00/00995/OUT for the erection of a Refused (Allowed at detached bungalow and garage Appeal) 07/00350/REM Reserved Matters Application for the erection of a Approved detached dwelling

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response Environmental No Contaminated Land Desk Study has been provided – recommend rejection. If Health approved a condition required for hours of construction.

County Highways No objections.

Parish Council No comments received within the statutory consultation period.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 One letter has been received stating no objection to the proposed development.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1) ‘Delivering Sustainable Development’ sets out the overarching planning policies on the delivery of sustainable development, advocating high quality design, accessibility to services and facilities, reducing the need to travel, inclusiveness, efficient use of land and improvements and enhancing biodiversity and landscape character.

6.2 Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3) ‘Housing’ seeks to ensure that housing is developed in suitable locations which are easily accessible, well connected to public transport or other means of transport other than the private car and offers a good range of community facilities.

6.3 Planning Policy Statement 7 (PPS7) ‘Sustainable Development in Rural Areas’ establishes the Government’s objectives for rural areas and reiterates that d ecisions relating to development proposals should be based on sustainable development principles and ensures effective protection of the environment.

6.4 Lancaster District Core Strategy – Policy SC1 : ‘Sustainable Development’ seeks to ensure new development proposals are sustainable in terms of both location and design. This policy, albeit a generic overriding policy, states that sites should be previously developed and accessible to public transport, employment, leisure, education and community facilities.

6.5 Policy SC3 : ‘Rural Communities’ identifies 8 villages within the District where a 10% allocation of housing is accommodated to meet local needs. Cockerham is not identified as one of the 8 villages having the five key services.

6.6 Policy SC5 : ‘Achieving Quality in Design’ seeks to ensure that new development contributes to the positive characteristics of its surroundings and the quality of life of the District by improving the quality of development and promoting good urban design. This policy supports regional and national agendas for raising the profile of good design in spatial planning.

6.7 Lancaster District Local Plan – Saved Policy H8 identifies that outside village settlements housing will only be permitted that is essential to the needs of agriculture, forestry or use appropriate to the rural area, the development shall be sited to minimise impact, be consistent to meeting the essential Page 29 employment needs and be appropriate in terms of design and materials.

6.8 Saved Policy H12 requires housing development to exhibit a high standard of design which uses materials and features which are appropriate to, and retain the distinctive local identity of their surroundings.

6.9 Saved Policy E4 (Countryside Area) relates to new development within the countryside area stating that development will only be permitted where it is in scale and in keeping with the character of the landscape and is appropriate in terms of scale, siting, design and materials. It also seeks to ensure that development proposals will not have an adverse impact on nature conservation and to make satisfactory arrangements for parking and access.

6.10 Supplementary Planning Guidance 12 (SPG12) sets out the Council’s design and amenity standards for new residential development.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The principle of a detached dwelling on the site has been approved on a number of occasions in the past spanning the last three decades. Therefore there are clearly no significant issues related the use of the site for residential development as a single dwelling with associated gardens.

7.2 The key issue for Members to consider in determining this application is;

Whether the proposal meets the criteria set out in Policy SC3 of the Lancaster District Core Strategy; and, If the proposal fails to meet the criteria, is there any material consideration that would affect our recommendation?

The policy requests that only the villages possessing the five key services of a GP, Primary School, food shop, Post Office and a Bus Stop will be allowed to develop suitable sites for housing. Outside these areas, and in villages such as Cockerham, the applicant will need to provide exceptional justification for the proposed development. In this case no ‘exceptional justification’ is provided.

7.3 A review of the history of the application finds that an application was refused in 2003, the reason at the time being an over supply of housing and not the current Policy SC3 issue of the sustainability of the site.

However, in considering the subsequent appeal that followed the refusal in 2003, the Planning Inspector referred in his report to the fact that historically the development had approval for a number of years prior to the refusal. With reference to the sustainability of the location he stated that

“…to my mind the settlement is of a size such that the question of location is not a determining matter” and that …”I consider that the planning history establishes a degree of commitment.”

In this instance it was determined that due to the historic approvals the development would not undermine the objectives of controlling oversupply of housing in the locality – and the appeal allowed.

7.4 The evolution of the new Core Strategy policy relating to settlement sustainability is a new consideration in respect of this proposal. Cockerham is not one of the settlements identified in this policy. However, it has to be noted that under the old Lancaster District Local Plan Policy H7 (now partly superseded), Cockerham was not an identified settlement either, and this did not affect the continued renewal of the application.

7.5 Officers have been cautious about approving this application because of Policy SC3. However, given the Planning Inspector’s comments regarding the size of the settlement of Cockerham, and the loss of that appeal in 2003, it is considered that the local planning authority would again lose the application on appeal should it be challenged. The recommendation would constitute a technical departure from Policy SC3, but given the history of renewals and the Inspector’s comments relating to this site, it is not considered that a precedent would be established.

7.6 Environmental Health has raised a formal objection to the proposal as it is not supported by a Desk Page 30 Study to consider contaminated land. The request for a Desk Study in advance is considered unreasonable. The property is already garden land in association with a residential use and as such the ‘end use’ has not changed - only the scale of the garden area. It is considered that an ‘unexpected contamination’ condition could be attached to any consent instead.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 None.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 The site is located in the village of Cockerham. This is not one of the identified key villages in the Council's Core Strategy Policy SC3. The policy requires the applicant to set out the 'exceptional circumstances' that exist for the site to come forward for residential development in a 'non-key' village. The applicant has not set out 'exceptional circumstances' within the submission, and so approval of the application would technically depart from the policy.

9.2 However, the Planning Inspector’s decision in 2003 is a material consideration. His comments pertaining to settlement size (of Cockerham) are noted and they lead Officers to believe that a refusal of permission would be quite weak when tested at planning appeal. It is for this reason that the application for the extension of time on this particular site is recommended favourably.

Recommendation

That Planning Permission BE GRANTED for the following reasons:

1. Standard 3 year time limit 2. Development carried out in accordance with the approved plans 3. Details of materials external elevations and to be agreed 4. Samples of brick, stone, render, slate to be submitted 5. Details of windows and door openings (including recess measurements) to be agreed 6. Details of rooflights to be agreed 7. Details of eaves, verges, ridge and rainwater goods to be agreed 8. Windows to the north and south elevations to be fitted with obscure glazing 9. Details of materials and finish of garage door 10. Landscaping scheme to be submitted and agreed 11. Garage to be used for domestic use only 12. Removal of Permitted Development Right – windows and doors 13 Removal of Permitted Development Rights - extensions 13. Hours of construction 0800-1800 Mon-Fri, 0800-1400 Saturdays 14. Unforeseen land contamination 15. 10% energy generation from renewable sources

Human Rights Act

Background Papers

1. None

Page 31 AgendaAgenda Item Item 9 Committee Date Application Number

A9 23 August 2010 10/00222/FUL

Application Site Proposal

Rose Tavern Erection of 4 apartments and associated parking

52 Ulleswater Road

Lancaster

Lancashire

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mitchells Brewery Mr A Kinder

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

24 May 2010 Committee Cycles – deferred for site visit

Case Officer Mr Andrew Holden

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Approve with conditions

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The application was presented at the planning committee meeting on 28 June 2010 where following discussion it was determined to defer determination of the application to allow a visual inspection of the site by committee members.

1.2 The application site is located to the rear of 52 Ullswater Road, Lancaster. The site is at the junction of Ullswater Road and Dalton Road with the boundaries abutting Bath Street and Dalton Road. A large stone wall approximately 2.5m high runs around the northern and western boundary of the site along the two street frontages. Number 52 (formerly The Rose Tavern public house) is three storeys in height with the residential properties to the south stepping down to two storeys. All the properties are built of natural stone with natural slate roofing.

1.3 The rear of 52 the property was until recently a small private parking area and beer garden associated with The Rose Tavern. The public house closed and the building and land has been separated with the building being sold off. The ground floor is now operating as a pharmacy with independent living accommodation above accessed from the rear of the building. The application site has been retained by the Mitchells Brewery.

1.4 The site falls from east to west and follows a similar fall to Dalton Road, the site and Bath Street are level on the north to south axis. The site is currently access via a vehicular access off Dalton Road with unrestricted parking along the remainder of the street. A pedestrian entrance (unused) is available off the public footpath to Bath Street. Lock-up garages are located on the opposite side of Dalton Road as well as a single bungalow. A ground floor retail shop with upper floor residential has its gable to Dalton Road, again three storeys in height. Bath Street has dedicated parking associated with the neighbouring Bath Mill residential complex as well as landscaping beds including a mature tree lying immediately to the west of the site.

Page 32 2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The application seeks consent for the erection of 4 apartments and associated parking spaces. The building is to be two storeys in height and includes four dedicated parking spaces accessed off a widened vehicle access. The accommodation provides 2 No. one-bedded flats and 2no. two-bedded units. The ground floor units comprise a combin ed kitchen lounge area with one double bedroom. The upper floor units have separate kitchen and lounge along with a double bedroom and bathroom. An additional en-suite bedroom within the roof space.

2.2 The building is to be located at the western end of the plot with car parking and turning area between the new build and the rear of the existing buildings which front Ullswater Road. Each unit enjoys a separate entrance, two at the front of the building and one to either gable. The orientation of the building develops a ridge running north–south with the front of the building facing the rear of the existing buildings. A limited grassed area runs around the perimeter of the building to provide dedicated amenity space.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The site has a very limited planning history (advertisements and smoking shelter) all relating to the previous use of the building as a public house.

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response County Highways Concerns raised over the original layout as it developed parking spaces with limited accessibility with a limited width vehicle entrance having poor pedestrian visibility. The revised scheme is considered appropriate, but conditions are required to ensure provision and maintenance of the access and car parking arrangements.

Environmental Suggested hours of construction condition, concerns over the lack of contaminated Health and study as part of the submission. Following submission of a Desk Study and clarification of submission details no objections have been raised subject to the provision of gas control measures, a ‘watching brief’ during groundwork and unforeseen contamination condition.

United Utilities No objection in principle subject to development being drained on a separate system.

Housing Officer Regarding the above, the Housing Needs Study shows that there is an under-supply of 2 bedroom flats in the Lancaster South area. Although at the time of the last HNS it showed an over-supply of 1 bedroom flats for the Lancaster South area as a whole, this site is east of the City in an area which is predominantly large family housing.

We would like to see the properties built to Lifetime Homes standard and to the relevant Code for Sustainable Homes at the time of the commencement of the development.

City Contract No comments within statutory timescale. Services

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 To date 18 individual letters have been received in connection with the proposed development in addition to a 138 signature petition from local residents. Both the letters and the petition raise concern/objections to the development. The mains of concern include: -

• The area is heavily trafficked and has a general lack of parking for residents. The development will exacerbate the ‘rat run’ from Bulk Road through Ullswater Road. • Much of Ullswater Road has double yellow lines the parking on Dalton Road is already used Page 33 for resident parking from the neighbouring streets. • Overlooking of residential properties to the east of Haylot Square. • The area is already densely populated. • This type of accommodation is not required in the area, there are already too many multi- occupancy buildings in the area with no apparent market. Student housing is already been provided for by Lancaster University and University of Cumbria as a consequence there is not perceived to be a need for additional rented housing in the area. • Loss of green space and a negative impact upon the outlook of the area. • Reduction in highway safety. • Potential conflict between vehicles emerging from the site and passing pedestrians. • ‘Parking area’ to the rear of the public house has never been used as anything other than parking for the landlord and not customer parking. Vehicle movements will inevitably increase rather than decrease as suggested in the Design and Access Statement. • Lack of neighbour consultation in the area • Building is out of character with area, should incorporate slate roofing and natural stone. • Over-intensive development for the area. • Stone boundary wall has to be maintained not just be ‘preferable to be maintained’. It loss would be detrimental to both the site and the neighbourhood. • Development of the site will result in the disturbance of local residents during the construction period. • The loss of The Rose Tavern was a benefit to the local community as it was typified by the noise and poor behaviour of its patrons. • Precedent would be set for further development and loss of green space/gardens in the future.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 Planning Policy Statement – PPS3 – Housing

6.2 Planning policy guidance in respect of housing was revised in June 2010. The new guidance incorporates two significant changes. Residential gardens have been removed from the classification as ‘previously developed land’ and thus are removed from Brownfield designation. In addition minimum density targets of 30 dwellings per hectare have been scrapped. Government says that the minimum target has contributed to a “lack of family sized homes and flats that local people need”. The guidance now allows councils to be able to decide what level of density is demonstrably appropriate for their areas specific needs, requirements and characteristics.

6.3 The guidance defines previously developed land within Annex A: -

Previously-developed land (often referred to as brownfield land)

‘Previously-developed land is that which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated fixed surface infrastructure.’

The definition includes defence buildings, but excludes:

• Land that is or has been occupied by agricultural or forestry buildings. • Land that has been developed for minerals extraction or waste disposal by landfill purposes where provision for restoration has been made through development control procedures. • Land in built-up areas such as private residential gardens, parks, recreation grounds and allotments, which, although it may feature paths, pavilions and other buildings, has not been previously developed. • Land that was previously-developed but where the remains of the permanent structure or fixed surface structure have blended into the landscape in the process of time (to the extent that it can reasonably be considered as part of the natural surroundings). There is no presumption that land that is previously-developed is necessarily suitable for housing development nor that the whole of the curtilage should be developed.

Page 34 6.4 Planning Policy Statement - PPS5 – Planning and the Historic Environment

6.5 The aim of the guidance is that the historic environment and its heritage assets should be conserved and enjoyed for the quality of life they bring. Conservation areas are designated as Heritage Assets. Applications should provide a description of the heritage asset and an assessment of potential impacts of the development upon the asset.

6.6 Lancaster District Local Plan –

Policy H12: Layout, Design and the Use of Materials sets out standards for new housing stating that proposals will only be permitted w hich exhibit a high standard of design, layout and landscaping and which use materials and features that are appropriate to and retain local distinctiveness.

6.7 Policy H19 of the Lancaster District Local Plan, which covers development within the existing housing areas of Lancaster, Morecambe and Carnforth. Para.2.7 states that "………residential development within existing housing areas will be permitted which; would not have a significant adverse effect on the amenities of nearby residents; provides a high standard of amenity……makes satisfactory arrangements for access….and car parking."

6.8 Policy E35 - Conservation Areas and their Surroundings states that development proposals which would adversely affect important views into and across a conservation area or lead to an unacceptable erosion of its historic form and layout, open spaces and townscape setting will not be permitted.

6.9 Lancaster District Supplementary Planning Guidance 12: Residential Design Code sets out the Councils design and amenity standards for new residential development. It has been produced as supplementary planning guidance in determining all new housing developments (design and amenity standards); and is “also intended to apply to house extensions and non-residential building of a domestic scale” (Introduction 1.7).

6.10 Lancaster District Core Strategy –

6.11 Policy SC1 (Sustainable Development) – Seeks to ensure that development proposals are as sustainable as possible. In determining suitable locations for development the Council will apply principles which include being convenient to walk, cycle and travel by public transport, the site be previously developed, the condition of the site is causing adverse impact and could be alleviated through development, does not have built heritage importance and is compatible with the character of the surrounding area.

6.12 Policy SC2: Urban Concentration promote s the creation of sustainable communities by focussing development within existing urban areas and minimising the need to travel. This states that 90% of new dwellings will be provided in these locations.

