Case Officer: Mr Malcolm Elliott Parish:

Application No : 46/2401/14/F

Agent/Applicant: Applicant: Nick Thomas The Cottage Hotel Mr Ireland The Cottage Hotel Hope Cove TQ7 3HJ

Site Address: The Cottage Hotel, Hope Cove, Kingsbridge TQ7 3HJ

Development: Development and extension of hotel to provide 56 bedrooms, 3 staff and 1 owners accommodation, new parking facilities plus new restaurant, bar, lounge and function room

Scale 1:2500

This map is reproduced from the Ordnance Survey material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office (c) Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. District Council 100022628. 2014. Scale 1:12500 For internal reference only – no further copies to be made

Reason item is being put before Committee This application has been placed before the Committee because of the significance of the proposed hotel extension plans and given the sensitivity of the site’s location within Hope Cove and the AONB,

Recommendation: REFUSE

Reasons for refusal 1. The proposed development, by reason of its overall size, height and massing, would have an overbearing and bulky visual impact on the character and setting of Hope Cove village. Such development would in addition have a most significantly adverse impact on the wider landscape setting of the village within the South Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The proposal would be contrary to the provisions of the NPPF, LDF Core Strategy policies CS7 & CS9; South Hams Development Policies DPD policies DP1 &DP2; and AONB Management Plan policies Plan/P2, Lan/P1.

2. The proposed extensions, by reason of their scale, height, extent and close proximity, would have an unduly overbearing and unneighbourly impact on the adjoining dwelling ‘West View’. As such the development would be contrary to the provisions of South Hams Development Policies DPD policy DP3.

Key issues for consideration: The proposal presents very significant extensions and alterations to the existing hotel. The economic benefits resulting from such investment must be considered against the detailed planning considerations. The key issues for consideration are the scale and design of the development and resulting impacts on the site’s setting within the AONB, the neighbour relationship, increased traffic generation, impact on Bolt Tail as a scheduled ancient monument and drainage.

Site Description: The Cottage Hotel first opened as a small guest house in 1927. It has since been much altered and extended over the years and continues to be a popular and respected business. The applicant’s family have run the business since 1973.

The hotel occupies a prominent location in Outer Hope Cove, in an elevated position above the immediate old village to the north and west. More modern development adjoins the link road to Inner Hope Cove to the east and south. The South West Coastal footpath adjoins the western site boundary. The hotel enjoys panoramic views of the coast. As a consequence of its relatively elevated position the site is also open to views from much of the surrounding coastal area and footpaths. The hotel is however viewed in the context of the village as a whole. The site lies wholly within the South Devon Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

The hotel is currently accessed from the link road to the east. The existing open car park is located on the upper part of the site adjacent to the road. The whole site is generally open with little landscaping.

The closest residential properties, not in the ownership of the hotel, are ‘Atlantic Lodge’ to the north east and directly adjoin an existing vehicular access to the hotel; ‘West View’ to the south east and directly overlooking the site to the north and west; and ‘Old Colonial House’ immediately to the south.

The Proposal: The proposed development relates to extensions and alterations to The Cottage Hotel to provide 56 bedrooms, 3 staff and owners accommodation, new parking facilities, new restaurant bar, lounge and function room. A new two storey car parking decks is to be constructed to the rear of the hotel, in the position of the existing car park. 38 spaces are located at ground floor and 40 spaces at first floor. The upper parking level is open and no higher than the existing car park

A proposed phasing plan has been put forward, following in depth conversations with both the owners and operators of the hotel and construction specialists, to ensure that the hotel itself can be maintained and run during the individual construction phases. This is central to the applicant’s business plan. All drawings referred to may be viewed on the Council’s web site.

The phasing of the proposed extension and internal alterations to hotel are to be broken down into approximately four phases. These phases are indicated on submitted drawings nos. 6634/320, 321, 322 & 323 in a colour breakdown of phase by phase of the proposed works.

Drawing no. 6634/320 comprises an existing and proposed identification drawing showing the proposed extensions and alterations together with an outline of the existing hotel area and footprint. This drawing is able to show that two extensions are to be constructed on both sides of the existing structure together with extensions to the rear of the existing hotel. The area indicated to the front of the hotel is the restaurant and lobby area only together with a conference centre at lower ground floor and does not extend up to the full height of the overall building. This is clearly indicated on elevational and floor plan drawings included within this application.

The existing car parking arrangements will be retained during phases 1 and 2. The new two storey parking decks will be constructed as part of phase 3 and completed prior to occupation. The new hotel servicing arrangements will also be included in phase 3.

PHASE ONE Phase One of the proposed works will not require the demolition or alteration to the existing as this will be a new extension to the East side of the existing hotel that will be interconnected to the inner corridors by a temporary weathered and covered walkway. The proposed phase will offer three lettable rooms at ground floor level and an owners apartment at both first floor and second floor level, this having a separate access from the rear of the hotel and integral parking within the unit.

PHASE TWO This phase will require the demolition of the end East wing of the hotel and allow for Phase One to be connected to the main hotel, this incorporating four bedrooms at ground floor level together with the increase in the restaurant capacity and enhancement to the main internal kitchens and lounge entrance lobby area to the restaurant.

