Planning Committee 20 October, 2016 WD/D/16/001814 ITEM NUMBER 05
Application Number: WD/D/16/001814 Outline
Registration Date: 19 August, 2016
Application Site: LAND OPPOSITE 24 AND 25, CHARLTON DOWN
Proposal: Erect single dwellinghouse (outline)
Applicant: Mr Foot
Ward Members: Cllr F Horsington, Cllr T Yarker
Case Officer: Katrina Trevett
This application has been called into committee by the Local Members.
1. Summary Recommendation
1.1 APPROVE - subject to conditions as listed below
2. Description of development
2.1 This application seeks outline planning permission to erect a dwelling on an open grassed area directly adjacent to numbers 24 & 25 Charlton Down; all matters are reserved although an indicative site plan has been submitted.
2.2 The application site covers an area of approximately 0.06ha and is situated within the south west corner of the Charlton Down village, directly south west of Herrison House; to the north west of number 24 Charlton Down and north east of 25 Charlton Down.
2.3 This area of land has remained as grassed open space that is sited between Back Lane (a perimeter lane to the south west of the village) and Beech Path that provides pedestrian access running north east from the application site. The site appears visually separate from the larger field directly to its north west, which is also within the applicants ownership and is currently used for horse grazing.
2.4 The application site would be accessed off Herrison Road via the private lane, Back Lane, which offers access to No. 24 and 25. Back Lane links to Beech Path which runs along the back of properties along Birch Way and connects to Poplar Drive..
2.5 The applicant has indicated that the dwelling will likely be two storey of a lodge style design to reflect a lodge house that would have been appropriate at this 'gateway' to Herrison House. It has also be stated that the house will be within the north east section of the site rather than the southern section, to protect views into and from the Conservation Area. These are however reserved matters.
2.6 This site is situated within the Cerne and Piddle Valleys and Chalk Downland Landscape Character Area, falls within an area designated as Historic Parks and Gardens, by its association with Herrison House, and is Land of Local Landscape Importance. The site is also adjacent to the Conservation Area. The Defined Development Boundary for Charlton Down runs through the site with the majority of the site within the DDB.
3. Main planning issues · Planning history · Principle of development · Impact on amenities of the site & surrounding area · Impact on Trees · Impact on highway safety · Protected species · Impact on the setting of the historic garden & Herrison House
4. Statutory Consultations
Parish/Town Council 4.1 == Objection == The Parish Council wishes to maintain its objection to this application as with the previous application on the grounds that the development of housing beyond the natural boundary of the beech avenue into the open countryside in a random and haphazard way would be detrimental to the quality landscape setting. The proposed dwelling would spoil the attractive views into the open countryside particularly from the south and north and may possibly affect the views from Herrison House over the winter months. Currently the developed area of the village has met natural boundaries and it is important to respect these natural features.
Highway Authority 4.2 No objections subject to conditions
5. Other consultations 5.1 WDDC Landscape officer: The submitted scheme represents a significant reduction in proposed built form at this site. This reduction substantially addresses landscape concerns raised over the previous application (WD/D/14/002685), which related to the landscape and visual impacts of the then proposed "cul-de-sac" of development, forming an uncharacteristic bite into the field pattern, viewed from the adjacent footpath, and Access Land on Haydon Hill.
As now proposed, the dwelling would read as one of a number of detached dwellings clustered around this end of the road. The plot would follow an existing area defined in the corner of the field, and subject to sensitive landscape and boundary treatments, would not be considered to interrupt the field pattern, or be viewed as isolated or incongruous from the adjacent road, footpath, or land to the south west. The reduction of development is also considered to minimise impacts on the LLLI designation, and the landscape value associated with this area would not now be adversely affected by the proposals. On this basis I would conclude that the application would comply with landscape policies ENV1, ENV3 and ENV10.
If you were minded to recommend approval of the application, I would recommend securing full hard and soft landscape details as part of any future reserved matters application, along with boundary treatments. We would also need to be content that all trees to the east, south, and west of the site could be retained, and that these are supplemented with additional tree planting on the site boundaries to successfully assimilate the site into its surroundings.
5.2 WDDC Environmental Health: The field associated with the site is known to have sewage treatment works within as many of these records are not historically correct I would recommend a full contaminated land survey be undertaken particularly as this is a sloping site and the STW is ‘above the development. It is currently listed as a low risk site in the prioritisation scheme for contaminated land.