6.13 Policy SC4: Meeting the Districts Housing Require ments seeks to manage and control the release of housing sites within the district in order to deliver and meet the housing requirements identified by the RSS.

6.14 Policy SC5 (Achieving Quality in Design) – maintain and improve the quality of development in and adjacent to Conservation Areas that reflects and enhances the positive characteristics of its surroundings.

6:15 Policy E1 (Environmental Capital) - Development should protect and enhance nature conservation sites and landscapes of national importance, Listed buildings, conservation areas and archaeological sites, minimise the use of land, resist development which would have a detrimental effect on environmental quality, properly manage environmental risks such as flooding, protect and where possible enhance habitats and the diversity of wildlife species, and conserve and enhance landscapes.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The site is located within the main urban area of Lancaster in a highly sustainable position within a predominantly residential area. Bath Mill Conservation Area abuts the site to the west, the Page 35 Conservation Area relates to a self-contained residential complex which has a distinct form and design characteristics which differ from the surrounding residential properties. The predominant building form is two/three storey terraced housing constructed of natural stone and slate.

7.2 The application raised a number of planning issues and comments raised by local residents which needed consideration.

7.3 Impact upon the Heritage Asset (Bath Mill Conservation Area ) – the external design of the building reflects the character of the Victorian terrace on Ullswater Road rather than the Bath Mill development. In addition, the large stone boundary wall demarking the boundary of the Conservation Area is to be retained at full height to the rear and side with only minor modification to enable an improved access arrangement. This wall is seen as a clear separation in the two distinct characters of the building forms. This distinct separation together with the maintenance of mature trees and landscaping is considered to minimise any impact upon the Bath Mill Conservation Area.

7.4 Design – the basic form of the development reflects that of the neighbouring properties with a simple dual pitch roof and gable walls. The window pattern and detail again reflect those of the older neighbouring properties. The initial submission raised comment from local residents over the nature of external materials and the preservation of the existing stone boundary wall. Clarification has been sought and a revised plan submitted. The revision confirms the use of natural rather than artificial stone and the retention of the substantial boundary wall surrounding the site.

7.5 Highways and parking – local residents have raised strong concerns that the development of additional residential properties in the area will add to the use of the neighbouring Ullswater Road by vehicles and increase demand for on-street parking in the immediate area, all to the detriment of highway safety and residential amenity. Following the presentation of the application at the June 2010 comm ittee, a request to investigate the potential of ‘car free’ development has been requested. The applicant has expressed an unwillingness to adopt this regime and considered that a revised parking layout and access arrangement could be developed which will address the concerns of County Highways. In addition, the applicant considers that the marketability of the development will be affected by the limitation or in practice the restriction will be open to abuse and be impractical to enforce.

7.6 Therefore, a revised parking and access layout has been submitted which re-positions the car parking spaces to make them more accessible but still maintains the amenity of the residential occupiers. The boundary wall is to be modified to improve access width and provide pedestrian sight lines. County Highways have confirmed that the revised parking arrangement is acceptable, providing accessible car parking spaces and a vehicle access of appropriate width and visibility.

7.7 Residential amenity - the scheme as originally submitted was not considered to provide an adequate level of amenity for the occupants of the flats. All the parking spaces were sited immediately in front the lower flat living rooms and the communal grassed area allowed direct viewing into the ground floor bedrooms. The scheme has been revised to relocate the parking area to maintain an outlook from the ground floor. The grassed area to the rear has been redefined to provide small dedicated garden spaces, and cycle storage has been introduced along with small new planting areas.

7.8 Relationship to surrounding properties – the scheme has been designed to maintain reasonable separation distances from immediate neighbours. The development has all of its main windows to the front and rear with only a minor obscure glazed window to each gable. The window-to-window separation distances reflect those defined in Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) 12 - The Residential Design Guide. The property known as The Bungalow faces the gable of the development across Dalton Road. Again, the distance to the new development reflects the spatial separation in SPG 12. The new building will be constructed close to the boundary of the neighbouring residential plot, 54 Ullswater Road. The development is 20m from the rear wall of the existing housing at the end of a long narrow garden.

7.9 Need for the Housing – local residents have raised concern over the development of flats in this location and there potential to be occupied by students. The applicant has indicated that the development of a larger single dwelling had been investigated but this had dismissed as being out of context with the ‘grain’ of development in the area and would not be marketable. Market research indicates a need for small properties, particularly those which are suitable for students. The Page 36 application is not seeking to restrict the nature of occupation and is merely seeking consent for one and two bed units. It is considered that the principle for this form of residential development is acceptable in this location and will add to the range of housing stock in the area. The future tenure and occupation of the units are not in the control of the local planning authority.

7.10 The initial submission made reference to the introduction of energy-generating elements at the site this has been clarified and details on the revised scheme as roof mounted solar panels on the southern elevation of the new building.

7.11 Overall, it is considered that the development in its revised form accords with local plan policy and subject to appropriate conditions will achieve a scheme which will maintain the traditional form of buildings in the immediate locality and have little impact upon the neighbouring Bath Mill Conservation Area. The scheme has been designed to minimise its impact upon neighbouring residential occupiers and provides for resident parking and an appropriate level of amenity for the future occupiers.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 None.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 Subject to no significant objections being raised by the statutory consultees, the development in its revised form is one that can be supported by the local planning authority.

Recommendation

That subject to no significant objections being raised by the consultees, Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard three year time limit 2. Development in accordance with the approved plans 3. Amended plans - 4. Use restricted to Class C3 dwelling houses only. 5. Contamination - introduction of gas control measures 6. Watching brief during groundwork stage of construction 7. Unforeseen contamination 8. Hours of construction 9. Provision and retention of parking spaces 10. Vehicle access and sight lines to be provided and maintained 11. Separate system of drainage 12. Provision and retention of solar panel energy generation 13. Provision and retention of Refuse and cycle storage 14. Details of the following to be submitted and agreed prior to development commencing:-

- cycle store - landscaped areas - natural slate and stone including coursing - solar panels - roof lights - window details - rain water goods - widening of the vehicle access - boundary treat to be agreed

15. Provision and maintenance of obscure glazing to the gable windows 16. At least 10% on site energy generation 17. Homes to be built to at least Code Level 3. 18. As may required by the consultees.

Page 37 Human Rights Act

Background Papers

None.

Page 38 Agenda Item Committee Date AgendaApplication Item Number 10

A15 23 August 2010 10/00646/FUL

Application Site Proposal

Agricultural Building Field 1563 Construction of new access track and a new bridge, top dressing to existing hardstanding adjacent to pond Wyresdale Road and retention of the new access

Quernmore

Lancashire

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr Anthony Gardner John Rowe

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

25 August 2010 N/A

Case Officer Karl Glover

Departure None

Summary of Recommendation Approval subject to conditions

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The 13.8 acre (5.58 hectares) site is located on the northern side of Wyresdale Road adjacent to the Listed Conder Mill Bridge in the village settlement of Quernmore. The site at present does not have any buildings or structures located within its curtilage however a base/hardstanding for a recently determined agricultural storage building has been engineered towards the north eastern section of the field. The unit is divided centrally from east to west by a belt of mature hedging and vegetation which provide substantial screening and landscaping. In the north eastern corner of the site there is a recently approved, excavated drainage pond which has two centrally located grassed island features. The topography of the site is predominantly flat however towards the east and south there is an increase in land levels which is bound by a small post and wire fence. The western most part of the land is also bound by a post and wire fence but also by the River Conder which is mostly screened by very large mature trees. The entrance to the site measures 6.4m in width and is made up of a dry stone wall either side of two stone pillars.

1.2 The surrounding area is essentially open and rural in character with only two nearby residential dwellings which are located to the west of the site and are known as Heatfield House and Condor Mill Farm. Directly opposite the entrance to the subject site is an access road which leads to Lane End Cottage and Lane End Farm.

1.3 The subject land is designated within the Forest of Bowland Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and is also located within the North West Flood Zones 2 and 3.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The applicant seeks full planning consent for the construction of a 6.5m x 2.9m wide concrete bridge which is to be located where the existing ford crosses the land with a (approximately) 240m long access track beyond which will follow the existing fence line leading to a recently approved agricultural storage building. The construction of the track will consist of crushed hardcore material at Page 39 a depth of 150mm topped off and finished with blue road chippings. The track will measure 2.9m wide overall and will have a 0.75m wide grass strip running the entire length of the track. The applicant also seeks retrospective planning consent to regularise the widening of the entrance on Wyresdale Road which measures 6.4m in width and retains the existing stone pillars with dry stone walls either side. The application also includes an engineering operation to return a section of land to the south of the pond back to its original form by top soiling and seeding a 5m long stone constructed track.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The site has recently been the subject of a number of agricultural determinations and full applications, predominantly as a result of enforcement action being pursued. The site is therefore subject to the following planning history:

Application Number Proposal Decision 09/00832/AD Erection of an agricultural building Withdrawn 09/00833/AD Creation of an access road Withdrawn 10/00267/FUL Retrospective application for the retention of a pond for Approved with drainage of agricultural land and provision of fresh drinking conditions water for livestock 10/00332/AD Prior notification for an agricultural storage building Accepted 10/00652/AD Prior notification for the erection of two bulk feed hoppers Withdrawn 10/00758/AD Prior notification for the erection of one bulk feed hopper Accepted

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response Lancashire County No objections to the proposal – A condition is recommended for a 5m hardstanding to Highways be provided from the roadside.

Lancashire County No objections to the proposal – satisfied that the track and the bridge are required for Land agent the agricultural use on the land and that grass will grow over the track reducing its visibility over time.

Environment No objections to the proposal Agency Parish Council Object to all aspects of the application – stated that the development would have an adverse impact on the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and is inappropriate and excessive development.

National Grid No observations received.

Environmental No objections to the proposal – Hours of construction condition requested. Health Lune Rivers Trust Object to the proposals – Stated that the access track is unwarranted for the purpose of agriculture, advised that the bridge will require EA consent.

Lancashire No objections to the proposal. Ramblers Tree Protection Satisfied that no offence had been committed in relation to existing hedgerows Officer following recent complaints that hedgerow had been removed.

Forest of Bowland No specific comments on the proposal AONOB

Page 40 5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 Six letters of Objections to the proposed works have been received by nearby residents. The reasons for opposition include the following:

• The widening of the access is not necessary for the agricultural need • The need of the track for the agricultural purpose • Legal issues as to the use of the land • Potential for hedgerow removal • Potential Impact within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty • Concerns that the development may lead to an agricultural workers dwelling • Potential impact on the River Condor

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 National Planning Policy Statements (PPS)

PPS7 (Sustainable Development in Rural Areas) sets out the Government’s overall aim is to protect the countryside for the sake of its intrinsic character and beauty, the diversity of its landscapes, heritage and wildlife, the wealth of its natural resources and so it may be enjoyed by all.

PPS 25 (Development and Flood Risk) requires flood risk to be taken into account at all stages of the development process. PPS25 recognises that flooding cannot be wholly prevented, but its impacts can be avoided and reduced through good planning and management.

6.2 Lancaster District Core Strategy (LDCS)

Policy SC3 (Rural Communities) seeks to build healthy sustainable communities by empowering rural communities to develop local vision and identity, identify and need local needs and manage change in the rural economy and landscape. Development should protect, conserve and enhance rural landscapes and the distinctive characteristics of rural settlements.

Policy SC7 ( Development And The Risk of Flooding) seeks to build sustainable communities by ensuring that new homes, workplaces and public areas are not exposed to unacceptable levels of flood risk.

Policy E1 (Environmental Capital) seeks to improve the districts environment, and resist development which would have a detrimental effect on the environment quality and public amenity.

6.3 Lancaster District Local Plan (LDLP)

Policy E3 (Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty ) – Development within and adjacent to the Forest of Bowland Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty which would either directly or indirectly have a significant adverse effect upon the character or harm the landscape quality, nature conservation interests, or features of geological importance will not be permitted. Any development must be of an appropriate scale and use materials appropriate to the area.

Policy E4 (Countryside Area) – Within the countryside development will only be permitted where it is in scale and keeping with the character and natural beauty of the landscape, is appropriate to its surroundings in terms of siting, scale, design, materials, external appearance and landscaping, would not result in a significant adverse effect on nature conservation or geological interests, and makes satisfactory arrangements for access, servicing, cycle and car parking.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 Lancashire County Council’s Land Agent – acting as our rural advisor – has visited the site earlier this year in relation to other submissions referred to in paragraph 3.1. They advised that the applicant has a sheep enterprise, and that this includes other land at Dolphinholme and Staining, near Fleetwood. This remains the main nature of the agricultural enterprise although it is understood that the applicant has kept chickens. The Land Agent has considered that the works being proposed Page 41 by the current submission are justified, and so the principle of the development is accepted.

7.2 Therefore, the key issue for Members to consider in determining this application is whether the proposal satisfies the criteria set out in LDLP Policy E3 and E4, and in particular whether the proposal is appropriate development within the Forest of Bowland Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB)

7.3 With regard to compliance with LDLP E3 and E4 it is clear that the surrounding area, not just on Wyresdale Road but also further afield heading towards the rural villages of Galgate and Caton that agricultural farming enterprises of large and small scales form the most dominant structures and features within the landscape. Most farms are seen to adapt to allow each type of agriculture to be carried out and work more efficiently to allow ease of access associated with the day to day operation of each farm. In this instance as highlighted by the Lancashire County Land Agent the applicant requires specific development on this unit of land to allow the operation of agriculture.

7.4 The widening of the access/entrance will allow tractors and delivery vehicles bringing feed to and from the site to manoeuvre more efficiently and more safely along Wyresdale Road, which is seen to be rather narrow. The entrance will remain the same by reusing the existing materials which are in keeping with the character of the area. The two stone pilasters with rebuilt stone walls either side are not seen to have any adverse impact on the local character and landscape along Wyresdale Road. The galvanised steel farm gates proposed are also seen to be similar to most field entrances found locally within the AONB.

7.5 The proposed bridge which is to be located approximately 25m from the entrance off Wyresdale Road is also seen to be an important addition to allow vehicles to pass over the tributary (linked to the River Conder) which at present allows vehicles to drive through when water levels are low. The bridge would prevent contamination and reduce detrimental impact on the watercourse whilst at the same time allow the site to be accessed all year round regardless of water levels. The bridge will remain at the same ground level either side of tributary and has raised no issues with the Environment Agency in terms of impact on the watercourse. The addition of this bridge is not seen to have any harm on the landscape quality and will only be visible when travelling along Wyresdale Road.

7.6 5m beyond where the bridge is proposed the applicant seeks planning consent for an access track to be located along the boundary fence line leading to the top end of the field, where it will dog-leg in a north-westerly direction and lead to an agricultural storage building which has yet to be erected (accepted under application number 10/00332/AD). Originally the track was proposed to be 2.9m wide and filled with road planings. To reduce the overall visual impact of this and allow the track to have a more natural appearance within the AONB, amended plans have been submitted showing a 0.75m wide strip of grass down the centre of the entire course of the track, either side of this will be topped off with blue road chippings which have previously been used in Abbeystead on access tracks leading to Dunkenshaw Fell (also within the AONB). A sample of the stone has been provided by the applicant and is seen to be an acceptable material in keeping with the surrounding area.

7.7 Along the south eastern bank of the recently approved drainage pond the applicant has constructed a 5m long stone track which is substantially visible when viewed from Little Fell Lane looking over the Lune Valley and can be seen to detract from the natural character of the landscape. As such forming part of the application this stone layered path is to be covered and topped off with soil and is to be grass seeded to allow this section of the bank to be returned to its natural green form.