Rear stairs and service corridors will also be created in this phase, this incorporating the tunnelling out for the lower ground floor level conference centre.

At first floor level there will be an additional three bedrooms together with all of the laundry and rear storage areas for the hotel.

This proposed phase will also include the rear fire escape staircase and secondary lift shaft for use by hotel guest in the East wing.

Two additional bedrooms and three stores will be created at roof level.

To the underside of the new restaurant extension the shell will be constructed and finished with windows and glazing doors for the lower

PHASE THREE This phase will incorporate the alteration to the existing hotel and the creation of the new main feature staircase and bank lifts, the retention and alteration to the existing front lounge and demolition and removal of the existing reception and Cove Room at ground floor level.

At first floor level a steel frame will be erected over the existing hotel and the creation of eight new bedrooms at first floor level together with ancillary staff accommodation, bin storage and snooker rooms, arcade and gym will all be constructed.

At second floor level eight new bedrooms will be created together with the new main entrance lobby and reception/offices for the running of the main hotel, this including the entrance lounge and luggage stores.

At roof level an additional eight bedrooms will be created with interconnection between Phases Two and Three.

PHASE FOUR Phase Four is the West extension to the main hotel and will create at ground floor level four new rooms.

At first floor level five rooms together with the main fire escape to the end of this section of the building.

Second floor level will have seven new rooms together with ancillary stores and storage for staff use.

At roof level an additional three rooms will be created again with storage.

Consultations : • County Highways Authority : No objection subject to imposition of conditions

• South West Water : No objection subject to foul flows only being connected to the public sewer

• Environment Agency : No objection subject to a planning condition ensuring the construction and maintenance of a sustainable drainage system.

• SHDC Drainage Engineer ; No Objection in principle subject to planning condition

• Environmental Health Section : No objection subject to Unsuspected land contamination planning condition

• Police Architectural Liaison Officer : offers detailed observations

• Natural : Views awaited

• English Heritage : recommends revisions to the submitted scheme to reduce impact on a scheduled ancient monument

• AONB Unit : views awaited

• South Huish Parish Council : Strongly support, subject to qualification of use of roof materials

• Parish Council : Unanimously supports the application

Representations All letters of representation may be viewed on the Council’s web site. A total of some 50 letters of objection and some 99 letters of support have been received .Comments made are summarised below in no particular order:

Objection • Unacceptable degree of overlooking and loss of privacy on ‘Midships’ • Unacceptable impact on the holiday business and amenity of ‘Atlantic Lodge’ • Overbearing upon and loss of views from ‘Atlantic Lodge’ • Severe overlooking from balcony and resulting loss of privacy on ‘Port’, Old Colonial House • Question the impact of construction works on the Coastal footpath and potential of future further erosion • Need for independent geological/engineering reports to ensure stability of cliff areas • The proposal would impact on the road access and servicing of immediately adjoining properties • Will set an undesirable precedent • The development is of unacceptable scale in a very prominent location, will detract from the character and appearance of the locality within the AONB • Detrimental visual impact on the landscape character of the area being visually dominant • Major developments in AONB should only be approved in exceptional circumstances • Will dominate the small village • Will have an adverse impact upon the setting of nearby listed buildings • Question the economic viability of the proposal • Failure to show any demand for the increase size of the hotel and question the contribution to be made to the economy • Question the likely composition of additional staff to be employed • Will impact on other small local hotels and B&B’s • Inadequate road access leading to Hope Cove to cater for increased traffic generation • Huge implications for future road maintenance • No need for additional hotel rooms in Hope Cove • Significant impact on public views • Increase in effluent flow will exacerbate treatment issues • Specific concerns on surface water disposal • Unacceptable traffic generation during the construction period and increased traffic generation from extra accommodation and hotel functions • Unacceptable impact of the amenity of the area and residents • The adverse impacts from the development outweighs the benefits • There is a duty to have regard to the impact of development on the AONB • 55% Increase in floor area is excessive resulting in a building that is too large for this setting • Inadequate sewage system in Hope Cove. Proposal will exacerbate problems • Phase 4 elevation is out of keeping being 3 / 4 floors, the proposal should be scaled back • No regard or consideration given to the impact on adjoining properties • The phasing of development would be damaging to Hope Cove and the amenity of residents and visitors • Contrary to the provisions of NPPF

Support • The hotel is a key employer using local producers • Increased hotel capacity will be a major asset to the locality • The design uses ground contours to best advantage • Larger building does fit in with the site and surroundings • Improved facilities would provide more employment, attract more people to the area • The hotel is an integral part of the local community with a recognised reputation for providing excellent facility and service • An important local hotel facility which is in need of an update, the expansion plans will enable the hotel to continue to operate meeting future needs • The current proposals are sympathetic to its surroundings • Significant improvements are justified to ensure that business viability is maintained • Suggestion that the car park deck is covered with a light weight roof structure • Hotel improvements are needed to meet consumer expectations, the increase in size and modern facilities are needed to continue a viable business • Will make a positive contribution to the local economy and benefit local suppliers

Relevant Planning History The hotel has been subject to many planning decisions over the years relating to alterations and extensions to the property. Of particular significance by reason of the nature and size are;

46/1012/80/3 : Remodelling and extensions of The Cottage Hotel. Refused and subsequently dismissed on appeal, decision letter dated 22/12/1982 .