I would recommend that, in order to ensure that risks from soil contamination to the future occupants of the development are minimised, together with those to controlled waters and ecological systems and to ensure that site workers are not exposed to the unacceptable risks from contamination during construction, and to safeguard the amenity and living conditions of neighbouring occupiers the following actions and works are undertaken:-
· An investigation and risk assessment, must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site; · A detailed remediation scheme to bring the site to a condition suitable for the intended use by removing unacceptable risks to human health, buildings and other property and the natural and historical environment must be prepared; · The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior to the commencement of development; · In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority; · A monitoring and maintenance scheme to include monitoring the long-term effectiveness of the proposed remediation over a period of years shall be submitted, in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency's ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11’; · I would recommend that, in order to ensure that risks from soil contamination to the future occupants of the development are minimised, together with those to controlled waters and ecological systems and to ensure that site workers are not exposed to the unacceptable risks from contamination during construction, and to safeguard the amenity and living conditions of neighbouring occupiers, no soil is imported to the site until it has been tested for contamination and assessed for its suitability for the proposed development. 5.3 WDDC Design & Conservation Officer: When I first viewed this application file my first impression was that it may be possible to achieve some form of development here. I then as is normal considered the back ground; the application site is outside of the DDB and fronting onto the lane / drive that sweeps up and round towards Herrison House. Herrison House is a Grade II Listed Building dating from 1904, essentially designed to have the appearance and setting of a country house when in fact its design use is that of a Hospital Building. It is unusual to have such a late building being Listed and very much of this is because the building is a vigorously and well worked out example of design stemming from the great country houses of the Edwardian era. The front elevation of Herrison House looks out over a large garden with this approach drive and landscaping and trees/ avenue are all part of this designed landscape to a country house. This swathe of land that leads up to Herrison House, which formerly had a designation as Land of Local Landscape Importance, is part inside the Charminster - Herrison Conservation Area but all abutting / adjoining the Conservation Area . This application site is on the outward corner of the drive approach and the application site will be visible when viewed from both the south east and north [probably less so from the north view]. When viewing the application on site this corner of land is so clearly part of this designed landscape and approach, the existing building to the south and west of the application site in my opinion detrimentally impacts on the Conservation Area and this application site would also detrimentally impact on the Conservation Area, views from the drive the landscape and wider setting of the Listed Building. From my site visit I was struck how ill related and out of character building on this site would be, and how it could only lead to a detrimental impact on the heritage assets.
5.4 DCC Rights of Way: This proposal directly affects footpath 17, Charminster; the footpath should remain open and not gated throughout the works and in the future. 5.5 Historic England: On the basis of the information provided, we do not consider that it is necessary for this application to be notified to Historic England under the relevant statutory provisions.
6. Other representations 6.1 1 third party comment has been received raising concerns/objecting to the application. The key concerns are summarised as follows:
· Highway safety; · Uncharacteristic urban extension appearing incongruous in plan form and impacting on the landscape character, designated as Land of Local landscape Importance. Impact on AONB; · The development would be prominent in views;
Copies of the letters of representation are available to view on the website - www.dorsetforyou.com.
7. Human Rights 7.1 Article 6 - Right to a fair trial. 7.2 Article 8 - Right to respect for private and family life and home. 7.3 The first protocol of Article 1 Protection of property
8. Relevant Planning History
App. No Type Proposal Decision Officer 1/D/14/002685 OUT Residential development for up to REFUSED PKC 5 dwellings
9. The Development Plan
West Dorset, Weymouth & Portland Local Plan (Adopted 2015) INT1 Presumption in favour of sustainable development ENV1 Landscape, seascape & sites of other geological interest ENV2 Protected species and habitats ENV4 Heritage assets ENV10 The landscape & townscape setting ENV11 The pattern of streets & spaces ENV16 Amenity SUS2 Distribution of development HOUS1 Affordable Housing HOUS3 Open market housing mix HOUS6 Residential development outside the DDB COM1 Provision for Community Infrastructure COM7 Creating a safe & efficient transport network COM9 Parking provision COM10 The provision of utilities services infrastructure
10. Supplementary planning documents 10.1 WDDC Design & Sustainable Development Planning Guidelines (2009)
11. Other Material Planning Considerations 11.1 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) Section 6 - Delivering homes Section 7 - Design Section 11 - Natural environment Section 12 - Historic environment
11.2 WDDC Landscape Character Assessment 2009 11.2 Conservation Area Appraisals - Charlton Down
12. Planning issues
12.1 Planning History: This scheme follows WD/D/15/002100 that is currently going through the appeal for non-determination process. This application was brought to committee so the members recommendation/likely decision could be reported to the Appeal Inspector. The planning committee members would have voted to approve this scheme. This current application does not differ in any way from WD/D/15/002100.