7.8 With regard to compliance with PPS25 (Development and Flood Risk) as the application site is designated within the North West Flood Zones 2 and 3 it is set out that the land and buildings used for agriculture are considered within Table D.2 of the Flood Risk Vulnerability Classification as a less vulnerable site.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 None.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 Whilst the objections and concerns of local residents and the Parish Council are understood, Page 42 particularly given the retrospective nature of an earlier submission, it is not considered that in practice this development now being proposed would give rise to significant detriment or adverse impact on the surrounding landscape, the nearby River Conder or the wider Forest of Bowland Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

9.2 From all other aspects it is considered that this proposal conforms to the requirements of the policies relating to agricultural development within the countryside and the AONB, referred to earlier in this report and will allow the agricultural enterprise as accepted by the Lancashire County Land Agent to operate more efficiently and with less adverse impact on the existing landscape.

9.3 It is considered therefore that this proposal can be supported.

Recommendation

That Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard 3 year time limit 2. Amended plans and proposals 3. Development in accordance with approved plans 4 That the area of banking laid with stone is restored back to its original form and seeded within three months of the date of the permission, and retained as such thereafter 5. A sample strip of the access track measuring 4m in length to be agreed on site 6. Hours of construction

Human Rights Act

Background Papers

None.

Page 43 AgendaAgenda Item Item 11 Committee Date Application Number

A11 23 August 2010 10/00545/VCN

Application Site Proposal

A B C Lancaster (disused) Variation of condition which limits the use of the King Street ground and first floor to use class A1 (Non-food) retail Lancaster to allow use class B1 (Office) at first floor Lancashire

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr M Fuerst Miss Rebecca Dennis

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

20 September 2010 N/A

Case Officer Mr Andrew Drummond

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Approval

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The application site is located on the corner of King Street and Spring Garden Street. The old cinema building and bingo hall was constructed of red brick with faience panels to the King Street façade. The Spring Garden Street elevation was of solid brick, and was only broken up by a billboard.

Both King Street and Spring Garden Street are one-way roads, with the former forming part of the city's gyratory systems.

1.2 On the opposite side of Spring Garden Street is a small, surface public car park, and diagonally across King Street lies the cobbled and ‘tree-scaped’ triangular area known as Queen Square.

The properties visible from the site to the west and south are predominantly 3-4 storey Georgian terraces built in the eighteenth century with traditional stone and large sash windows. The properties immediately to the north of the site along King Street, that form a 2-storey terrace that arcs round into Common Garden Street, are inter-war construction.

Though there are numerous Listed buildings in the vicinity of the site, there are no Listed buildings actually adjacent to the site.

1.3 The site falls within the City Centre Conservation Area and within the City Centre as defined by the Local Plan in relation to retail development and uses.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The purpose of this application is to vary condition 17 attached to planning permission 08/01129/FUL. Condition 17 states; "Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town & Country Planning Use Classes Order 2005 (or any other order revoking or re-enacting that Order), the use of the ground and first floors (with the exception of the hotel lobby) shall be limited to Use Class A1(non- food) and shall not be used for any other purpose without the express consent of the local planning authority." The reason for this condition is to ensure that inappropriate uses do not occur within the Page 44 locality, and for highway safety purposes.

2.2 It is proposed to use the majority of the first floor for B1 (office) use rather than the previously- approved A1 (retail) use (see 2.1 above). The proposal seeks to provide 762 sq.m of office space, split into 2 suites. 93 sq.m would be retained as storage space for retail unit 1. Further space would be utilised for fire escapes, disabled toilet and shower facilities and showering and changing facilities for cyclists. The office would be served by a set of stairs or a lift from ground floor level, accessed from doors onto the Spring Garden Street frontage.

2.3 This application does not change the design, scale, form, floorspace or materials of the approved building.

3.0 Site History

3.1 A number of relevant applications relating to this site have previously been received by the Local Planning Authority. These include:

Application Number Proposal Decision 08/00146/CON Demolition of existing bingo hall and cinema complex Approved 08/01129/FUL Construction of a 6-storey development with A1 retail use Approved at ground and first floors with a 115 bedroom hotel at second to fifth floors 09/00628/VCN Variation of Condition 17 to allow open A1 use of the Withdrawn ground and first floor retail space 09/00787/VCN Variation of Condition 24 to allow operations or activities Approved within the ground and first floor retail space between the hours of 06.00 and 23.00 without the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority 09/01109/VCN Variation of Condition 17 to allow open A1 use of the Refused ground and first floor retail space 09/01148/VCN Variation of Condition 17 to allow A4 use in Unit 4 Approved 10/00170/VCN Variation of Condition 17 to allow C1 use on the first floor Withdrawn

4.0 Consultation Responses

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

Consultees Response County Highways No objection. Environmental No objection. Health

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 No correspondence was been received at the time of compiling this report. Any comments subsequently received will be reported verbally.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 National Planning Policy Statements (PPS) and Guidance Notes (PPG)

PPS 4 (Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth) - All planning applications for economic development should be assessed against the following impact considerations:

Whether the proposal has been planned over the lifetime of the development to limit carbon dioxide emissions, and minimise vulnerability and provide resilience to, climate change; The accessibility of the proposal by a choice of means of transport including walking, cycling, public transport and the car, the effect on local traffic levels and congestion (especially to the trunk road network) after public transport and traffic management measures have been Page 45 secured; Whether the proposal secures a high quality and inclusive design which takes the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of the area and the way it functions; The impact on economic and physical regeneration in the area including the impact on deprived areas and social inclusion objectives; and The impact on local employment.

In terms of retail development, the emphasis is on the protection of existing town and local centres. The proposal should not have an adverse impact on town centre vitality and viability, including local consumer choice and the range and quality of the comparison and convenience retail offer. Economic development (which includes offices) should be assessed in terms of accessibility and reducing carbon emission, impact on local employment and economic regeneration, and secures high quality design.

PPS5 (Planning for the Historic Environment) - has superseded PPG15 and PPG16. The Government’s overarching aim is that the historic environment and its heritage assets should be conserved and enjoyed for the quality of life they bring to this and future generations. In order to deliver sustainable development, PPS5 states that polices and decisions concerning the historic environment should: • Recognise that heritage assets are a non-renewable resource • Take account of the wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits of heritage conservation • Recognise that intelligently managed change may sometimes be necessary if heritage assets are to be maintained in the long term.

6.3 Lancaster District Local Plan - adopted April 2004 (saved policies)

Policy R21 (Access for People with Disabilities) - requires disabled access provision.

6.4 Lancaster District Core Strategy - adopted July 2008

Policy SC2 (Urban Concentration) – 95% of new employment floorspace will be accommodated within the existing urban areas of Lancaster, Morecambe, Heysham and Carnforth.

Policy ER2 (Regeneration Priority Areas) – Central Lancaster will be strengthened as a shopping destination, enhanced as a historic city visitor attraction with a restored and enhanced historic environment, as the District’s main centre for office based employment and as a cultural centre.

Policy ER3 (Employment Land Allocations) – promote regeneration by ensuring that the right amount of employment land is provided, in the right place to meet needs generated by existing businesses, new businesses and inward investment. New B1, B2 and B8 employment use within the District will be located within the main urban areas of Lancaster, Morecambe and Carnforth.

Policy ER4 (Town Centres and Shopping) - to maintain vitality and viability of the town centres by focusing comparison shopping to Lancaster City Centre as well as developing its role as a tourist destination.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The permitted scheme has 2 floors of retail arranged on ground and first, with 4 storeys of hotel accommodation above. It was initially envisaged that the retail space would be let to 1 or 2 retailers who would operate over 2 floors. However, the applicant has been unable to secure such tenants despite a long and extensive marketing campaign. There seem to be 2 reasons for this. Firstly in the current market conditions retailers are generally consolidating rather than expanding. Secondly, there has been some uncertainty over the precise future of Lancaster retail centre in relation to other potential city centre developments. As a result the applicant has only had interest from retailers seeking smaller footprints in a more traditional format (i.e. ground floor only).

In light of this, the applicant has looked at alternative uses for the first floor. Whilst there has been no interest for office space or sports facilities (such as a gymnasium), their hotel operator, Travelodge, had conveyed an interest to secure more bedrooms and to furnish the hotel with a cafe. Page 46 Unfortunately this interest has subsequently fallen away, hence the withdrawal of the previous application for this site (10/00170/VCN). However, in policy terms, an office use is acceptable in a town centre. It provides employment in a sustainable location with good accessibility, in line with PPS4. Though the loss of retail space in a central location such as this is unfortunate, in the circumstances its loss is acceptable. It is only acceptable though because the space is at first floor level and difficult to market, especially during a recession. The key is to maintain the retail space at ground level, which is proposed.

7.2 In design terms, the building remains very much as negotiated on the 2008 permission. The most prominent elevations remain virtually untouched. An additional door at ground floor level onto Spring Garden Street would be required to provide access to the stairs and lift that would serve the first floor. However, the door can be designed to match the adjacent material (glass) so no contrast is created. This helps to maintain the balanced proportions of glass and stone. The variation would therefore not have any impact on the heritage asset (the City Conservation Area) and therefore complies with Planning Policy Statement 5.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 The 08/01129/FUL permission was granted subject to the applicant entering into a Section 106 (s106) agreement requiring 3 payments for:

Improvements to the Conservation Area A toucan crossing across King Street to Queen Square Improvements to the cycleway network in the vicinity of the site

The applicant has signed the s106 agreement and is making the relevant payments in accordance with the agreed timetable.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 For the reasons set out above, the variation to Condition 17 to allow the first floor of the development to be used for hotel purposes is acceptable.

Recommendation

That Condition 17 of Planning Permission 08/01129/FUL BE VARIED to allow B1 use on the first floor.

Human Rights Act

Background Papers

None.

Page 47 AgendaAgenda Item Item 12 Committee Date Application Number

A12 23 August 2010 10/00542/FUL

Application Site Proposal

2 Sunny Hill Erection of a five bed dwelling house and the formation of a new improved access Westbourne Road

Lancaster

Lancashire

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr D Howard N/A

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

17 August 2010 Committee cycle

Case Officer Mrs Jennifer Rehman

Departure N/A

That planning permission be granted subject to Summary of Recommendation conditions.

(i) Procedural Matters

This application has been referred to the Planning Committee by the Head of Regeneration and Policy on the basis that the previous outline consent was determined by Members on the 19 th April 2010. The previous outline application was referred because the applicant was in dispute with the local planning authority regarding the manner in which the Service has dealt with previous applications.

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The site that is the subject of this application for full planning permission relates to a 0.1ha site situated within an area of Lancaster City known as Cannon Hill. It is an area predominantly characterised by low density large Victorian houses surrounded by mature trees and set within relatively extensive garden plots. There is a diverse range of building types in this area including The Knoll - one of the first redbrick built houses in Lancaster; Westbourne House – one of the earliest examples of concrete house construction; Laurel Bank – one of the finest, grand stone-built terraces in the North West; the 19 th century random rubble stone properties at Abraham Heights Farm and; the 1980’s detached brown brick properties on Orchard Lane. A number of these properties are of significant architectural and historic merit and are recognised by their grade II listing.

1.2 The application site forms part of the original domestic curtilage to 2 Sunny Hill and was formally an orchard. No. 2 Sunny Hill is one of a pair of semi-detached mid-Victorian properties served by a private, un-adopted lane (Sunny Hill) which runs the length of the eastern boundary. The road is accessed off the south side of Westbourne Road approximately 70m west of Westbourne Drive, which runs parallel to Sunny Hill at a lower level. At present this private lane is an unmade road, narrow with substandard visibility in both directions at the junction with Westbourne Road, although the applicant has commenced work to the access and at the time of compiling this report the existing Page 48 wall had been demolished with a new access formed. The applicant has started re-building the wall behind visibility splays specified in both the current application and the previous proposal. This matter will be discussed later in the report.

1.3 Sunny Hill comprises a single pair of semi-detached properties – 1 and 2 Sunny Hill, constructed in stone under slate at three storeys high. These properties are situated hard up against the western boundary with ample land to the front and sides. They occupy a rather imposing and elevated position, orientated to face east towards the City Centre over properties on Westbourne Drive. The application site itself is bound by Orchard Lane; a private access road which runs along the southern boundary and leads to three large modern detached properties, the random rubble stone wall separating the site from The Knoll along the western boundary; 2 Sunny Hill to the north, and properties on Westbourne Drive to the east. The boundary treatment, with the exception of the western boundary, consists of trees, shrubs and hedges of Hawthorn, Holly and Beech.

1.4 The site has a constant and uniform slope of approximately 1 in 12 running perpendicularly down from the west boundary to the almost parallel eastern boundary, with negligible deviation in level between the north and south boundaries of the site.

1.5 The trees along the western boundary are all protected by TPO No. 118/G2 and are located within the grounds of The Knoll. There are also protected trees close to the site access (TPO No: 2005/376/T3) and mature trees along the eastern side of the private lane which are not protected. There has been a recent appeal decision relating the trees at the access onto Sunny Hill which is relevant to the application and shall be discussed in section 3.0 and 7.0 of this report.

1.6 At present the site is unallocated in the Lancaster District Local Plan. It should be noted however that the area in which this application is proposed is under consideration for conservation area status with all the consultation now completed. Notwithstanding this, the conservation area designation has not yet been granted formal resolution by the local planning authority.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 Full planning permission is sought for the erection of a five bedroom detached dwellinghouse and the formation of a new improved access at the junction with Westbourne Road.

2.2 The proposed dwelling has a rectangular footprint, somewhat larger than the adjacent pair of properties, positioned centrally on the plot tight up against the western boundary with a 1.5m set back behind the building line of 1 and 2 Sunny Hill. The layout plan indicates a footprint of 8.5m (depth) by 20m (length) with the ground floor levels set approximately 1.2m below the existing ground floor levels of the adjacent properties on Sunny Hill. The height of the main part of the building is approximately 6.7m, increasing to approximately 8.8m to account for the third storey element of the scheme. The proposed dwelling employs a contemporary modular approach to the design, using a simple palette of materials including a white and grey render, cedar boarding and glass. The proposed accommodation is split over three floors comprising two large reception rooms at ground floor level, together with utility/storage space and WC; an en-suite master bedroom, three further bedrooms with a bathroom at first floor level and; a guest bedroom, shower room and study at second floor level. The flat roof nature to the design allows for the creation of two grass roofs – one over the main part of the dwelling and a smaller area over the flat roof that forms the third storey cedar clad pod. The scheme also incorporates a flat roof single storey garage which shall be linked to the main dwelling with external walls only.

2.3 The design and access statement also indicates that due to the 1:12 slope of the site, landscaping and re-grading of the plot will be required. This will be arranged into a series flat lawned terraces with the internal lawn boundary heavily planted and the existing hedgerows enclosing the site retained. The submitted sections demonstrate how this arrangement will be achieved.