46/909/81/O : Alterations to The Cottage Hotel and new staff accommodation. Refused and subsequently dismissed on appeal, decision letter dated 22/12/1982

The Inspector found the central consideration to these appeals to be the economy and visual impact and effect on neighbour amenity. The proposals related to extensions comprising a 62 bedroom hotel and not dissimilar scale to the current proposal. The general massing and scale was considered to have an unacceptable impact on the AONB. There was no evidence to substantiate an overriding highway objection.

46/0936/83/3 : Alterations and extension to hotel including indoor swimming pool. Approved August 1983.

46/340/87/3 : Alterations and extensions to The Cottage Hotel. Refused April 1987.

The most recent application relates to a pre-application enquiry REF: 1490/13/PREMAJ for alterations and extensions which has led to the sub mission of the current planning application. This pre-application enquiry has been subject to a public consultation exercise, detailed discussions with officers and presentations to the Council’s Design Review Panel on two occasions. The letters may be viewed in full on the Council’s website.

The Panel’s findings after the first presentation were: “In summary, the Panel felt strongly that the current proposal represents a missed opportunity for this site, while there may be scope for a larger building here, the current scheme would have too dominant an impact on what is a sensitive setting...... The Panel would welcome the opportunity to discuss the project with you further at a later date in order to enable a meaningful debate about the design in the light of alternative designs that have been explored”

Further to the second presentation in June 2014 the Panel stated: “In a lengthy presentation to this special Design Review Panel meeting, you described the scheme in more detail and justified it in the light of the Client’s brief. However, the requested analysis of the site and its context, the scheme and similar precedents elsewhere was not forthcoming. No diagrams were provided in order that the Panel could gain a proper understanding of the site, or why you proposed to develop it in this way. The members of the Panel therefore felt that this was a missed opportunity to explain the scheme and gain useful input in making it more sympathetic. There is therefore little to add to the comments made in the previous letter. However, on the basis of the limited information available, the Panel would strongly reiterate the two following points: The proposed building would harm the village and its setting. This is due in part to its excessive size (the justification for which remains unconvincing) but also to the client-led design approach which, in turn, is a result of the requirement to preserve and build around the existing structure. Secondly, the suggested 7-year building programme would be likely to cause immense and protracted disruption to this small, relatively inaccessible community due to noise and heavy traffic.

The purpose of the Design Panel is to provide impartial advice; it is not a decision making body. Notwithstanding the views expressed, it is for the Committee Members to decide whether the size and design of the building is acceptable.

Officers have had detailed engagement with the pre-application process and the principle of improving the hotel facilities has been actively encouraged. Modifications to the scheme have been achieved to improve the relationship with neighbouring properties and the adjoining coastal footpath.

ANALYSIS The proposal has clearly attracted much representation. The importance of the family run hotel and its contribution to the local community has been reinforced in the many letters of support.

South Huish Parish Council considers the proposed alterations and extensions to the hotel to be essential for its sustainable future and for the benefit of the parish. The PC also considers that the increase in visitors will in turn be beneficial to local businesses, plus an increase in employment. The hotel is seen as the hub of the community having supported the community over many years. It is considered that the proposed plans blend in well with the surrounding area and considers that the applicant has taken local opinions into consideration. The one negative comment concerns the proposed roof colouring and the PC is of the view that the use of red roof tiles would be less obtrusive, blend better with surrounding roofs and adjacent cliffs.

Malborough Parish Council also expresses strong support, considering the proposal to be acceptable and in keeping, offering a quality development that would provide local employment.

Principle of Development/Sustainability: The NPPF in para 7 sets out the economic, social and environmental roles which the planning system should perform. Local Authorities are required to approach decision making in a positive way, be problem solving seeking to approve applications for sustainable development wherever possible (para 186-187). However, NPPF para 7 sets out the three dimensions to sustainable development being the economic, social and environmental roles. These roles are mutually dependent and as such must be looked at simultaneously when assessing the merits of development proposals.

Whilst there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, such matters that may support a development proposal must be carefully balanced against all pertinent material planning considerations. The principle of extending and improving the hotel facilities and accommodation is supported by the NPPF insofar as it recognises the clear contribution to the local economy such developments may provide.

LDF Core Strategy policy CS12 and DPD Development Policy DP12 supports the provision of new tourism facilities, including associated accommodation the location of which should follow a sequential approach. The principle of extending and improving the existing hotel accommodation in a sustainable location is supported by these policies.

The Cottage Hotel site enjoys a very prominent location in the village, located within the South Devon Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, directly adjoining the South West Coastal footpath. The landscape impact assessment, neighbour relationship, proximity to nearby heritage assets, highway and drainage considerations are all material considerations of importance to the determination of this planning application and are dealt with in detail below.

The economic benefits considered to derive from the proposed development must be carefully balanced against these considerations. The proposal has been developed following a business plan that the applicant considers can deliver the type and quantum of new hotel accommodation that would enable a sustainable hotel business to proceed to fruition. The phasing of the development is designed to achieve this, allowing the hotel facility to continue to operate during the build process. The applicants justifications for this development are further detailed in para 2.3 of the Access and Design Statement. This may be viewed on the Council’s website.