12.2 A previous outline application to develop this site as part of a larger scheme for 5 dwellings. Application number 1/D/14/002685 was refused for the following reason: The proposed development of a single corner of an otherwise undeveloped open field would result in a piecemeal and incongruous extension of the built form into the open countryside, designated as Land of Local Landscape Importance. The resultant development would fall outside of the strong landscaped boundaries of the village, extending development beyond the village envelope and failing to reflect existing plot patterns, to the detriment of the visual and landscape qualities of the area. In addition, the proposed development would detract from the rural amenity of the area by reason of its prominence and visual intrusion into the open countryside, visible from short and long range public views and footpaths. Furthermore, the proposed development would fail to preserve the character of the adjacent Conservation Area and setting of nearby listed buildings, including the Grade II Listed Herrison House, impacting both views from and towards these heritage assets, and also impacting upon the setting of the Historic Parks and Gardens designation. Insufficient information has been provided in relation to the impact of the proposed development on protected species and trees. As such, the proposed development is considered to be contrary to policies SA3, SA6, SA17, SA12,SA20, SA21, and DA1 of the West Dorset District Local Plan (adopted 2006), policies ENV1, ENV2, ENV4 and ENV10 of the West Dorset, Weymouth and Portland Draft Local Plan, and Section 11 and Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
12.3 When comparing the current scheme to the past refused application; the current application site was used merely as access for the previous scheme and was not intended for housing development. The previous 5 dwellings proposed were part of a larger site encompassing an area of the field to the north west of this site. Therefore, the previous proposal was to extend residential development significantly beyond the boundaries of the village and into open countryside.
12.4 This current application does not extend into the field and is more contained within the built envelope of the village unlike the 2014 scheme. The natural boundary for the village would appear to be Beech Path that is roughly in line with the north west boundary of this site. Therefore, the previous planning history, although a material planning consideration, this is a much reduced site which is considered to be within the visual boundary of the village and must be considered on its merits.
12.5 Principle of development: The application site is located outside of the defined development boundary, but is located on the edge of Charlton Down and has good access to the main village via existing footpaths. Charlton Down is regarded as one of the larger settlements within the District has a defined development boundary and services/facilities including a shop, village hall and regular bus service.
12.6 Paragraphs 30 and 34 of the NPPF seek to guide development to locations which facilitate the use of sustainable transport modes; and paragraph 55 advises that housing in rural areas should be located where it would maintain or enhance the vitality of rural communities. This is all based on the objective of achieving sustainable development as is supported by Policy INT1 of the adopted Local Plan.
12.7 The facilities within the village would be in walking distance from the site, and Charlton Down is located on the Dorchester bus route. Access to facilities is therefore possible by means other than a car. There would be some limited economic benefit during construction, and a limited economic/social benefit for the services within the Parish. The proposal would make only a modest contribution, but could arguably contribute to maintaining the vitality of the community in line with Para 55.
12.8 The Inspectors Report on the Local Plan, is also a material planning consideration. The Inspector in his report, acknowledges that due to our marginal housing land supply, opportunities should be taken to improve the housing supply for new development in sustainable locations.
12.9 Given the proximity of the site to the built boundary of Charlton Down village, location adjacent to the defined development boundary, and having regard to the wider choice of facilities available within Charlton Down compared to many smaller settlements, the proposed development, subject to its environmental impact (which will be discussed in more detail below), could be considered a sustainable location for new development having regard to the National Planning Policy Framework and Local Plan.
12.10 Impact on amenities of the site & surrounding area and setting of the historic garden, Herrison House & the Charlton Conservation Area:
As already discussed, it is considered that this site will relate visually to the village backdrop of Charlton Down given its connected nature to Back Lane and the properties beyond, its visual separation from the larger field to the north west and the neighbouring dwellings of 24 & 25 Charlton Down which will sit directly adjacent to the new dwelling. It will not appear visually isolated or out of context on this site, being adjacent to the existing modern residential development.