2.4 This full planning application also seeks permission for alterations and improvements to the access consisting of closing up the existing access and relocating it 3m further up Westbourne Road; widening the access to 4.5m; setting the gateposts back 3m from the edge of the kerb and demolishing and rebuilding the boundary walls in order to achieve 25 visibility splays in both directions; together with improvements to the pavement at the junction (splaying and realigning of the kerbstones). Page 49

2.5 The proposed development would result in a number of trees being removed. This consists of two groups of trees (comprising Elder, Holly, Hazel, Hawthorn, Yew and Sycamore) at the access, another group of trees (Apple and Cherry) located in the plot itself and a Sawara Cypress tree located in front of 2 Sunny Hill. An Arboricultural Method Statement and Tree Protection Plan have been submitted with the application and are read in conjunction with the Arboricultural Implications Assessment dated 25 March 2010. This indicates that the Yew tree located on the east side of the proposed new access and trees T4 – T6 shall be retained and protected, together with the trees along the eastern boundary of the lane (G7, T10 and T11).

3.0 Site History

3.1 An outline application was submitted to the Council in March last year for the erection of a five-bed dwellinghouse. This application was refused on the 7 May 2009 for the following reason:

The proposed development would lead to an increased use of the existing vehicular access to the site which, without improvements to the site lines and the formalising of passing places, would lead to additional pedestrian and vehicular conflict. Utilising this existing substandard access would be seriously detrimental to highway and pedestrian safety, particularly at the junction with Westbourne Road. Subsequently the proposed development fails to make satisfactory access arrangements and is therefore considered contrary to policy H19 and Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 12 ‘Residential Design Code’ of the Lancaster District Local Plan.

3.2 The Planning Inspector concluded that any increased usage of the access without improvements to the visibility would be harmful to highway and pedestrian safety and subsequently dismissed the appeal.

3.3 During the course of the appeal process, a revised scheme was put to the Local Planning Authority which involved the relocation of the access up the hill and the subsequent loss of 14 trees close to the site access. At this time, Officers were seriously concerned about the loss of trees and the impact on the wider visual amenities of the locality and advised the applicant that such a proposal would not be supported. Rather than submitting a revised planning application, the applicant chose to apply to remove these trees via an Application for tree works: works to trees subject to a TPO and/or notification of proposed works to trees in a conservation area . This was refused by the Council on the grounds of their significant contribution to the character and amenity value of the wider landscape; their greening and screening function between the adjacent residential property and the public highway; and their overall good condition and longevity. The applicant appealed this decision.

3.4 An Arboricultural Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State concluded that 6 of the appeal trees within group G3 (close to the derelict garage) were in a poor condition and did not have a significant amenity value. In relation to these trees the appeal was allowed. The Inspector did however consider the Yew Tree T3 at the access a significant amenity feature and dismissed the appeal in relation to this particular tree – commenting that the tree could be retained with minor amendments to the design of the access to prevent any undue harm.

3.5 In light of the above planning history, the applicant submitted a revised outline application for the access only and all other matters reserved. This application resolved the highway issues and outlined how the new access could be provided without undue harm to the protected trees. Members supported this application in April this year.

3.6 The applicant has now applied for full planning permission for the erection of a dwelling and alterations to the access. The proposal varies slightly from the outline and incorporates a single storey detached garage to the side of the dwelling and slight changes to the access arrangement.

3.7 Since the submission of this application on the 22 June 210, the applicant has commenced work on site. The work carried out to date involves a significant amount of excavation to the upside of the protected tree, the formation of an access, the creation of a retaining wall and the relocation of the stone boundary walls. It appears that the works carried out on site relate to this pending proposal and not the outline permission which granted a conditional consent for the access only. Furthermore, the applicant has failed to undertake the work in accordance with the previously submitted Tree Protection Plan and Arboricultural Method Statement. As a consequence it appears Page 50 that the protected Yew tree at the access has been damaged. This is a matter your Officers are currently investigating. A verbal update will be provided for Members at the committee meeting.

3.8 For information, Members may be interested to know that an outline application for a single dwelling on land between No. 1 Sunny Hill and Westbourne Road has now been submitted but is still pending consideration. The table below summarises the above planning history:

Application Number Proposal Decision 09/00196/OUT Outline application for the erection of a Refused and later dismissed at appeal. five bed private dwelling and associated (Delegated) landscape works 09/0089/TPO The application proposed the removal of Refused. The applicant appealed the 14 trees subject to TPO 118/G3 and decision with the Planning Inspectorate 2005/376/T3. allowing the appeal in relation to 6 trees in G3 and dismissing the appeal in relation to T3 of the 2005 TPO. (Delegated) 09/01186/OUT Outline application for the erection of a Outline permission was granted for the five bed private dwelling and associated access only (all other matters reserved). landscape works Permission was granted subject conditions requiring the development to be carried out in accordance with the approved plans with various conditions precedent. (Committee)

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response County Highways No objections. The proposal is effectively the same in highway terms to the previous approved outline permission. Conditions regarding the closing up of the existing access; provision of the new vehicular access, turning area, garaging and parking; and the provision of 25x 2m visibility splays should be imposed in the event that the application is approved.

Environmental Recommends refusal on the grounds that no desk top study has been submitted. Health In the event approval is granted an hours of construction condition is required.

Tree Protection Additional information in respect of tree protection measures to be submitted to Officer support the submitted Arboricultural Method Statement (AMS). Subject to receipt of this, conditions regarding implementation of the AMS, tree protection and landscaping to be imposed.

United Utilities No response received from United Utilities - current standing advice states that where no response is received this means that there are no United Utilities assets in the location and therefore there is no objection. UU commented on the outline permission and requested the development be drained on a separate system. Conditions relating to site drainage were imposed on the outline consent and as such will be repeated in the event that the submitted scheme is approved.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 At the time of compiling this report, 3 letters of representation have been received. Two of these letters raise objections to the proposed development. The reasons for opposition are as follows:

• The design and use of materials are inappropriate. The development should be built with Page 51 similar materials and style to those around it, particularly given the sites potential conservation area status and proximity to The Knoll (listed building).

• The modern design will set an undesirable precedent for future development which will have ramifications for the conservation area.

The other letter submitted does not raise objections to the scheme but stresses the importance of high quality materials and appropriate landscaping to allow the building to sit comfortably within its setting. Concerns are still raised regarding construction traffic, highway safety and disturbance and the detailing of the new wall to the access.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 Lancaster District Core Strategy

Policy SC2 (Urban Concentration) seeks to build healthy sustainable communities by focussing development where it will support the vitality of existing settlements, regenerate areas of need and minimise the need to travel. This policy seeks to accommodate 90% of new dwellings within the existing urban areas of Lancaster, Morecambe, Heysham and Carnforth.

Policy SC4 (Meeting the Districts Housing Requirement) sets out the principles which will ensure housing needs are met through housing allocations and determining planning applications This policy seeks to identity housing land and manage the phased release of housing land in accordance the Regional Spatial Strategy.

Policy SC5 (Achieving Quality in Design) seeks to maintain and improve the quality of development throughout the District by ensuring new development is of a quality which reflects and enhances the positive characteristics of its surroundings.

Policy ER7 (Renewable Energy) seeks to promote micro-renewables through the development control process and determining planning applications.

Policy E1 (Environmental Capital) seeks to safeguard and enhance the Districts Environmental Capital by ensuring that development in the city of Lancaster and other historic areas conserves and enhances a sense of place. This policy also indicates that the Council will resist proposals which would have a detrimental effect on environmental quality and public amenity.

Lancaster District Local Plan

Policy H19 (Development on Small Sites in Lancaster, Morecambe, Heysham and Carnforth) states that new residential development within existing housing areas will be permitted which; • Should not result in the loss of greenspace or other areas of locally important open space; • Would not have a significant adverse effect on the amenities of nearby residents; • Provides a high standard of amenity; • Makes adequate provision for the disposal of sewage and waste water, and • Makes satisfactory arrangement for access, servicing and cycle and car parking.

Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 12 ‘Residential Design Code’ sets out the Councils design guidance for new residential development.

National Planning Policy Statement 3 (Housing) is also relevant in the determination of this application. This policy sets a number of objectives. High quality housing and good design is one of them. PPS3 also states that a key objective of Local Planning Authorities is to make effective use of land by re-using land that has been previously developed. The newly adopted PPS3 (June 2010) has removed private residential gardens from the definition of previously developed land.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 Principle of Development

The Council seeks to build and maintain sustainable communities through a strategy of Urban Page 52 Concentration whereby 90% of new dwellings to be accommodated within the existing urban areas of the District. In the context of the Districts housing policy, the principle of constructing a new single dwellinghouse in this location raises no significant planning concerns. The site is in a sustainable location on the edge of the city centre with the principle of development recently granted through the outline consent. However since granting this consent, there has been a slight change in national policy, with private gardens now excluded from the definition of previously developed land. PPS3, Policy SC2 and SC4 of the Core Strategy all seek to encourage new development on previously developed land. Notwithstanding this, PPS3 does not exclude development on garden land outright nor does it state that garden land is ‘greenfield’. In which case each case must be determined on its own merits with regard to the Development Plan and any material considerations. In this case, the principle of a dwelling on the land adjacent to No. 2 Sunny Hill has been established with the recent approval of outline consent. It was determined earlier this year that the plot was capable of accommodating a single dwelling without undue harm to neighbouring residents or adversely affecting the character and appearance of the area. These circumstances have not changed and whilst it could be argued that there is sufficient housing land available to enable individual sites to be resisted, there are no grounds to resist such development in this case.

7.2 In light of the fact that the principle of the development has been accepted, the principal issues for Members to consider in the determination of this application relate to the design and appearance of the proposed dwelling.

7.3 Character and Appearance

Since the last application was determined proposals for the Cannon Hill area to be afforded conservation area status have progressed, with consultation on the proposal completed. As a consequence Officers have been mindful of this and consider it a material consideration in the determination of the submitted application.

7.4 Cannon Hill, which developed as a low density suburb in the mid-late 19th-century, has survived largely intact with high quality historic buildings. The mature woodland, extensive gardens and boundary walls provide equally important unifying factors in this area. The pattern of built form is characterised by the density of development increasing gradually downhill from The Knoll. Sunny Hill sits below The Knoll and serves two semi-detached Victorian properties constructed over three stories build in stone under slate with intricate architectural detail. 1 and 2 Sunny Hill are largely unaltered. They are positioned centrally up against the western boundary with large extensive garden plots to either side.

7.5 The low density built form and the apparent street pattern of the Cannon Hill area is clearly what makes it so unique from elsewhere within the City and as a consequence is one of the main reasons for considering the area for conservation area status. In plan form Sunny Hill appears to be subdivided into four plots, namely 1 and 2 Sunny Hill and two plots to either side of these properties. The submitted application relates to the development of the far plot, which was formally garden land to 2 Sunny Hill. The development of this plot is going to reduce the size of the curtilage associated with 2 Sunny Hill and create an additional dwelling on this site. Notwithstanding this, the two plots created remain substantial in size with ample space around them so as not to undermine the low density characteristics of the Cannon Hill area. Indeed evidence has been shown that the original intention was to build on this plot many decades ago.

7.6 The layout of the development is marginally different from the outline consent. In fact the dimensions of the dwelling are slightly smaller, but with the additional garage, the overall footprint is now slightly greater. This however raises no significant planning issues. The most controversial element of the proposal, clearly relates to the design of the dwelling. The applicant has purposefully avoided designing a dwelling which is of similar style to the nearby Victoria properties. The proposal takes a very modern approach to developing the site employing contemporary forms, materials and construction technologies. This in isolation is commendable and clearly constitutes good design as advocated by national planning policy and our local plan policy SC5. However for a scheme to be of truly good design it should have regard to its setting. In this case, despite some disagreement from neighbouring residents, this innovative approach to the site works well in this location. The site is heavily screened from the public highway (Westbourne Road) and is only visible from neighbouring gardens and Orchard Lane – even then there is natural landscaping to help screen the site. The use of contrasting materials and large areas of glazing to the proposed dwelling simply enhances and brings out the special architectural detail of the important surrounding properties, in particular 1 Page 53 and 2 Sunny Hill. 7.7 To ensure the special historical and architectural qualities of 1 and 2 Sunny Hill are not jeopardised by the erection of a new dwelling on the application site, the scale of the development has been respectfully designed to maintain a subordinate relationship with the neighbouring properties, whilst holding its own identify and presence within the plot. The highest part of the dwelling, which in itself is a small pod located on top of the main part of the dwelling, is located just below the eaves of the neighbouring property, with the main part of the dwelling no higher than the middle of the first floor windows. Similarly, the building line set by the frontages of 1 and 2 Sunny Hill has been retained, with the proposed dwelling set back approximately 1.5m from their principal elevations.

7.8 The development is arguably not conventional in terms of form, design and use of materials (stone buildings under slate pitched roofs), but this does not mean that the development is inappropriate; regard has to be paid to the site context. Modern, high quality design can equally add to the positive characteristics of an area. This site lends itself to be developed in an innovative fashion without undue harm to the area. However it is acknowledged that the matter of design can clearly be subjective and it is inevitable that some may disagree with your Officers opinions regarding this . However, on the basis that the site is relatively well screened and that the design in itself has a respectful relationship to the neighbouring properties, a refusal of planning permission on design grounds would be difficult to substantiate.

7.9 The location of the proposed access was granted consent under the outline permission. The only change relates to the design of the access arrangement, in particular the form of the new walls fronting Westbourne Road. The previous outline consent showed the new walls (both the upside and low side of the access) curving into the site. The current scheme shows the wall to the upside of the access concaved with a raised planter to the front with the wall to the low side designed as previously approved. From a streetscene perspective, amendments have been requested to revise the upside of the access to create a symmetrical and simplified arrangement. Such amendments would respect the form and appearance of this boundary wall, which is an important design feature within the Cannon Hill area. At the time of compiling this report, the applicant had verbally informed Officers that he was not prepared to amend this access. The applicant believes that the proposed design provides enhanced pedestrian visibility and that there are other accesses within the immediate vicinity with similar asymmetrical characteristics. This is disputed. On the south side of Westbourne Road the majority of the accesses up Cannon Hill have a symmetrical design; whether concave of convex in appearance.

7.10 In the history section of this report, it was noted that work has already commenced on site. The development carried out relates to the proposed access arrangement with the concave section of wall already completed. This whole situation is regrettable, and whilst our intention is to enhance the appearance of the access though the suggested amendments, a refusal of planning permission because of the design of the access arrangement would be difficult to support. Notwithstanding this, it is the intention that the new walls will be rebuilt in natural reclaimed stone. This is evident on site.

7.11 With regards to the re-grading and landscaping of the site, despite some neighbouring concerns, the formation of terraced lawns and the sweeping drive would not cause an adverse impact on the visual amenities of the locality. As noted earlier the site is well screened from public view. A refusal of planning permission on the grounds of landscape and character impact would be difficult to substantiate in these circumstances and particularly given previous development of the Cannon Hill area over recent years. It is proposed that a landscaping condition be imposed if Members are minded to grant planning permission.

7.12 Based on the above considerations in respect to the design and appearance of the proposed dwelling and landscaping, the proposed development is considered compliant with the policies E1 and SC5 of the Core Strategy and H19 of the Local Plan. With regards to the access arrangement, the proposed development could be significantly improved as noted above, however given that this is the only element that raises concern, this alone would not be sufficient to refuse the application.