Design The design, form and scale of the proposed building has been lead by the functional requirements of the accommodation needs influenced primarily by the applicants own business plan. Some design modifications have been made in response to the pre- application process and detailed in the submitted Design and Access statement.

The NPPF promotes good design recognising that it is a key aspect of sustainable development. Para’s 60 – 65 are relevant. Planning policies and decision should not stifle innovation, originality or initiative through unsubstantiated requirements to conform the certain forms or styles....decisions should address the connections between people, places and the integration of new development into the natural, built and historic environment...... LPA’s should have local design review arrangements to provide assessment and support to ensure high standards of design...... permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and qualityof an area...... These requirements are supported by adopted Development Plan policies CS7 and DP1.

The submitted design cannot be described as innovative; the architect has however attempted to influence the external appearance of the built form by reference to recent architectural styles that do form part of the local area. This approach in itself should not be criticised and such individual elements would not necessarily be out of place. The building’s form and elevational treatment does result in a building stepping back from the frontage onto the public footpath. The change in materials; natural stone, render and slate also contributes to breaking up the facade onto the sea frontage and coastal footpath.

The main concerns on the design relate to the overall size and massing of the building which is a necessity of the applicant’s accommodation requirements. Notwithstanding the design changes that have been taken on board, the central judgement that the impact this bulk/massing of building has on the village setting and wider landscape setting remains to be made.

Landscape It is very clear from the representations received that there is mixed opinion on the whether the proposal has an acceptable or unacceptable visual impact on the landscape setting which the Cottage Hotel enjoys.

Paragraph 115 of the NPPF requires ‘great weight’ to be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in AONB’s. Hope Cove village lies wholly within the AONB, as such the developed area is an integral element of the coastal scene. New development is not precluded but must have due regard to its landscape setting.

The application has been supported by a LVIA. In response to representations submitted opposing the development, the following comments have been made by the applicant’s landscape consultants (Redbay Design);

“ ....the proposals are for a replacement/redevelopment of an existing hotel building. If the proposed development were to take place on a green field, currently free of development within the AONB there is no doubt that the sensitivity would be high. As there is currently a building in this location the ability of the landscape to accommodate development is evident and the impact would arise from what is proposed over and above the existing situation. With that in mind, due to the presence of the building currently on this site, it is considered justification enough to reduce the susceptibility of the landscape and visual receptors to accommodate a replacement building and therefore when compared to its high value results in a medium-high sensitivity.”......

“The adverse impact that arises from the development identified by the LVIA and agreed within Tyler Grange’s review is from the scale and mass of the proposed building. However, overall the architectural style of the proposed building respects the local character and it contains individual elements that are characteristic of the area as well as being typical of coastal vernacular.”

The Council’s Landscape Officer has considered the application in detail. The consultation response may be viewed in full on the Council’s website. It is accepted that;

Officers have been involved in long pre-application discussions, providing detailed input and comment over the evolving schemes. Particular emphasis has been placed on the highly sensitive location within the South Devon AONB, where natural beauty and scenic quality is extremely important and especially outstanding in this coastal position. Constructive dialogue was held over controlling the extensions to the north and south, and reducing impacts of the two storey car park to the rear. However, following the request to see the hotel modelled in the wider setting of the village, photomontages clearly illustrated the large scale, form and massing of the proposal and immediate concern was expressed.

The submitted LVIA (Redbay Design) is noted and reads as a competent appraisal, appraising the importance of this sensitive landscape whilst recognising the context of the seaward facing coastal village nestled within the combe. It also acknowledges that aspects of the landscape character and visual amenity will be adversely affected including moderate- substantial adverse effects on the character of the AONB and visual amenity......

Visual Impact

As highlighted within the character appraisal, this is a highly sensitive location, which is extremely sensitive to visual changes. Whilst it is acknowledged that the hotel’s position mid- slope within Hope Cove limits views from inland, it is clearly visible from some highly sensitive receptors including from Bolt Tail to the south-west, the ridge to the north, the and from the sea. Overall the Zone of Theoretical Visibility relatively contained.

When viewing Inner Hope and parts of Outer Hope from Bolt Tail, the sense of scale is very apparent, there is a consistency in building sizes across the full extent of the village; the existing hotel sitting neatly within this.

Wider views exist along the coast around the full extent of Bigbury Bay, with no one individual feature dominating. It is in this context that the proposed development will be overbearing and has the potential to dominate the view from the adjacent landscapes, disrupting the presently acceptable scale and tranquillity of the existing built form and landscape. The dominance arises from the height and visual bulk of the proposal’s built form and roof structures, and to a degree the extent of the site over which it now fills. This also has potential to affect the adjacent South Coast footpath (high sensitive receptor) which passes beneath the site.