12.11 Charlton Down has seen extensive development in the past and has more than doubled in size over time. This has been allowed through careful consideration of the impacts of the development on the natural and historic environment, and the built form of the village is particularly well contained within landscaped edges, making a clear distinction between the built form of development and the open landscape beyond. The surrounding land is of high landscape and amenity value, acting as a buffer between the built form and wider countryside. Whilst situated outside of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, the site is nevertheless highly sensitive, forming the setting of important local buildings and providing key views in and out of the village. The land is consequently designated Land of Local Landscape Importance.
12.12 The site is however relatively discreet in terms of wider views given the extent of trees and mature hedgerows that surround its boundaries and the boundaries of the north west field beyond. The bank of trees that line The Avenue to the north of the site also help to shield the site from Herrison House and vice versa.
12.13 The site lies within the setting of Herrison House, which is a Grade II listed building, formerly the hospital, and the site is also situated adjacent to the Conservation Area, and as such is highly sensitive. Planning policies seek to preserve the historic character and integrity of listed buildings and in doing so it is important that their setting is not compromised. Para 132 of the National Planning Policy Statement states the following:
When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. ... Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of a grade II listed building, park or garden should be exceptional.
12.14 Para 137 of the National Planning Policy Statement states the following:
Local planning authorities should look for opportunities for new development within Conservation Areas and World Heritage Sites and within the setting of heritage assets to enhance or better reveal their significance. Proposals that preserve those elements of the setting that make a positive contribution to or better reveal the significance of the asset should be treated favourably.
12.15 In terms of assessing both the setting of the listed building, impact on the Historic Garden and the significance of the listed building further guidance is provided within the National Planning Practice Guide, which defines the setting of a heritage asset as follows:
Setting is the surroundings in which an asset is experienced, and may therefore be more extensive than its curtilage. All heritage assets have a setting, irrespective of the form in which they survive and whether they are designated or not.
12.16 The applicant has put forward the case that originally, there was a lodge house on this application site. This has been confirmed from viewing archive plans dated from the 1930's. Although, this does not provide a fall back for a new dwelling on the site, it does indicate that a lodge house was present within the historic setting of Herrison House on this site. As such, if designed appropriately, a new lodge house could be viewed positively within the setting of the heritage asset and the wider Conservation Area.
12.17 Whilst the comments from the Design & Conservation Officer have been carefully considered, the distance from the listed building and context of the proposal in relation to the existing modern residential development is such that the setting of the Herrison House and the character of the Conservation Area.
12.18 It is considered that the dense screening of the site, its discreet location, its position away from the larger agricultural field enclosed by the lane & path and its related nature to numbers 24 & 25 Charlton Down ensures that if developed, the site will not significantly harm visual amenity, setting or beauty of the site, heritage assets & Conservation Area.
12.19 Impact on neighbours: The proposed dwellings would be sited on the north of Back Lane and as a result would be separated from the modern development of Charlton Down, with significant planting between. By reason of the separation distance and orientation of existing dwellings off Birch Way, it is possible that the proposed development could be designed so not to significantly impact the light or privacy of these properties.
12.20 The nearest neighbours are in fact the properties accessed directly off Back Lane (No’s. 24 and 25) which did not form part of the recent development at Charlton Down. No. 25 is situated to the south west of the site and is well screened by vegetation. This property benefits from a private garden to the south and west, and its main outlook is to the south and north. As such, the proposed development could be designed to have an acceptable relationship to this neighbour.
12.21 No.24 on the other hand is more exposed to the application site. This property has an open garden, which although could be screened is currently quite exposed, with a clear glazed conservatory on its west elevation and windows looking out towards the application site. The privacy of this property is already compromised by its lack of boundary treatment and will already be impacted by the well used footpaths which run alongside the property. The property does however have a more private garden to the east.
12.22 Full details of the proposed siting , scale and fenestration of the proposed dwelling are not currently provided, with only an indicative layout plan submitted. Careful consideration will need to be given as reserved matters or any detailed application in terms of the impact on this neighbour. It is however considered that through careful positioning and detail one dwelling could be developed on this plot without significant detrimental impact to this neighbour.
12.23 Impact on trees: Given the indicative scheme currently presented, the trees officer has no objections to the proposal but will require a full arboricultural assessment as part of any reserved matters scheme.
12.24 Impact on highway safety: The new property will be accessed from Back Lane; the additional use of this lane is considered to be acceptable and will not give rise to significantly more vehicle movements as a result of the extra dwelling. The DCC Highways has no objections.