7.13 Neighbouring Amenity

The proposed dwelling is surrounded by residential properties to the north (2 Sunny Hill), east (Westbourne Drive) and south (Orchard Lane) with separation distances of approximately 14m, 33m and 26m respectively. The Knoll, which is currently occupied as offices, is located to the west of the Page 54 site and is a sufficient distance from the proposed development. It is also sufficiently screened by mature woodland along this boundary. 7.14 Despite previous concerns regarding overlooking and loss of privacy during the determination of the outline application, none of the neighbouring residents have raised objection on loss of residential amenity grounds to the current proposal. The principal elevation is fully glazed and provides the primary habitable accommodation with plenty of natural light. The windows to the side elevations and to the rear serve the internal circulation areas and non-habitable rooms only, with the exception of a kitchen window at ground floor level, which would be screened by the boundary treatment between this site and 2 Sunny Hill. Due to the scale of the proposed development, its position within the plot, the topography of the area and existing landscaping, the relationship of the development to neighbouring residential properties is considered compliant with policy H19 and SPG 12 of the Local Plan. The only matter which does raise concern, is the potential use of the flat roofs as external sitting-out areas. Using the grass roofs as additional amenity space would result in elevated overlooking into the only private garden area to 2 Sunny Hill. This would be unacceptable and as such it is proposed that a condition be imposed to prevent the use of the flat roofs for this purpose. A further condition would be required preventing the insertion of any new windows on the side elevation facing this neighbouring property, as 2 Sunny Hill has some habitable windows facing the application site.

Subject to these appropriate conditions, the erection of a new dwelling in this location in the manner proposed would not significantly harm neighbouring residential amenity.

7.15 Highway Safety

The existing access to Sunny Hill is narrow and has substandard visibility in both directions. During the determination of the first outline application it was concluded that an additional dwelling in this location, accessed via a narrow private road which suffers poor intervisibility, would pose a risk to highway safety and as such was refused. The Planning Inspector equally found the existing access to be inappropriate to accommodate a further dwelling and therefore dismissed the application. In light of this, a further outline application was submitted which proposed to close off the existing access and relocate a widened access 3m up the hill. This was permitted by Members in April this year. The access proposed as part of the current scheme remains principally the same (location and width) as the access approved under the outline application. As such County Highways have raised no objections to the proposal provided conditions are imposed, as noted in the consultation section in this report.

7.16 The site layout provides sufficient car parking to adequately comply with the Council’s parking standards. The application also indicates that 5 cycle spaces will be provided in the curtilage of the dwelling.

7.17 Trees

As noted in the history section of this report, an application to fell protected trees has been determined at appeal where 6 of the protected trees were allowed to be felled and the one tree at the site access (T3) to be retained. Replacement planting is indicated in this appeal decision and amounts to three oak trees and holly trees to be planted within twelve months of felling. This appeal decision is separate to the submitted application and as such the replacement planting is not shown on the proposed plans. To account for the other trees which are to be felled, if Members are minded to support the proposal, a landscaping condition should be imposed requiring details of hard and soft landscaping including replacement tree planting.

7.18 The protected tree of the 2005 TPO, which is identified for retention in the latest appeal decision, (ref: TPO 376/2005 T3) is located in very close proximity to the new access. A load bearing surface is proposed to be installed to reduce the potential impact on root systems within the root protection areas of T3 in relation to construction of the access and trees T10 and T11 in front of the proposed dwelling. Further details to support the submitted Method Statement regarding how the existing access will be developed and the method for installation of the ‘special surface’ have been requested. This detail was particularly important with regards to how the load bearing system would be constructed at the access so close to the protected Yew tree. Excavation at the access has been carried out with damage to this tree clearly evident. The detail is still needed however to ensure other trees on site are not damaged. The outcome of this shall be verbally presented to Members. Page 55 Despite this, if Members are minded to approve the development, conditions are required relating to tree protection measures, the method statement and landscaping.

7.19 Subject to the submission of satisfactory information, the proposed development and subsequent loss in trees can be adequately mitigated through an appropriate landscaping scheme to be agreed by condition.

7.20 Sustainability

With regards to sustainability, the application indicates that the house will far exceed the requirements of the current building regulations in terms of energy use and conservation by employing a number of techniques that include:

• Ground source heat pumping; • Heat exchange ventilation to minimise heat loss; • High levels of thermal insulation and sir-tightness to minimise heat loss; • High thermal mass to passively achieve required diurnal temperature changes and; • Rainwater collection.

This indicates a sound commitment to achieving a low carbon property on this site and is therefore compliant with policy SC1 (Sustainable Communities) of the Core Strategy. In line with other residential applications in the district, it is also considered that the standard conditions are imposed; that is that the properties should meet at least Code Level 3 for Sustainable Homes, and that at least 10% of the predicted energy demand for the development shall be met by on-site renewable energy measures.

7.21 Other Matters

Concerns regarding potential noise and disturbance from construction are inevitable for a period of time in any development. In order or prevent undue harm, a planning condition should be imposed limiting the hours of construction in the interest of neighbouring residential amenity. There are similar concerns regarding the use of the existing lane for construction traffic. Whilst this is not entirely a planning matter, there is an argument to suggest that in the interests of highway safety, the proposed access should be provided before development commences rather than prior to occupation. This can be delivered by an appropriated worded condition and is clearly the applicant’s intensions given the work already carried out on site.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 The development proposal falls below the requirements for any on-site or off-site contributions towards highway infrastructure or affordable housing.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 The principle of a dwellinghouse on this site has been established through the granting of outline consent earlier this year. The main considerations for Members to consider are whether the scale, design and layout of the development is appropriate in this location. Having had regard to the special historic and architectural qualities of the Cannon Hill area and considered the relationship of the development to neighbouring residential properties, Members are advised that, despite the regrettable situation over the access walls and the preserved tree, the development now being proposed is compliant with the policies contained in the Development Plan and as such the proposal should be supported.

Recommendation

That Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1 Standard time limit 2 Development to accord with the approved plans and supplementary documents 3 Precise details/samples of all external materials including window sample 4 Access to be provided prior to commencement of development and retained at all times thereafter Page 56 5 Existing access to be permanently closed off when the new access is operational 6 Provision of parking and turning to be provided in full and retained 7 Visibility splays to be provided and maintained at all times 8 Site to be drained on a separate system and details of the surface water drainage to be submitted and agreed with the LPA 9 Tree Protection Condition 9 Development to be carried out in accordance with the AMS 10 Standard landscaping condition 11 Existing stone and copings from the wall fronting Westbourne Road to be reused unless otherwise indicated in writing with the LPA 12 Unforeseen contamination condition 13 Construction hours condition 13 Properties to meet at least Code Level 3 for Sustainable Homes 14 No development until a scheme for measures to incorporate at least 10% of the predicted energy requirements via on-site renewable sources is agreed. 15 The roof of the development shall not be used as a balcony or as a sitting-out area, nor shall the flat roof be physically enclosed 16 No windows or doors to be inserted in the elevation facing 2 Sunny Hill without express consent from the local planning authority. 17 Removal of PD rights (Parts 1 and 2)

Human Rights Act

Background Papers

1. None

Page 57 AgendaAgenda Item Item 13 Committee Date Application Number

A13 26 th July 2010 10/00129/REM

Application Site Proposal

Land To The Rear Of 1 St Michaels Grove Reserved matters application for the erection of a work/live unit Bolton Le Sands

Carnforth

Lancashire

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr David Hall John Coward Architects Ltd

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

7 June 2010

Case Officer Mr Daniel Ratcliffe

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Approval

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The site is in the Bolton Le Sands Conservation Area. It lies on the east side of the A6 road through the village, from which it is screened by a belt of trees at the side of a watercourse known as St Michael’s Brook. Although the land is known on the Ordnance Survey plans as an area of allotments, it is not used as such; it has been for many years a detached garden associated with the applicant’s house. The adjoining land to the east also appears to be used similarly. The site is currently uncultivated and is used to provide off street parking and for open storage of various items.

1.2 To the south-east is a terrace of late-Victorian houses fronting St Michael’s Grove. The adjoining site to the north west is occupied by a large single storey building used as an Indian Restaurant.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The proposed application seeks approval of all matters reserved (access, appearance, landscaping layout and scale) following the outline approval in November 2009 of a live/work unit on the site.

2.2 The applicant’s proposal involves the erection of a two-storey, three-bedroom detached house of conventional design at the north and east side of the site. To the south east side of the site a single storey garage/workshop is proposed, together with a detached double garage. The end wall of the workshop would be 10m from the nearest part of the existing house at 1 St Michael’s Grove and 15m from the next property in the terrace.

2.2 A detached double garage - which is to be positioned in the southern corner of the site - is proposed to have a flat green roof. All windows and doors are proposed to be timber, the precise colour of which is detailed ‘to be agreed’. Access will be provided via the existing access off St Michaels Grove and a turnaround area to be finished in block paving is to be provided to the front of the property.

Page 58 2.4 With regards to boundary treatment the site will utilise part of the existing boundary walls as well as incorporating new fencing. The north, east and south west boundaries will retain the existing stone walls and trees and existing landscaping adjacent to the Beck will also be retained. To the south east boundary a new 1.8m post and panel fence is proposed to be erected adjacent to which fruit tress are shown to be planted.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The only history at this site involves two recent planning applications both submitted in 2009. The first proposed a change of use but this was subsequently withdrawn. The second was an outline application for the erection of a live/work unit which was approved and it is the reserved matters which are the subject of this most recent application. The outline application was approved at Planning Committee in November 2009.

Application Number Proposal Decision 09/00014/CU Outline application for mixed use development comprising Withdrawn church hall, parking and live/work unit 09/00822/OUT Outline application for the erection of a live/work unit Approved

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response No comments received within statutory time period. County Highways had no County Highways objections to the outline application, subject to a condition being attached to any permission requiring the provision of garages and/or parking facilities.

As with the outline application concerns are raised regarding levels of noise. Environmental Therefore there is a request for a condition regarding noise assessment and control at Health the site, as well as hours of operation.

Previous environmental health-related conditions imposed on the outline shall be repeated on any grant of reserved matters.

Parish Council No comments received within statutory time period.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 There has been one letter of objection to the proposal which raised the concern that the proposed dwelling is out of character with those in the surrounding area.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 Planning Policy Statement 5 (PPS 5): Planning for the Historic Environment , specifically paragraph HE7.5 states that local planning authorities should take into account the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to the character and local distinctiveness of the historic environment.

6.2 Lancaster District Core Strategy (LDCS): Policy SC3 identifies Bolton-le-Sands as one of those villages which has a full range of services: a general practitioner, a primary school, a food shop, a post office and a bus stop. It is therefore considered appropriate for infill housing development. It anticipates that 10% of new housing in the District will be provided in the rural area, generally within these settlements. It also seeks to provide for local employment needs within them. It also states that in Rural Areas the Council will work to protect, conserve and enhance rural landscapes and the distinctive characteristics of rural settlements.

Page 59 6.3 Policy E1 refers Environmental Capital It seeks to improve the Districts Environment by applying national and regional planning policies and resisting development which would have a detrimental effect on environmental quality and public amenity.

6.4 Policy ER7 of the Core Strategy seeks to encourage the use of renewable energy in new developments.

6.5 The proposal also has to be considered in relation to Policy H7 , one of the "partly saved" policies from the Lancaster District Local Plan, which allows for new housing development in selected villages where it:

• Is appropriate in terms of design, density, and open space standards to its surroundings • Would not have a significant adverse effect on the character of the settlement, the surrounding landscape, or the amenities of nearby residents • Would not result in the loss of an important open area • Makes satisfactory arrangements for access, servicing, cycle and car parking; and • Makes adequate provision for the disposal of sewage and waste water.

6.6 Lancaster District Local Plan (LDLP): As the site is in a Conservation Area account has to be taken of "saved" Policy E38 , which states that development proposals within such areas will only be permitted where they respect their scale and character.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 Although all matters were reserved the majority of the issues were identified during the previous application for outline permission, which was approved at Planning Committee in November 2009. The principle of the development has already been approved. As highlighted earlier in this report, this application asks Members to consider only the access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale of the development. The key criterion to consider relates to PPS 5 and whether this scheme would make a positive contribution to the character and distinctiveness of the Conservation Area and either preserve or enhance its setting.

7.2 Layout, Appearance and Scale:

The site is at present open but the recent Conservation Area Appraisal of Bolton Le Sands did not identify it as being of special significance to the character of the village, unlike the adjoining land to the north. As it is screened from the A6 road, its development would have only a limited impact on views of the area. Despite its limited public visibility, consideration has been given to the current condition of the site, and views into and out from the Conservation Area, particularly from elevated land. The local planning authority has previously held the view that the proposal would improve views into and out from the Conservation Area. This remains our position and the proposal is compliant with PPS 5.

The house and the workshop would be far enough away from neighbouring properties not to give rise to any privacy issues. The design of the dwelling would not have any windows in positions where they would give rise to any privacy issues. A two storey building constructed/finished in wet dash render with a slate roof and timber windows and doors would not be out of place in this location and is considered to be compatible with the character of this part of the village.

7.3 Access:

The existing access from St Michael’s Grove will be maintained and improved. There are no issues regarding access to the site and County Highways do not have any concerns with the proposal. A turning area is provided for vehicles that enter the site which will allow for the majority of traffic to leave the site in a forward gear.

7:4 Landscaping:

Tree planting within the site will be simple. Most of the existing trees within the vicinity are along the north side of the beck and will therefore remain, acting as a screen of the development from the adjacent A6 road. Page 60

7.5 The site is classed as being in a sustainable location within one of the eight rural communities highlighted in Policy SC3 of the Core Strategy where (cumulatively) 10% of new housing should be provided to meet the district housing supply. The principle of the development has already been approved with the outline application.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 None relating to this reserved matters submission.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 Overall the design of the proposed dwelling is inoffensive and will not detract from the character or local distinctiveness of the area. The property will be in keeping with those in the surrounding area and all matters reserved (access, appearance, landscaping layout and scale) are acceptable from the details and information provided in the application. The application is therefore recommended for approval.

Recommendation

That Approval of Reserved Matters BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard 3 year time limit. 2. Development carried out in accordance with the approved plans. 3. Details of materials and finishes to be agreed. 4. Drainage details to be submitted. 5. Use of the workshop to be for activities associated with the landscape gardening business only. 6. Domestic garage retained as such. 7. Standard Contaminated Conditions (Assessment to be carried out) 8. No importation of soil materials unless agreed 9. Prevention of future contamination 10. Measures to survey and remove asbestos 11. Construction hours 0800-1800 Monday to Saturday, no work on Sundays or Public Holidays 12. At least 10% of energy needs to be generated on site. 13. At least Code Level 3 for Sustainable Homes. 14. As required by consultees

Human Rights Act

Background Papers

None.

Page 61 AgendaAgenda Item Item 14 Committee Date Application Number

A14 23 August 2010 10/00598/FUL

Application Site Proposal

Burrowbeck Grange Nursing Home Erection of a two storey extension and associated landscaping Scotforth Road

Lancaster

Lancashire

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Optima Care Ltd Jamie Pyper

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

14 September 2010 None

Case Officer Mrs Jennifer Rehman

Departure N/A

That planning permission be granted subject to Summary of Recommendation conditions.

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The site that is the subject of this application relates to Burrowbeck Grange nursing home, which is a large detached Edwardian building, formally a private residence, set in its own grounds located on the east side of Scotforth Road, approximately 3km south of the city centre.

1.2 The original property is two-stories high under steep pitched roofs constructed and finished in red brick with contrasting stone features (mainly a stone solider course) under a red clay tile roof with over hanging eaves and dormers to the front and side roof slopes. The building has various other architectural features, such as the stone balcony to the front elevation, two tall brick chimneybreasts and arched window heads. The original property has been extended and altered over the years, including a large two-storey extension to the rear, a single storey hexiform extension to the side, an enclosed canopy and porch to the front elevation and replacement upvc windows. There is also a detached red brick built bungalow within the grounds of Burrowbeck Grange which was granted a change of use from a residential dwelling to a D1 use (non-residential institution) in the early 1990s. This building is now used in association with the main use of the site (as a nursing home) and provides ancillary office/meeting accommodation.