Protected Landscape

As identified, Hope Cove is situated within the South Devon AONB. Due regard and great weight must be given to this designation when assessing development proposals within it; this is a highly sensitive landscape receptor (NPPF para 115)

In understanding the designation, particular emphasis is placed on its special qualities and significance; its distinctive characteristics and key features are identified in the ‘sense of place’. These are set out within the South Devon AONB Management Plan 2014-2019. The special qualities define the unique natural beauty of the AONB and include: • Fine, undeveloped, wild and rugged coastline • ... steep combes and a network of associated watercourses • Deeply rural rolling patchwork agricultural landscape • Iconic wide, unspoilt and expansive panoramic views • A landscape with a rich time depth and a wealth of historic features and cultural associations • Areas of high tranquillity, natural nightscapes, distinctive natural soundscapes and visible movement • A variety in the setting to the AONB formed by the marine environment...coastal towns, and rural South Hams

It should be noted that the AONB Management Plan also serves as a management plan for the South Devon Heritage Coast because the finest stretches of the coast justify national recognition. These objectives are set out within the plan.

In reviewing the proposed development and in understanding the landscape character setting, officers believe the special qualities (noted above) and policies of the AONB are being adversely affected by the overbearing nature of the proposed design. In particular it conflicts with policies Lan/P1 and Lan/P5. This is contrary to the requirements of the paragraph 115 of the NPPF.

Landscape Planting Scheme

The landscape strategy is noted and attempts to mitigate elements of the scheme. Whilst this is achieved to a degree, the overwhelming scale and form of the proposal is not addressed.

A full and thorough appraisal has been carried out by both the applicant and SHDC Officers. In understanding the landscape character and special qualities of the South Devon AONB in this location an objection has been raised.

Landscape characteristics are well represented locally and range in condition from good to excellent. In considering this baseline position and the likely adverse impacts arsing, it is the officer view that the proposed development fails to conserve and enhance what is special about the landscape character and visual amenity of this highly sensitive landscape. This results from the scale and overbearing form of the proposed development where it will dominate views from highly sensitive receptors and conflict with its defining characteristics. The proposed development will result in a permanent moderate to substantial adverse impact on both landscape character, visual amenity and the special qualities of the South Devon AONB. It is therefore contrary to LDF policy and the provisions of the NPPF.

In conclusion, the Landscape Officer raises an objection to the proposal for the following reasons:

As a result of the proposal’s overbearing scale, form and massing, the development fails to conserve and enhance the landscape character and visual amenity. This is contrary to Policies CS9 and DP2r where development proposals will need to demonstrate how they conserve and / or enhance the South Hams landscape character, including coastal areas, estuaries, river valleys, undulating uplands and other landscapes, by: (a) reflecting the needs and issues set out in identified landscape character areas; (b) ensuring its location, siting, layout, scale and design conserves and/or enhances what is special and locally distinctive about the landscape character (including its historic, biodiversity and cultural character); (c) avoiding unsympathetic intrusion in the wider landscape, such as detrimental (d) impact on the character of skylines or views from public vantage points; and (e) light pollution respecting the unspoilt nature and tranquillity of the area

Heritage Impacts The Council’s Senior Conservation Planning Officer has made the following observations;

In considering this application and assessing potential impacts of the development proposal against surrounding heritage assets the following policies, principles, guidance and recent case law have been considered:

• Section 66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act; • Section 12 of the NPPF including paragraphs; 128, 129, 132, 133, & 134; • The National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG), particularly the Section: Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment. • The 2011 English Heritage publication: The Setting of Heritage Assets; • Recent Case Law in particular the East Northamptonshire DC v. Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government (known as the ‘Barnwell Manor’ case) and R. (on the application of (1) The Forge Field Society (2) Martin Barraud (3) Robert Rees) v Sevenoaks District Council [2014] EWHC 1895.

Designated Heritage Assets in the Area. There are two listed buildings in the vicinity of the hotel that would be affected by the proposal – Bridge Cottage (Mayers) and The Cabin . Both are thatched, 18 th century cottages set low down in the centre of Outer Hope. Mayers, especially, has been thoroughly modernised and the setting of both of these houses has been transformed by 20 th century development – suburban-style housing and the Cottage Hotel itself on the surrounding hillsides. Both houses are built on to the street and are significant as exemplars of the traditional house typology and village form. Their setting has been transformed by indifferent 20 th century development.

Bolt Tail Camp is an Iron Age cliff castle and is a Scheduled Ancient Monument. The site is significant, being the only one of its type in South Devon and its rural and maritime setting is generally well preserved. The exception to this is the village of Hope Cove looking back inland to the NE, especially its associated 20 th century extension.

The other listed buildings in the area are at Inner Hope , which is a designated conservation area, which comprises a well-preserved group of traditional houses.

Heritage Impact Assessment of Proposed Development. The applicant has not provided any heritage impact assessment with the application. The assessment below was carried out by the Senior Conservation Officer in November 2014.

The impact on the two listed buildings mentioned above was assessed from the street, from the coast path to the north of the site and from the coast path leading to and passing through Bolt Tail.

The two listed cottages are both built in the lowest, most sheltered part of the Outer Hope, in stark contrast to most of the 20 th century buildings (including the Cottage Hotel), whose elevated position was chosen to make the best of the sea view. In practice, this means that the listed houses are dominated by the surrounding buildings and, in all but the closest views tend to blend in with them. The impact on their setting of the proposals when seen from the coast path, either from the north, or from Bolt Tail to the SW is not therefore great.