12.25 Impact on protected species: The proposed development is not in an area of known wildlife value, and would cover an area less than 0.1 ha. In such cases, applicants would not normally be required to submit a habitat survey and biodiversity mitigation plan. An ecological survey has nevertheless been provided and no evidence of protected species was found. However, the report did note that there is suitable nesting and roosting habitat for birds in the hedge at the west of the plot; the rough grass over the remaining plot provided suitable reptile habitat; and the trees nearby lining the road and alongside the footpath and bridleway would provide good bat foraging and commuting habitat. The report makes a number of recommendations following good practice and this could form a condition on any consent. The proposed development is considered to be acceptable in this respect. 12.26 Impact on safety of future occupiers through land contamination: Concern has been raised in relation to potential land contamination. As such, the Environmental Health Officer has been consulted, which sets out the requirements of any developer in respect of testing for, and mitigating against, contamination. Subject to conditions, no objection is raised in this respect.
12.27 Housing land supply: Following the September 2016 publication of the Housing Monitoring Report, the Council cannot evidence a 5 year housing land supply and therefore, all applications for housing development have to be carefully considered as opportunity to aid housing delivery within the District. It is considered that given its sustainable location within the DDB; this scheme is ideal as a contribution towards housing land supply within the District.
12.28 Local Financial Considerations Having regard to S70 (2) of the Town and Country Planning Act the proposal has local finance considerations.
Community Infrastructure Levy The adopted charging schedule only applies a levy on proposals that create a dwelling and/or a dwelling with restricted holiday use. All other development types are therefore set a £0 per square metre CIL rate. The development proposal is CIL liable.A levy is not raised because the proposal is for an outline planning permission and full details are unknown
Affordable Housing Contributions Policy HOUS1 requires all new dwellings to make a 35% contribution towards affordable housing. However, in May 2016 National Planning Practice Guidance was updated to reflect the re-instatement of a Written Ministerial Statement from 28 November 2014. National planning policy and national guidance establish thresholds below which affordable housing contributions should not be sought.
In the light of changes to national policy and guidance, affordable housing contributions will not normally be sought on sites of 5 units or fewer inside designated rural areas. As this site falls below this threshold an affordable housing contribution is not required.
13. Summary
13.1 The erection of a dwelling on this site is considered acceptable in principle given its relationship with numbers 24 & 25 Charlton Down, its location on the edge of the DDB with safe & convenient access to services, the visual relationship of the site to the backdrop of the village and existing residential development and the degree of soft landscaping and screening.
13.2 A historical cue has be taken from the information that a lodge house was situated on this land and would have been part of the setting of Herrison House. This design approach could be followed in any reserved matters submission to provide an historic visual connection which would be considered appropriate. 13.3 Issues in relation to land contamination, protected species and landscaping (trees/hedgerows) can be successfully addressed by a future reserved matters application and conditions.
14. Recommendation 14.1 APPROVE subject to the following conditions:
i. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: Location Plan - Drawing no. 14071-5 Rev B received on 19/08/2016
REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning. ii. Approval of the details of the layout, scale and appearance of the building, the means of access thereto and the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called the Reserved Matters) shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced.
REASON: To ensure the satisfactory development of the site.
iii. Application for approval of any 'reserved matter' must be made not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date of this permission.
REASON: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
iv. The development to which this permission relates must be begun not later than the expiration of two years from the final approval of the reserved matters or, in the case of approval on different dates, the final approval of the last such matter to be approved.
REASON: This condition is required to be imposed by Section 92 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).
v. Prior to the commencement of any works pursuant to this permission the developer shall submit for the written approval of the Local Planning Authority:
1. a 'desk study' report documenting the site history. 2. a site investigation report detailing ground conditions, a 'conceptual model' of all potential pollutant linkages, and incorporating risk assessment. 3. a detailed scheme for remedial works and measures to be taken to avoid risk from contaminants/or gases when the site is developed. 4. a detailed phasing scheme for the development and remedial works.
The Remediation Scheme, as agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, shall be fully implemented before the development hereby permitted is first occupied. Any variation to the scheme shall be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority in advance of works being undertaken. On completion of the works the developer shall provide written confirmation that all works were completed in accordance with the agreed details.
REASON To ensure potential land contamination is satisfactorily addressed. vi. In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development, it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority and an investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with requirements of BS10175.
Should any contamination be found requiring remediation, a remediation scheme shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The approved remediation scheme shall be carried out to a timescale to be first agreed with the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared and submitted which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.
REASON: To ensure risks from contamination are minimised.