1.3 The topography of the site rises west to east and drop gradually from north to south. The application property sits towards the rear (east) of the plot, elevated above Scotforth Road which runs along the western boundary of the site. The bungalow occupies a lower position in the south eastern corner of the plot. The plot is well landscaped with a mixture of tree/hedgerow species around the whole of the perimeter of the site, in particular the substantial tree screening along the eastern boundary. The majority of these trees are covered by Tree Protection Order No:67 (1981). To the west of the building the grounds are open with landscaped gardens, steeply falling to the adjacent highway where vehicular access is provided.

1.4 Burrowbeck is the last building on the east side of Scotforth Road when leaving the city to the south towards Galgate. The site is bound by residential properties to the north and south, namely Burrowbeck Copse and Aroona (a children’s care home) respectively. A public right of way (no.55) Page 62 runs along the eastern boundary of the site. This footpath is separated from the adjacent highway (Collingham Park) by an area of grassed verge. To the east beyond the highway, approximately 40 meters from the site, lies Beechwood Gardens; a small cul-de-sac of detached residential dwellings.

1.5 The application site lies within the built up area of Lancaster and is subsequently unallocated in the Lancaster District Local Plan.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 Planning permission is sought for the demolition of the existing bungalow and parts of the existing building (the extended parts of the original property), and the erection of a substantial two-storey extension (partly three storey due to proposed basement levels). The development will result in a net increase of 26 bedrooms (a total of 46 bedrooms) as well as improved facilities including a new lounge area, hair/treatment room, kitchen and laundry facilities, ancillary office/meeting space and external amenity areas. The proposed extension will extend from the rear of the property (east) and wrap around the southern aspect of the property where the scale of the extension will drop to 1½ storeys high. The development will then extend to the north where it will link to the original building by a single storey predominately glazed extension. The proposal, which involves some refurbishment and reconfiguration of the existing accommodation, amounts to an increase of 1545sqm of new floorspace. The average ridge height is approximately 8.6m, increasing to approximately 9.4m at its most southern point as a response to the changes in land levels. The eaves levels to the southern two storey element measures circa 7m, dropping to approximately 5m on the 1½ storey element of the scheme. The eaves height is on average approximately 6m for the rest of the extension.

In addition to the main part of the development, an additional two-storey element is proposed adjoining the original western part of the building infilling between the original property and the two- storey extension previously permitted and built in the 1990s. This extends marginally beyond the furthermost northern elevation.

2.2 The extensions shall be built in red brick with stone or an alternative brick detail under a blue roof tile. To break up the bulk and massing of the extension, full height glazed projecting bays are proposed on all elevations. As a response to the layout and form of the development, two internal courtyards are included in the design. These areas shall provide safe and secure amenity space for residents.

2.3 To support the application a full Arboricultural Implications Assessment has been submitted. This provides a full account of all the trees on site and assesses the impact of the development on their sustainability and long term protection. A total of three trees are identified to be removed (two protected trees along the north and eastern boundaries and one unprotected tree in the centre of the site). Together with various other supporting documents, an indicative landscaping proposal has also been submitted. This proposes improved landscaping to the front of the site (some re-grading works), replacement tree planting, additional parking and a separate pedestrian access from Scotforth Road.

2.4 A Sustainability Statement has also been submitted with the application which confirms that the developers are committed to meeting a minimum of 10% of the developments predicted energy demand from renewable energy sources.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The nursing home is well established and has been the subject of a number of planning permissions since its initial permission in 1987. The most relevant applications are listed in the table below:

Application Number Proposal Decision 87/00663/HST Change of use of house to care home Permitted 89/00709/HST Erection of extension for 6 additional bedrooms Permitted 92/01000/HST Change of use of bungalow from class C3 to class D1 Permitted 93/00260/FUL Erection of a two storey extension to form new day spaces Permitted 98/00702/FUL Renewal of permission 93/00260/FUL for erection of a two Permitted Page 63 storey extension to form new day spaces 01/00141/FUL Erection of an extension to provide an additional Permitted communal lounge 01/01039/FUL Erection of a two storey bedroom block extension Permitted 06/00994/FUL Erection of two storey extension Permitted 09/00997/FUL Extension of time limit on application 06/00994/FUL for the Undetermined erection of a two storey extension

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response Tree Protection No objections subject the following conditions: Officer • Implementation of the Arboriculture Method Statement • Detailed Landscaping Scheme to be submitted County Highways No objections subject to the following condition: • Precise details of the of car parking, mobility car parking and cycle storage to be submitted and thereafter retained. Environmental No objections subject to the following condition: Health Service • Hours of construction (Mon-Fri 08.00 – 18.00, Sat 08.00 – 14.00 and no works on Sundays or Bank Holidays) • Unforeseen contaminated land United Utilities No response received from United Utilities - current standing advice states that where no response is received this means that there are no United Utilities assets in the location and therefore there is no objection Extra Care Housing At the time of compiling this report no comments have been received. Group

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 At the time of compiling this report, only one letter of representation has been received. This letter is from the occupiers of Burrowbeck Copse who have raised no objections to the proposed development.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 The relevant planning policies are as follows:

Lancaster District Core Strategy (LDCS): Policy SC1 (Sustainable Development) seeks to ensure new development proposals are sustainable in terms of both location and design. This policy, albeit a generic overriding policy, states that sites should be previously developed and accessible to public transport, employment, leisure, education and community facilities. This policy also states that development should not cause adverse environmental impacts on the natural and built environments.

Policy SC5 (Achieving Quality in Design) seeks to ensure that new development contributes to the positive characteristics of its surroundings and the quality of life of the District, by improving the quality of development and promoting good urban design. This policy supports national agendas for raising the profile of good design in spatial planning.

Policy ER7 (Renewable Energy) seeks to promote and ensure the integration of renewable energy within new development, subject to acceptable impacts on townscape, landscape and residential amenity.

Policy E2 (Transportation Measures) supports the wider principles that development should be focused in sustainable locations and should improve walking and cycle networks.

Page 64 Lancaster District Local Plan (LDLP): Policy H18 (Nursing Homes) relates to new nursing homes including the change of use of existing properties. The criteria for new care home development is that it should be well located in relation to local services, facilities and public transport; is physically suitable in size and general layout and can provide a good standard of external amenity space.

Policy E13 (Trees & Woodland) clearly states that development which would result in a significant adverse effect on, or involve the loss of any significant areas of woodland, significant trees or any area of ancient woodland will not be permitted.

Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 12 ‘Residential Design Code’ (SPG 12) deals mainly with new residential development, however it does highlight some design/amenity standards applicable in assessing the submitted proposal.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 Planning Background

The submitted application is made following detailed discussions with Officers with particular reference to planning permission 06/00994/FUL, which was granted by Committee on the 16 October 2006. This earlier permission was for the demolition of the existing bungalow on site and a substantial two-storey extension wrapping around the east and south elevations, amounting to an additional 1134 sqm of floorspace. The scale, massing and siting of this extension is not dissimilar to the current submitted scheme. The main differences between the two proposals relates to the proximity of the development to the existing protected trees along the eastern boundary and the scale of the development along the southern boundary. It came to light that a revised scheme may be necessary when the applicant applied to discharge conditions late last year. In particular, Officers were not satisfied that condition 9, which required a scheme for the protection of trees to be submitted and agreed, could be fully discharged. In fact, as part of dealing with the condition a number of these trees were identified for removal. This was an obvious concern to your Officers as the original submission had not identified any significant tree removal along the eastern boundary. In addition the authority’s tree protection criteria were not as strict in 2006. The problem was that the 2006 approval was simply too close to the protected trees.

7.2 Following the submission of a discharge of condition application, the applicant then submitted an application to extend the time limit of the 2006 permission under the recent provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) (Amendment No.3) (England) Order 2009. Officers have indicated to the applicant that the extension of time application could not be supported in the knowledge that the previously approved development would have a harmful impact on protected trees and the wider character or the area. This application remains undetermined to safeguard the applicant’s position in the event that a revised scheme (the submitted proposal) is not supported. Notwithstanding this, if Members are minded to support the submitted proposal, it is the applicant’s intention to withdraw the application to extend the life of the original planning permission.

7.3 Despite the rather complex planning history, the principal issues for Members to consider in the determination of this application relate to the impact of the development on protected trees and any amenity and design considerations.

7.4 Principle of Development

The principle of the development, in terms of its scale and amount, has been established over the years with significant extensions approved by the local planning authority back in 2001 and later in 2006. With regards to the submitted proposal, there are no significant planning reasons to resist the principle of a substantial extension to Burrowbeck Grange. Notwithstanding this, the development plan has changed since the 2006 approval with the adoption of the Core Strategy in summer 2008. Subsequently the policies contained therein are a material consideration. The principal policies have been listed in the section above but in short, the issue of sustainability and good design are more prevalent under the current policy framework than they have been in the past.

7.5 The key objective of this proposal has been to retain the same number of bedrooms as that previously approved in order to maintain commercial viability, whilst at the same time providing a Page 65 greater level of protection to the existing protected trees. In order to achieve this reasonable compromises from both your Officers and the applicant have been negotiated at length prior to this submission.

7.6 The site topography, the proximity of protected trees, the relationship to surrounding dwellings and the operational requirements of the nursing home are difficult constraints, but in this instance they have been successfully addressed in the submitted proposal. Unlike the previously approved scheme, this proposal will now affect the existing accommodation and from an operational point of view is less convenient to implement. The applicant is however prepared to manage this in order to negotiate an appropriate scheme which meets both their own commercial requirements and the requirements of the local planning authority to protect the existing trees and the wider visual amenity of the area.

7.7 The submitted proposal has been pulled further away from the protected trees along the eastern boundary compared to the 2006 scheme. To recapture the floorspace lost by doing this, additional bulk has been added to the southern wing of the proposed development. The consequences of this will be discussed in the following section of the report.

7.8 Design and appearance

The original property is characterised as a large red brick and clay tile building of a traditional Edwardian style. There have been a number of alterations and extensions to the building; some more sympathetic than others. The proposed extension would however replicate the use of materials and architectural detail of the original building, with the addition of some more modern elements including the predominately glazed single storey link extension and full height projecting bays to the front and side elevations of the development. These features help break up the bulk, massing and repetition of openings on the large two-storey elements of the scheme. The roof arrangement is relatively simple, other than the junction of the new extension to the existing two- storey extension to the east of the original building, and consists of a series of hipped roofs over the two storey elements following a common ridgeline. The single storey link between the extension and the existing building has a simple pitched roof. The roofing materials will be a contrasting blue roof tile, opposed to red, in order to help distinguish between the existing and extended parts of the building.

Despite the difference in scale and bulk, the design of the previous scheme appeared quite disjointed with a poor roof arrangement in particular. Careful consideration has been given to the overall scale and design of the current proposal, with the extension architecturally designed to reflect the positive character and appearance of the original building. This has been achieved by maintaining both a respectful and subservient relationship to the original from and character of the original property. In particular, when viewed from the west (the A6) the scale and appearance of the original façade of the building is retained with a degree of separation (by the single story link) from the bulk of the proposed two-storey extension. In this regard, the development is considered compliant with policy SC1 and SC5 of the Core Strategy.

The applicant has committed to meeting a minimum of 10% of the developments predicted energy demand from low energy technologies. To evaluate and determine how this will be achieved a detailed energy assessment of the nursing home extension will be undertaken together with a low or zero carbon technologies assessment, which will include a detailed appraisal of the most effective and efficient technologies available. This is a matter which can be dealt with by condition.

7.9 The impact on neighbouring residential amenity

The proposed development results in the entire eastern side of the plot becoming developed with the footprint of the building extending much closer to existing plot boundaries (similar to the 2006 approval). There are existing residential properties to 3 sides of the site, with the furthest away being nos: 1 & 2 Beechwood Gardens, approximately 40 metres to the east of the site. The two- storey element of the development to the rear of the existing property extends approximately 37m along the eastern boundary. The bulk and massing of this part of the development is significant, but with the protection and retention of the mature trees along this boundary any undue visual impact should be mitigated. In terms of residential amenity, there are habitable windows proposed at both ground floor and first floor level of the proposed extension. Overlooking and loss of privacy from these windows is not a concern in this instance. The proposed development is located in excess of Page 66 the minimum 21 m separation distance. This together with the retention of the mature trees along the eastern boundary will afford an acceptable level of residential amenity.

7.10 `Burrowbeck Copse’ is set approximately 10 metres to the north of the application site, separated by relatively high tree and hedgerow planting. The occupiers of this property when commenting on earlier applications have previously had concerns about loss of privacy and overlooking from windows on the north elevation. The submitted scheme proposes no habitable windows to the northern elevation, other than the projecting glazed bay which serves the staircase, and as such is considered an improvement to previously approved development. In addition to these welcomed changes to the fenestration, the site contours (the neighbouring property is set approximately 2.5m higher than the application site) and boundary treatment also help reduce any undue impact on neighbouring residential amenity to an acceptable level. The occupiers of this property have raised no objections to the proposed scheme.

7.11 Of greater concern, the other adjacent property known as Aroona (children’s are home), is sited 20 meters to the south of the site but is positioned at a much lower ground level; approximately 5 meters lower than the application site. This property, which is a large detached bungalow, is occupied in a similar manner to a residential dwelling and as such the impact of the development will assessed on this basis. The most significant compromise in pulling the extension further away from the eastern boundary has been an increase to the bulk and massing of the southern wing of the extension which faces this property. The impact of the development in terms of dominance and bulk is the main consideration in this case. Despite the very close proximity of the development to the northern boundary of Aroona, the design of the extension has attempted to reduce the impact be dropping the height of the extension to 1½ stories and setting the two storey element a further 3.5m away from the furthermost southern elevation of the development. The proposal also maintains a separation distance of approximately 20 meters to the 1½ storey element and approximately 23m to the two storey element. Based on a flat land scenario, this would generally be an acceptable relationship; however as SPG12 points out there may be instances on sloping sites where the distance standards may not be appropriate. The two-storey element closest to the southern boundary has been designed to sit as far away from the neighbouring property as possible. In fact this element almost aligns with Aroona’s eastern gable elevation, leaving the 1 ½ storey element running along the boundary with this property, albeit at a higher level. During the assessment of the 2006 application the issue of overbearingness was a concern with amendments sought to reduce the scale of the southern element of the scheme in the interests of protecting residential amenity. Whilst this proposal reverts back to a greater bulk in this location, it has been carefully designed and represented as part of this application that the impact would not be significant to warrant a refusal of planning permission.

7.12 In addition to the above considerations, the development would not result in undue loss of privacy or overlooking for the occupants of this property. The rear windows of this neighbouring bungalow simply look out onto the rear garden that slopes steeply up towards the application boundary. The first floor bedrooms in the bungalow are located in the attic space and are served by rooflights only and as such have no outlook as existing. In this regard, despite the scale of this extension, the proposal will not adversely affect the amenities of adjoining properties.