However, from closer viewpoints both houses are visible in conjunction with the Cottage Hotel and the proposed significant increase in size and change in appearance would have some impact on their setting. This is most noticeable from the main approach to this part of the village, with the Hope and Anchor straight ahead and from the beach. The existing Cottage Hotel building already occupies a dominant position in relation to the listed cottages, but it is only one of a number of unsympathetic buildings around them. Mayers, in particular, has also been affected by the tarmac road covering that surrounds it on all sides. Given the scale of change to these buildings’ setting that has already occurred, therefore, the increase of scale of the hotel is not considered to result in harm to it.

I have assessed the impact of the development from Bolt Tail and English Heritage has provided comments on the impact of the development on it. The Cottage Hotel is prominent from Bolt Tail when looking back towards Hope Cove. Again, the impact of the proposal needs to be considered in the light of the considerable, less than sympathetic development that has already occurred in the village. In the context of this, the proposed expansion of the hotel is not considered to cause harm to this view despite its size.

However, views of Bolt Tail from Hope Cove also need to be considered and the increased bulk of the new building would have an impact on this. Currently, there is a clear view of Bolt Tail over the roof of the hotel from the road that links Outer and Inner Hope. By raising the height of the hotel this view would be partially blocked and English Heritage has judged that this would cause less than substantial harm to the setting of the Scheduled Ancient Monument. However, although the view is significant, it should be pointed out that it would be blocked for a very short length of road.

The setting of the conservation area and listed buildings at Inner Hope would not be affected by the development as it would not be visible from or in conjunction with them.

Summary Due to the existence of indifferent 20 th century development surrounding the listed buildings, the proposed extension to the hotel is not considered to cause harm to the setting of the Grade II listed Cabin and Mayers.

The view of Hope Cove from the Scheduled Ancient Monument at Bolt Tail is also already compromised and the larger building would not in itself cause harm. However, views of Bolt Tail from the link road between Outer and Inner Hope would be affected by the development and have been judged by English Heritage to cause less than substantial harm to the setting.

English Heritage is a statutory consultee and has had regard to the impact of this development on the scheduled ancient monument of Bolt Tail Cliff Castle. The full response can be viewed on the Council’s website. The following advice has been offered;

Bolt Tail Cliff Castle is a late Iron Age fortified enclosure, formed by the construction of earthen ramparts on the landward side to defend the peninsular. It is the only known cliff castle in South Devon, and the commanding visual presence in the landscape of the peninsular and its associated earthworks remains well-preserved.

In the context of landward views from Bolt Tail, the proposed hotel development will be read as part of the rather suburban sprawl of Outer Hope village. The hotel will be a significant and prominent addition but the increase in size will not affect views from the monument.

However, in considering setting, regard must be also paid to views of the monument and whether they contribute to its significance. In this context, it is apparent that fine views of the monument are currently afforded from the public road to the rear of the Cottage Hotel. This road is the primary approach to Inner Hope, and the views of the monument, showing its visual primacy in the land and seascape, are important. They contribute to the setting of the Castle, and thus its significance .

The proposed development on the site of the Cottage Hotel will adversely affect the setting of the monument, as evidenced by viewpoint 4b of the supplied landscape and visual impact assessment. Whereas the existing building currently sits low in the landscape, the proposed building will rise higher and block views of the monument. This is regrettable; the monument’s prominence in the landscape is part of its significance, and we therefore advise consideration is given to reducing the height of the proposed development to allow preservation of the setting of Bolt Tail.

I acknowledge, however, that the harm described above is to one particular view of a monument which can be seen and experienced from many areas. In the language of the NPPF, the harm to the monument is therefore less than substantial (NPPF 134).

Following the advice of the NPPF however, you will be aware that a Scheduled Ancient Monument is a highly-graded heritage asset (NPPF 132), and the more important the asset the greater the weight that should be given to its conservation. “Conservation” is defined by the NPPF as “the process of managing change to a heritage asset in a way that sustains and where appropriate enhances its significance”.

Bearing the above in mind, we encourage your authority to give the required “great weight” to managing the setting of the monument, and in accordance with NPPF 129 seek to minimise conflict between conservation of the asset and the proposed development by revising the design and restricting its height, to preserve the setting of Bolt Tail Cliff Castle.

English Heritage recommends that revisions to the submitted scheme should be sought to address these identified concerns. There are no revisions to consider and it is therefore necessary for officers and Members to carefully weigh the identified harm to the ancient monument against any public benefits of the proposal, in accordance with NPPF para 134.

It is agreed that there is no harmful heritage impact from views out of Bolt Tail but there is such impact on limited occasion from the village looking over the hotel site onto Bolt Tail. Current views of the headland will be partially interrupted. Officers do however consider that Bolt Tail is part of a much wider vista and as such, whilst it is acknowledged that there will be partial interruption to the headland view, this is at the’ lower end of less than substantial consideration.’

In this instance, in terms of the proposals heritage impacts the officer advice to Members is that the economic benefits resulting from improving and extending the hotel facilities would be in the wider public interests and would outweigh the impact of the development on the scheduled ancient monument.

Residential Amenity Properties located alongside and above the Cottage Hotel do generally enjoy panoramic views. However, the proposed development will have an impact on neighbouring properties to varying degrees. It is necessary to assess the visual outlook of the most affected dwellings.

Atlantic Lodge , This is a single storey dwelling located to the north and adjacent to the access drive leading to the hotel’s entrance. The dwelling faces north west and has an open garden falling away to the west. The open views of the coast to the north and west are retained. Views to the south west onto Bolt Tail will be lost. The accommodation block in phase 4 will be located approx 6.5m from the garden boundary which is formed by a low bank. A patio to the front of the bungalow provides an open amenity area. The eaves line of the proposed building is at approximately existing ground level to the rear and approx 7m above ground level on the seaward facade. The elevation is 22m in length, 15m extending beyond the existing front face of the bungalow. There are no windows proposed in the wall facing Atlantic Lodge. This element of the development will have a significant impact on Atlantic Lodge. However, given the respective levels and general orientation of the dwelling, it is not considered that the proposal would be unduly overbearing or unneighbourly, neither would it have a marked impact on the dwelling’s visual outlook.

Old Colonial House This single storey dwelling is located to the south of the hotel and also enjoys panoramic views. The existing hotel is separated from this building by an open grassed area being approximately 40m distant. The proposed accommodation wing comprising phase1 will be within 16m of the dwelling. This part of the hotel extension features 2 storey accommodation under a mansard roof with a height of approx 11m above ground level at the seaward elevation. The height of the building diminishes as it is set back into the rising land, approximately 6m to the rear. High level windows to a kitchen area feature on the elevation facing the neighbour. The front facade of the extension extends approximately 3m forward of the seaward facing elevation of Old Colonial House. Balconies on the extension have privacy screens to protect overlooking. Whilst the proposed development has an impact on Old Colonial House it is not considered that this is so significant as to substantiate a reason for refusal by reason of an unneighbourly impact or adverse overlooking.

West View This property is a bungalow located to the south, directly adjacent to the existing hotel car park. The main aspect to this property is to the west. A terrace directly adjoins the site to the west and overlooks the open area of land upon which the extension comprising phase 1 is to be located. The dwelling also enjoys views of the coastline, over the existing hotel to the north and west and Bolt Tail to the south and west. It is considered that this property is the dwelling most impacted by the proposed extensions. The proposed hotel accommodation extends approximately 22m beyond the existing hotel into the open area and to within 6m of the garden terrace boundary. The outlook from this property to Bolt View will not be lost. The accommodation wing has been revised prior to submission of this application by removing another floor. By doing this views over the mansard roof are retained but the outlook onto the beach and harbour would be significantly interrupted. Similarly the outlook to the north and west is obscured as a result of the main body of hotel extensions comprised in the remaining phases of development. The loss of private view is not in itself a material planning consideration. However, in this instance the scale, height and proximity of new development in its totality is considered to have an adverse impact on the amenity of residents. The removal of the second floor roof from phase 1 is very clearly a significant improvement but does not in itself address the concerns identified. The extensions would together be overwhelming and overbearing resulting in an unacceptable loss of amenity contrary to Development Policies DPD policy DP3.

Noise and Odour Impact There is some concern over the impact of the new parking arrangements to the property known as West View, If the Committee is minded to approve this application then it may be deemed appropriate that the boundary between the two properties be further treated with a 2m high wooden fence of density 10kg/m2 or greater to act as a sound barrier to reduce the noise levels.

In regards to potential noise levels from the proposed extension and the use as a conference facility, whilst there is potential for noise at night to cause an impact, should this area be used as a leisure facility this can be dealt with through either the licensing legislation, or other environmental health legislation. Good management of the noise will prevent this facility from causing a problem and as such there should be no need to condition this further.

Highways/Access DCC as County Highway Authority raises no objection to this development. The traffic flow predictions supporting the application are accepted by the Highway Engineer. It is considered that, whilst there will inevitably be some impact on the local highway network, this will be on average 1 vehicle every 6 minutes added to the network. This is not considered sufficient to substantiate a highway objection being raised. Planning conditions mitigating the impact on the road network during the construction period are recommended.

In response to the representations made on traffic generation and the adequacy of the road network the County Highway Engineer offers the following comments; “The applicant has commissioned a Transport Report, which the Highway Authority has examined carefully. The contents of this report are in line with the National Guidance on Transport Assessments and therefore the Highway Authority has no reason to not support its contents. Inevitably there will be some additional delays on the road networks as it is acknowledged in places it is narrow, however this does not necessarily constitute a reason to refuse planning applications especially if the numbers proposed will generate in-severe levels of additional traffic, which noting the current levels of traffic on the road network is the case here in the view of the Highway Authority. The National Planning Policy Frameworks specifically specifies applications should not be refused unless the implications are severe.

Highway Maintenance is not a planning consideration as the Highways Act 1980 specifically specifies that Highway Authorities have a duty to maintain roads. However, if it can be proven extraordinary traffic such as construction traffic has caused the damage then this is something that can be claimed. There are provisions for this in the requested Construction Management Plan.”

On this basis there are no substantive highway objections to the proposal.