7.13 Trees

There are significant mature trees established around the perimeter of the whole site, with the trees on the north, west and eastern boundaries being covered by TPO No: 67 imposed in 1981. Species on the site include fruit trees, Beech, Pine, Maple, Sycamore, Acacia, Chestnut, Oak and Hawthorn. The trees on this site provide significant visual amenity to a wide area and also form a screen boundary. There are no trees established within the footprint of the proposed extension that are covered by a TPO. The proposed development has come about primarily because of concerns regarding tree protection in relation to the 2006 application. The submitted scheme as stated above has pulled the extension further away from the eastern boundary in order to prevent significant encroachment into the root protection areas. Whilst this is not ideal, the Council’s Tree Protection Officer agrees that such encroachment would be within acceptable limits as it affords greater protection than that which would be achieved within the extant scheme. The proposal provides adequate information to assess the proposal and to be sure that the trees along the eastern boundary of the site can be retained. The retention of these protected trees is vital given their important amenity value within the immediate locality. Full implementation of the submitted tree protection plan and arboricultural method statement shall be conditioned in the event Members Page 67 support the proposal. In light of the revised submission, the proposed development can be considered compliant with policy E13 of the Local Plan.

7.14 Parking and highway safety

The site is accessed from Scotforth Road north of the junction with Collingham Park within the 50mph zone. The access has adequate visibility but is in practice a difficult junction to compromise. Notwithstanding this, the proposal makes some improvements by creating a separate pedestrian access to the north of the vehicular access, which will provide a safe route up through the site without having to encounter moving vehicles. The application also indicates an increase in employee numbers from 31 employees to 51 proposed full-time staff. Confirmation has been provided indicating that the 51 employees will work on a rota basis, with 20 members of staff on during the day and 9 in the evening. In line with the increase in staff numbers, the scheme proposes additional parking bringing the existing provision from 9 car spaces up to 18 spaces (including 2 mobility spaces), 2 motorbike spaces and a stand for 6 cycles. County Highways have raised no objections to the proposed development provided conditions relating to the provision of car/cycle parking are imposed if Members are minded to approve the application.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 The application exceeds 1000 sqm of floorspace and as such is classified as a small scale major planning proposal. Notwithstanding this there have been no requests for any off-site contributions which would require the applicant entering into a legal agreement. A proposal of this type would generally only result in contributions towards highway infrastructure. In this case, County Highways have made no such request. It should be noted that there was no legal obligation associated with the previous consent.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 Based on the above considerations and having regard to the site history, Members are advised that the submitted proposal is a careful compromise which delivers an appropriate form of development in terms of siting, scale and design and importantly demonstrates that despite the scale of the scheme, the protected trees along the eastern boundary of the plot can safely be retained. The proposed development is considered compliant with the policies listed in section 6.0, and as such Officers recommend that that planning permission be granted.

Recommendation

That Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard Time Limit 2. Development in accordance with the approved plans and supplementary documentation 3. Details of external materials and samples to be provided 4. Details of materials, form, colour and finish to all new windows and doors 5. Tree Protection Condition 6. Arboricultural Method Statement to be implemented in full 7. Landscaping condition 8. Details of and provision of car/motorcycle/cycle parking to be agreed and retained at all times thereafter 9. At least 10% on-site renewable energy 10. Construction hours condition 11. Unforeseen contaminated land condition 12. The extension shall be used only in association with the existing nursing home 13. No window or door opening to be altered or inserted, other than those shown on the approved plans, on the northern elevation of the building.

Page 68 Human Rights Act

This recommendatio n has been reached after consideration of the provisions of The Human Rights Act. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the issues arising do not appear to be of such magnitude to override the responsibility of the City Council to regulate land use for the benefit of the community as a whole, in accordance with national law. Background Papers

None.

Agenda Item15 PLANNING ENFORCEMENT SCHEDULE

No DESCRIPTION OF DISTRICT FILE REF. NATURE OF BREACH PRESENT POSITION . PROPERTY S16 Requisition for information issued 18 June Cuba, Mary Street, Lancaster 1. 109/2/193 Unauthorised advertisements 2007. Not returned - considering appropriate Lancaster action. Retrospective application refused. Appeal dismissed. S330s issued. Considering E.N. Agent West Bank Stables, in negotiations. EN issued. Appeal against EN in 2. 109/2/206 Construction of decked area Greaves Park, Lancaster progress. Appeal dismissed - agreement reached. Amended E.N. issued. Awaiting compliance.

S330 issued. Planning application refused. EN Page 69 Replacement UPVC windows at 3. 109/2/213 58 North Road, Lancaster issued. Appeal pending. Appeal dismissed. first floor level Awaiting compliance with notice. Windows replaced at 1 st floor 4. 109/2/221 1 George Street, Lancaster S330 issued. EN issued. level in UPVC Enforcement Notice issued. Partial compliance. Application received for erection of a dwelling Land adjacent to 120 Siting of a caravan for 5. 109/2/215 invalid. Owner advised to remove rubbish from Newlands Road, Lancaster residential purposes site. Site cleared of rubbish. Application approved for a dwelling. Unauthorised use from Application refused at Committee. Monitoring restaurant to restaurant/take- 6. 109/2/196 21 Brock Street, Lancaster situation, complying with opening hours at away and breach in opening present. hours Lara Nichols, Unit 17a S330 served. Application submitted but currently 7. 109/2 Lansil Industrial Estate, Siting of a diesel tank invalid. Lancaster Insertion of a window on front 8. 109/2 76 Dallas Road, Lancaster S 330 issued. elevation. Hayloft Barn, Ashton Road, Breach of condition re: use of 9. 109/2/218A PCN issued. Ashton with Stodday cottage 1 Last updated: 10 August 2010 - 1 - E:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\3\5\5\AI00021553\EnforcementSchedule0.doc

PLANNING ENFORCEMENT SCHEDULE

No DESCRIPTION OF DISTRICT FILE REF. NATURE OF BREACH PRESENT POSITION . PROPERTY Enforcement Notice served 24 October Morecambe 10. 109/3/308 10 Queen Street, Morecambe Unauthorised roller shutters 2005. Appeal dismissed. In contact with & Heysham owner. S330 issued and returned. Considering Unauthorised works to Listed what further action is required. Planning 11 109/3 221 Marine Road, Morecambe Building - works not in Permission granted - awaiting accordance with approved plan implementation but continue consideration of formal action. S215 Notice served. Not complied with. 12. 109/3/326 29 Green Street, Morecambe Untidy land Successful prosecution in absence - fined £500 - costs £300. Considering action.

S330 issued. Application submitted. Page 70 Construction of raised patio area 13. 109/3/331 35 Heysham Road, Heysham Approved. Appeal against condition and balconies dismissed – awaiting compliance. S330 issued - planning application refused but amended re-submission received. EN 14. 109/3/329 33 Albert Road, Morecambe Insertion of two windows issued. Second application refused ~ appeal dismissed. EN now complied with. S330 served. S215 Notice served. Appeal 19 Beecham Street, 15. 109/3/332 Untidy land in Court 23 April 2010. Notice upheld and Morecambe work commenced. S330 issued. EN issued. Awaiting 238 Marine Road Central, Installation of a flue and erection 16. 109/3/335 compliance. Non compliance with EN. Morecambe of screens Considering referral to Magistrates Court. Replacement of windows and S330 issued. Enforcement Notice issued 17. 109/3/337 4-6 Green Street, Morecambe door ~ works to change the use and appeal submitted.

Last updated: 10 August 2010 - 2 - E:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\3\5\5\AI00021553\EnforcementSchedule0.doc

PLANNING ENFORCEMENT SCHEDULE

DESCRIPTION OF DISTRICT No. FILE REF. NATURE OF BREACH PRESENT POSITION PROPERTY PCN served. No work currently taking Morecambe 64-66 Clarendon Road, 18. 109/3/334 Works to change the use place. Owner agreed to make application in & Heysham Morecambe future. Empire Carpets, Southgate, 19. 109/3/336 Display of illegal signs S16 served. Morecambe Mr & Mrs Forde, Unit 4, Creation of a residential flat on S330 served. Application received, still 20. 109/3 Penrod Way, Heysham upper floor pending. 19 Fairhaven Way, Use of granny annexe as a 21. 109/3 S330 served. Morecambe (Hutton) separate dwelling.

376 Heysham Road, Heysham Use of shop as a hot food S330 served – application for PP made – Page 71 22. 109/3 (Scanlon) takeaway. pending. 160 Heysham Road, Heysham Use of house as a place of S330 served – advised use has now ceased 23. 109/3 (Flerin) worship (mixed use). – sign removed. Rainbow Centre, Clarence 24. 109/3/339 Replacement of windows. S330 served. EN drafted. Street, Morecambe The Lighthouse, Townley S330 served. Awaiting advice from senior 25. 109/3 Replacement of windows. Street, Morecambe conservation officer for drafting of EN. 17 Windsor Grove, 26. 109/3 Erection of decking. S330 served. Morecambe

Last updated: 10 August 2010 - 3 - E:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\3\5\5\AI00021553\EnforcementSchedule0.doc

PLANNING ENFORCEMENT SCHEDULE

DESCRIPTION OF DISTRICT No. FILE REF. NATURE OF BREACH PRESENT POSITION PROPERTY Non-compliance with Condition Prosecution successful - still no compliance Carnforth 27. 109/4/28 9 Grosvenor Court, Carnforth re: obscure glazing and opening - in discussion and awaiting compliance. windows PP expired – all works Rear of 85-91 North Road, S330 served. Application submitted finally – 28. 109/4 unauthorised in respect of new Carnforth pending consideration. dwelling.

Page 72

Last updated: 10 August 2010 - 4 - E:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\3\5\5\AI00021553\EnforcementSchedule0.doc

PLANNING ENFORCEMENT SCHEDULE

DESCRIPTION OF DISTRICT No. FILE REF. NATURE OF BREACH PRESENT POSITION PROPERTY Enforcement Notices issued. Appeal submitted - Inquiry held. Notice upheld - Removal of hedgerow. non compliance. Application for caravan Lot 2, Hampson Farm, Stoney Rural Areas 29. 109/5/320 Unauthorised works and refused, prosecution proceedings Lane, Galgate unauthorised use commenced. Court 19 August 2009 successful prosecution but sentence reduced on appeal. Near Moss Farm, Gulf Lane, Breach of condition re: limit of 30. 109/5 S330 issued and returned. Cockerham season for caravan occupancy

Failure to return S330, instructions sent to Page 73 Legal to prosecute re non-return. Kilross House, Flat Lane, Instructions sent to issue Breach of 31. 109/5/352 Columns and window frames Yealand Conyers Conditions notice. Notices served. Appeal lodged. Awaiting full compliance (delayed due to illness). Section 330 issued - Not returned - Letterbox Field, Erection of building not in Application received. Application approved. 32. 109/5/375 Ford Lane, Silverdale accordance with approved plans Enforcement Notice issued awaiting compliance. Compliance achieved. Bainsbeck Farm, Kirkby Beach of condition – works taking Application approved. Monitoring 33. 109/5/361 Lonsdale Road, Arkholme place outside of buildings conditions. Mr Fairhurst, Unit 4, Old Application refused. Situation currently 34. 109/5/371 Station Yard, Kirkby Lonsdale Use of unit as a stone yard being monitored. Road, Burrow-with-Burrow

Last updated: 10 August 2010 - 5 - E:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\3\5\5\AI00021553\EnforcementSchedule0.doc

PLANNING ENFORCEMENT SCHEDULE

DESCRIPTION OF DISTRICT No. FILE REF. NATURE OF BREACH PRESENT POSITION PROPERTY S330 issued 4 January 2006. Planning Application refused 26 June 2006. Higher Moorhead, Erection of a building & Rural Areas 35. 109/2/194 Enforcement Notice issued. Appeal Quernmore unauthorised use dismissed - awaiting compliance, but new application approved. E. Notice to be issued shortly for removal of caravan & demolition of dwelling. EN Vianova formerly Tillery Siting of a caravan & erection of a issued. Appeal lodged. Public enquiry to 36. 109/2/207 Garth, Quernmore bungalow be held 13 August 2009. Appeal dismissed ~ building to be changed back to agricultural

barn. Checking for compliance. Page 74 Brooklands Building, 37. 109/5/349A Non-compliance with conditions EN served and awaiting compliance. Addington Road, Halton Unit 14, Heysham Business S330 issued. Details now submitted - 38. 109/5 Park, Middleton Road, Non-compliance with condition awaiting agreement. Middleton Hayloft Barn, Ashton Road, Breach of condition ~ use of 39. 109/2/218 BCN issued. Breach ceased. Ashton-with-Stodday holiday accommodation CLU part approved. Part refused. Gibraltar Farm, Lindeth Use of land as a caravan site and 40. 109/5/374 EN served. Appeal submitted. Further CLU Road, Silverdale creation of hardstandings application submitted. 1. Use of property as additional 109/5/376 Further issues arisen – investigating. 41. 32 Wallings Lane, Silverdale living accommodation 109/5/377 2. Erection of a wall Pure Bowland, Far Lodge, Breach of Condition re 42. 109/5 S330 served. Quernmore landscaping Consent granted for pond. PCN & Temp Field 1563, Wyresdale Road, 43. 109/5/379 Creation of a pond Stop Notice served for creation of an access Quernmore track. Application pending.

Last updated: 10 August 2010 - 6 - E:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\3\5\5\AI00021553\EnforcementSchedule0.doc

PLANNING ENFORCEMENT SCHEDULE

DISTRICT No. FILE REF: DESCRIPTION OF NATURE OF BREACH PRESENT POSITION PROPERTY Rural Areas 44. 109/5 Land at Crimbles Lane, Siting of 2 caravans for residential S330 issued. Application expected. Cockerham purposes 45. 109/5 Land at Addington Lane, Erection of chicken shed building. S330 issued. Halton 46. 109/5 Tewitfield Trout Fishery, Use of log cabin as permanent S330 served. Use ceased. Burton Road, Warton accommodation. 47. 109/5/380 Wickes, Mellishaw Lane, Display of illegal signs. S16 served. Heaton with Oxcliffe 48. 109/5/378 Peugot Garage, Mellishaw Display of illegal signs. S16 served. Lane, Heaton with Oxcliffe Page 75

Last updated: 10 August 2010 - 7 - E:\moderngov\Data\AgendaItemDocs\3\5\5\AI00021553\EnforcementSchedule0.doc

Page 76 Agenda Item 16 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS

LANCASTER CITY COUNCIL

APPLICATION NO DETAILS DECISION

09/00256/CU Ringers Hill Barn Ringers Hill, Back Lane, Wennington Appeal Against Non Erection of a detached out building and extension to Determination curtilage for Mr And Mrs Reid (Upper Lune Valley Ward)

09/00653/ADV 7 - 11 Chapel Street, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection of Application Permitted a non illuminated projecting sign, wall letters and window signs for Mrs Deborah Kirkup (Bulk Ward)

09/00934/FUL Land North Of 120, Newlands Road, Lancaster Erection Application Permitted of detached bungalow for Mr P. Robb (John O'Gaunt Ward)

09/01090/NMA YMCA Garages, Bridge Lane, Lancaster Amendment to Application Permitted application 06/01495/FUL to alter windows above the main entry door for Mr Phil McGrath (Dukes Ward)

09/01234/CU Stables, Out Moss Lane, Morecambe Change of use of Application Permitted agricultural land to form sand paddock for private equine use and erection of timber stable block for Angela Letchford (Poulton Ward)

09/01267/FUL 276 Oxcliffe Road, Heaton With Oxcliffe, Morecambe Application Permitted Erection of a 2 storey extension to the front elevation and re-roofing to create a new facade and front extension to the existing garage for Mr R Hill (Westgate Ward)