Lighting The Environmental Health Officer has reviewed the submitted lighting assessment and is satisfied that the pre-curfew (i.e. between the hours of 07:00 – 23:00) levels of lighting are acceptable in accordance with the guidance provided by the Institute of Lighting Professionals. However the reports states that there is a need for a lower level of lighting to in place post-curfew to ensure compliance and still allow a suitable level of lighting to protect the safety of guests.

There is also concern regarding the glazing treatment to the hotel allowing light spillage out of the hotel if it is not appropriately treated. It is considered that this may be controlled by suitable planning condition. This will require the submission of a lighting management policy which will include details of:

• low level and low energy lighting to all terrace and balcony areas; • internal circulation areas to be operated by PIR motion sensors with timer controls to reduce energy and light pollution; • all glazing to windows, doors and balconies to be non-reflective glass to reduce solar reflection and the amount of artificial light emitted from the building.

Contaminated Land The contamination assessment demonstrates that there should be no contamination issues with this site. No site investigation can completely characterise a site. A planning condition is required to ensure that any unexpected contamination that is uncovered during remediation or other site works is dealt with appropriately.

Drainage South West Water raises no objection in principle to the development subject to foul flows only being connected to the public sewer. It is proposed that surface water will be dealt with by SUDs.

The Environment Agency raises no objection subject to a satisfactory sustainable drainage system being provided. A suitable planning condition has been recommended.

The Council’s Drainage Engineer raises no objection and recommends an appropriate planning condition requiring trial holes and percolation tests to be carried out prior to commencement, the SUD’s be designed for a 1:100 year event plus 30% for climate change and provision be made for alternative drainage mitigation if the percolation tests prove unsatisfactory.

Clearly it is very important to ensure that surface water runoff does not increase to the detriment of the public highway or other local properties as a result of this proposed development.

Concerns have been raised in representations on the inadequacy of the sewage treatment in Hope Cove and that the enlargement of the hotel will exacerbate problems presently experienced. These have been raised with SWW who consider that the proposed development will greatly benefit the situation. The hotel currently discharges all its surface water to the public sewer. During adverse weather conditions, this puts considerable additional load to the sewer/pumping station. The surface water disposal strategy for the extension will result in all current surface water from the entire Hotel building being removed from the sewer network thus reducing any potential sewer flooding risk.

Ecology The submitted Ecological Survey Report indicates that there was limited potential for impact on protected species or habitats subject to adherence to some basic mitigation (namely timing of vegetation clearance). There is potential for enhancement measures (bird boxes) to be included within the building and these should be conditioned.

The initial Ecological Survey Report recommended further bat surveys of various buildings with low potential for bat access/use, but a supplemental report (which takes into account the exposed position and lack of access points into the buildings) satisfies this matter.

Should Members be minded to approve the application the following condition is recommended • Works shall fully adhere to mitigation and enhancement measures as detailed in sections 3, 4 and 5 of Appendix 4, of the Ecological Survey Report (Acorn Ecology Ltd, 29 th September 2013).

Conclusion DCC as Highway Authority does not raise objection for the reasons set out in this report. Notwithstanding the third party objections received on highway grounds there is no highway objection to this development that can be substantiated.

English Heritage has identified an impact on the nearby scheduled ancient monument at Bolt Tail. As with the balance of all issues identified, the economic benefits of providing a sustainable hotel development is in the wider public interest and this is a material consideration. When considering heritage impact assessment, officers are of the view that the wider public benefits would outweigh the impact the development would have on Bolt Tail as a scheduled ancient monument.

The central issues to consider in the determination of this planning application are the landscape impact caused within the AONB and the impact the development would have on immediate neighbours.

As required by the NPPF and relevant Development Plan policies, it is necessary to place ‘great weight’ to the conservation of the landscape and scenic beauty in AONB’s. Officers have given this matter very careful consideration. Any enlargement of the hotel will impact on the very sensitive landscape setting but it must also be acknowledged that it would be unacceptable for the hotel business to remain unchanged. This is indeed shown by the high level of support for the family business to be allowed to expand. The proposals have been modified prior to the submission of the application to overcome some concerns and improve the general design. However, the overall bulk and scale of the proposal would not change significantly as the applicant’s business aspirations would otherwise be unacceptably compromised. The overbearing nature of the proposed building would have an adverse impact on the special qualities of this part of the AONB, the conservation of which is required to receive special consideration. In this instance the weight to be given to safeguarding the protected landscape outweighs the economic benefits that may be derived to the wider rural economy.

Finally, although it is acknowledged that development on the site will have an effect on neighbouring properties, the impact on West View is particularly imposing. The combination of the amount of new development, the height and close proximity on this property would be unduly overbearing and unneighbourly.

This application has been considered in accordance with Section 38 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and with Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

Planning Policy

National Planning Policy Framework

South Hams LDF Core Strategy CS7 Design CS9 Landscape and Historic Environment CS10 Nature Conservation CS11 Climate Change CS12 Tourism

Development Policies DPD DP1 High Quality Design DP2 Landscape Character DP3 Residential Amenity DP4 Sustainable Construction DP5 Conservation and Wildlife DP6 Historic Environment DP7 Transport, Access & Parking DP12 Tourism & Leisure

South Hams Local Plan SHDC 1 Development Boundaries

AONB Management Plan

Considerations under Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 The provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report.