10/00026/FUL Stables, Out Moss Lane, Morecambe Erection of 3 no. Application Permitted pony stables with tack room for Mr R Taylor (Poulton Ward)

10/00037/FUL 9 Ailsa Walk, Heysham, Morecambe Erection of a two Application Permitted storey extension to the side for Mrs R Haslam (Heysham South Ward)

10/00045/ADV Boots, 14 - 16 Lancaster Gate, Lancaster Erection of Application Permitted various signs for Boots The Chemist (Dukes Ward)

10/00071/FUL Lancaster University, Bailrigg Lane, Lancaster Erection Application Permitted of a single storey HV substation with associated landscaping works for Mr P McMullen (University Ward)

10/00134/FUL Westfield War Memorial Village, Storey Avenue, Application Permitted Lancaster Replacement of all windows and doors to 2, 4, 5, 6 and 7 Haig Avenue, 1, 7, 8, 9, 11-16, 19, 21, 25, 27 Peel Crescent, 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 Porritt Avenue, 1, 4, 5, 5a, 7-15, 17,19, 20, 21, 24-31, 33, 35, 37, 39a, 39b, 41, 43, 45, 47, 49 Storey Avenue and re- roof 31-33 and 35-37 Storey Avenue and 12 and 19 Peel Crescent for Mr C Clark (Castle Ward)

10/00173/FUL 74 Coastal Road, Hest Bank, Lancaster Retrospective Application Refused application to amend previously approved extension on application number 09/00321/FUL with the insertion of a ground floor window for Mrs M Pennington (Slyne With Page 77 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS Hest Ward)

10/00196/FUL 4 Elmslack Court, Silverdale, Carnforth Erection of a Application Permitted porch to side for Mr & Mrs L Brockbank (Silverdale Ward)

10/00207/CU 59 And 59A Scotforth Road, Lancaster, Lancashire Application Permitted Change of use of ground floor shop (A1) to hot food take away (A5) and the installation of an external flue to the rear elevation for Mrs Z Wang (Scotforth East Ward)

10/00286/FUL Arkholme Village Hall, Kirkby Lonsdale Road, Arkholme Application Permitted Creation of wetland reedbed for Mr Michael Hampson (Kellet Ward)

10/00291/VCN Bay View Holiday Park, (formerly Detron Gate Caravan Application Withdrawn Park), Dertern Lane Variation of condition No. 1 on application No. 2/4/5505 to extend caravan park holiday season from 1st March - 31st October to 22nd December - 7th November across the whole site for Mr M Holgate (Bolton Le Sands Ward)

10/00299/FUL Royal Lancaster Infirmary, Ashton Road, Lancaster Application Permitted Erection of two single storey extensions to existing main hospital emergency dept, and replacement of ambulance entrance canopy with associated external works for University Hospitals Of Morecambe Bay NHS Trust (Dukes Ward)

10/00312/CU Sand Villa Farm, Sandside, Cockerham Retrospective Application Permitted application for the retention of 2 temporary caravans for an agricultural worker for Mr R Jones (Ellel Ward)

10/00322/AD Moor Cock Farm, Slaidburn Road, Lowgill Erection of an Prior Approval Not agricultural building for Mr B Faraday (Lower Lune Required Valley Ward)

10/00325/CU Glen Tarn, Blea Tarn Road, Lancaster Change of use of Application Permitted land for siting of touring caravans for Mr Jim Daly (Ellel Ward)

10/00329/FUL Netto Supermarket, Lancaster Road, Morecambe Application Permitted Erection of an extension to existing food store for Netto Foodstores Ltd (Poulton Ward)

10/00340/FUL 25 Castle Hill, Lancaster, Lancashire Siting of a Application Permitted television aerial to the rear of property for Professor Anthony McEnery (Castle Ward)

10/00370/LB 7 - 11 Chapel Street, Lancaster, Lancashire Listed Application Permitted Building Application for erection of non illuminated projecting signs, wall letters and window signs for Mrs Deborah Kirkup (Bulk Ward)

10/00406/FUL 19 Oakville Road, Heysham, Morecambe Retrospective Application Permitted application for the retention of decking area to the rear for Mrs N Keber (Overton Ward)

10/00391/FUL Appleby, Emesgate Lane, Silverdale Demolition of Application Permitted existing dwelling and erection of two new dwellings and creation of new vehicular access for Mrs Rubina Mercer (Silverdale Ward)

10/00394/FUL Bay Horse Hotel, Kirkby Lonsdale Road, Arkholme Application Permitted Page 78 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS Erection of a pavilion for Mr P Benson (Kellet Ward)

10/00401/OUT 63 Michaelson Avenue, Morecambe, Lancashire Outline Application Withdrawn application for the erection of a single detached dormer bungalow to the land rear of Torrisholme Vicarage and formation of private driveway for Mr David Bailey (Torrisholme Ward)

10/00412/FUL Halton Park Farm, Park Lane, Halton Erection of a Application Permitted replacement covered cattle yard and midden for Mr M Barker (Halton With Aughton Ward)

10/00426/CU Stoney Brook Farm, Stoney Lane, Galgate Change of Application Refused use of the existing redundant agricultural buildings to B1, B2 or B8 together with associated works (including the retention of the access) for Mr Charles Newhouse (Ellel Ward)

10/00435/CU Ashbank Cottage, Ashleys Farm, Millhouses Road Application Permitted Erection of single storey extension to the side and change of use of part field to extend garden for Mr O Marsden (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00449/RENU 16 Shireshead Crescent, Lancaster, Lancashire Application Permitted Application for extension of time on application 05/00338/FUL for the erection of a two storey extension to the rear for Mr S Green (Scotforth East Ward)

10/00437/FUL 15 Redmayne Drive, Carnforth, Lancashire Erection of a Application Permitted 2 storey extension to rear for Mr & Mrs P Chippendale ( Ward)

10/00457/LB The Blands, Old Moor Road, Wennington Listed building Application Permitted application for the restoration of existing house including the demolition and rebuilding of existing single storey extension for Mr A McClements (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00461/LB 1 Dalton Square, Lancaster, Lancashire Listed building Application Permitted consent for the change of use from dental surgery to hair dressing salon for Jo & Cass (Dukes Ward)

10/00473/FUL J E Clarke, Agricultural Buildings, Melling Road Erection Application Permitted of a stock building (Building Two) for Mr J E Clarke (Upper Lune Valley Ward)

10/00474/FUL J E Clarke, Agricultural Buildings, Melling Road Erection Application Permitted of a stock building (Building One) for Mr J E Clarke (Upper Lune Valley Ward)

10/00475/FUL J E Clarke, Agricultural Buildings, Melling Road Erection Application Permitted of a stock building (Building Three) for Mr J E Clarke (Upper Lune Valley Ward)

10/00481/FUL Dolphinholme C Of E School, Abbeystead Lane, Application Permitted Dolphinholme Erection of a replacement bin store for Dolphinholm CE Primary School (Ellel Ward)

10/00496/LB 48 Market Street, Lancaster, Lancashire Listed building Application Permitted application for various works for Reeds Rains Ltd (Dukes Ward)

10/00499/PLDC Unit J, Sunnycliff Retail Park, Mellishaw Lane Retail Lawful Development (Class A1) comprising the sale of household products for Certificate Granted Page 79 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS Galiform Plc (Overton Ward)

10/00512/FUL 8 St Pauls Drive, Brookhouse, Lancaster Erection of Application Permitted front and rear dormer windows for Mr Huddleston (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00514/FUL Denny Beck Farm, Denny Beck Lane, Quernmore Application Refused Erection of a two storey side extension and porch to front for Mr & Mrs L Puttick (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00516/FUL Edmundson Electrical Ltd, Northgate, Morecambe Application Permitted Installation of a roller shutter door on side elevation for Mr William Elliot (Westgate Ward)

10/00520/FUL 1 St Michaels Crescent, Bolton Le Sands, Carnforth First Application Permitted floor extension above existing ground floor workshop and utility room to create an en-suite bathroom to the first floor master bedroom for Mr Graham Richardson (Bolton Le Sands Ward)

10/00532/FUL Stone Acre, 7 Wallings Lane, Silverdale Erection of an Application Permitted extension to garage for Mr M Bland (Silverdale Ward)

10/00535/FUL Wesley Methodist Church, Middleton Road, Heysham Application Permitted Erection of new perimeter railings to existing church car park that borders middleton road & lea lane. for The Methodist Church (Heysham South Ward)

10/00538/FUL Moorfield, Sunnyside Lane, Lancaster Change use of Application Permitted existing garage to form a family room,erection of first floor over existing garage with balcony, new garage to side and porch to rear with balcony above, kitchen extension and utility room link to old garage and enclosed front porch. for Mr Tony Plater (Castle Ward)

10/00543/ELDC Bay Riding School, Borrans Lane, Middleton Existing Application Refused lawful development certificate for a residential caravan and stables for Wendy Hepworth (Overton Ward)

10/00544/ADV Greaves Park, Bowerham Road, Lancaster Erection of a Application Refused non illuminated double sided post sign for Mr Phil Strong (Bulk Ward)

10/00551/FUL The Cedars, Starbank, Bay Horse Installation of obscure Application Permitted glazed rooflight and obscure glazed window to the southern elevation for Mr And Mrs Mulvenna (Ellel Ward)

10/00555/FUL Valley View, Littlefell Lane, Lancaster Alterations to roof Application Permitted incorporating creation of dormers to rear and velux windows to front for Mrs N Hobson (Ellel Ward)

10/00557/FUL George And Dragon, 24 St Georges Quay, Lancaster Application Permitted Creation of beer garden to rear, replacement window and retention of satellite dish for Admiral Taverns (Castle Ward)

10/00558/LB 14 Castle Park, Lancaster, Lancashire Listed building Application Permitted application for installation of roof light, secondary glazing on north side of 1st floor and new WC on 2nd floor for Mr Michael Greenhalgh (Castle Ward)

10/00559/LB George And Dragon, 24 St Georges Quay, Lancaster Application Permitted Application for listed building consent for replacement Page 80 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS windows and the retention of satellite dish to the rear for Admiral Taverns (Castle Ward)

10/00561/FUL 22 Portland Drive, Morecambe, Lancashire Erection of a Application Permitted first floor side extension for Mr & Mrs M. Dalton (Westgate Ward)

10/00562/FUL North Farm, Moss Road, Heaton With Oxcliffe Creation Application Permitted of an earthed bank slurry lagoon for Mr Alan Bargh (Overton Ward)

10/00564/FUL 17 Glentworth Road West, Morecambe, Lancashire Application Permitted Installation of new shopfront and widening of rear pass door for The Co-operative Funeralcare (Westgate Ward)

10/00568/LB 25 Castle Hill, Lancaster, Lancashire Alterations to Application Permitted existing windows and rooflights. Insertion of additional rooflight. Internal alterations to loft. Works to eaves storage. Insertion of pipework and installation of TV aerial. for Professor Anthony McEnery (Castle Ward)

10/00574/FUL Wyresdale, Caton Road, Quernmore Erection of a front Application Permitted porch for Mr And Mrs Jhalley (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00576/FUL Croziers Croft, Moss Lane, Silverdale Replacement of Application Permitted conservatory roof with slate for Mr Kenneth Gregory (Silverdale Ward)

10/00581/FUL Unit J, Sunnycliff Retail Park, Mellishaw Lane Internal Application Permitted alterations comprising installation of a mezzanine floor for retail, storage and ancillary cafe use and minor alterations to existing shop front for Galiform Plc (Overton Ward)

10/00584/FUL 12 Jackson Close, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection of a Application Permitted first floor side extension and lean-to roof over existing flat roof extension to rear. for Mr Simon Clarke (Castle Ward)

10/00596/ADV 11 Corn Market, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection of 2no. Application Permitted internally illuminated fascia signs, 1no. non-illuminated projecting sign and refurbishment of existing wall mounted halo-lit lettering for New Look Group Plc. (Dukes Ward)

10/00599/VCN Land And Buildings At Former British Waterways Depot, Application Permitted Aldcliffe Road, Lancaster Variation of condition 2 on approved application 09/00123/FUL for H2O Urban LLP And British Waterways (Dukes Ward)

10/00601/CU Land Rear Of 6 And 7 Manor Farm, Church Street, Application Permitted Whittington Change of use from substation to storage for Mr Nick Hall (Upper Lune Valley Ward)

10/00593/FUL 4 Melville Road, Heysham, Morecambe Erection of a Application Permitted two storey side extension for Mr & Mrs K Crundell (Heysham South Ward)

10/00607/FUL 6 Leighton Drive, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection of a Application Permitted single storey extension to form garage/workshop and utility for Mr And Mrs Farmer (Castle Ward)

10/00605/FUL Red Bridge Barn, Red Bridge Lane, Silverdale Application Permitted Installation of new chimney flue, installation of additional Page 81 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS roof lights and alterations to existing openings. for Mr & Mrs P Morgan (Silverdale Ward)

10/00613/FUL Garage Adjacent To, 23 Westover Street, Morecambe Application Permitted Erection of a two storey dwelling for Mr Huett (Poulton Ward)

10/00630/FUL 1 Shrewsbury Drive, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection of a Application Permitted two storey extension to the side for Mr & Mrs J Gill (John O'Gaunt Ward)

10/00647/FUL St Bernadettes Rc School, Bowerham Road, Lancaster Application Permitted Erection of a store for Mr Gerard McKevitt (Scotforth East Ward)

10/00650/FUL 6 Langdale, Caton, Lancaster Erection of a single storey Application Permitted outbuilding for Mr Andrew Muirhead (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00682/NMA Hay Carr, Preston Lancaster Road, Ellel Non material Application Permitted amendment to approved application 09/00097/FUL to change approved link corridor to a glazed link and omission of store from the west elevation of the orangery for Mr And Mrs Higginson (Ellel Ward)

10/00681/AD Claughton Hall Farm, Hornby Road, Claughton Prior Approval Is Agricultural Determination for the erection of a open Required fronted storage building for Mr Isacc Barge (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00693/EIR Axa Direct, Northgate, Morecambe Screening opinion for Request Completed an environmental impact assessment for The Emerson Group (Westgate Ward)

10/00695/NMA The Cottage, Main Street, Arkholme Non-material Application Permitted amendment to approved application 09/01141/FUL for Mr Andy Deall (Kellet Ward)

10/00700/NMA Vale Of Lune R U F C, Powderhouse Lane, Lancaster Application Permitted Non-material amendments to approved application 10/00266/FUL relating to roof structure for Vale Of Lune RUFC (Skerton West Ward)

10/00694/FUL 1 Clifton Drive, Morecambe, Lancashire Proposed Permitted Development alterations and extension for Mrs A Jones (Torrisholme Ward)

10/00709/CPA West End County Primary School, Chatsworth Road, No Objections Morecambe Erection of a lean-to Canopy/Shelter on early years playground, colour dark blue RAL 5005 for Lancashire County Council (Harbour Ward)

10/00051/DIS Catholic Social Centre, Balmoral Road, Lancaster Application Permitted Discharge of condition no. 3 on approved application 10/00164/FUL for Canon Shields (John O'Gaunt Ward)

10/00758/AD Agricultural Building Field 1563, Wyresdale Road, Prior Approval Not Quernmore Erection of agricultural bulk feed hopper for Required Mr A GARDNER (Lower Lune Valley Ward)