Hart Initial Template

HEAD OF PLANNING SERVICES REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMITTEE OF 13th August 2014

1. INTRODUCTION This agenda considers planning applications submitted to the Council, as the Local Planning Authority, for determination. 2. STATUS OF OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMITTEE'S DECISIONS All information, advice, and recommendations contained in this agenda are understood to be correct at the time of preparation, which is approximately two weeks in advance of the Committee meeting. Because of the time constraints, some reports may have been prepared before the final date for consultee responses or neighbour comment. Where a recommendation is either altered or substantially amended between preparing the report and the Committee meeting or where additional information has been received, a separate “Planning Addendum” paper will be circulated at the meeting to assist Councillors. This paper will be available to members of the public. The Planning Addendum report will also set out a report of the Viewing Panel visit (see below). A decision is made only when the Members of the Committee have formally considered and determined each application and the decision notice issued. 3. THE DEBATE AT THE MEETING The Chairman of the Committee will introduce the item to be discussed. A Planning Officer will then give a short presentation and, if applicable, public speaking will take place (see below). The Committee will then debate the application with the starting point being the officer recommendation. A flow chart showing the procedure is given at the end of this paper. 4. SITE VISITS A Panel of Members visits some sites on the day before the Committee meeting. This can be useful to assess the effect of the proposal on matters that are not clear from the plans or from the report. The Panel does not discuss the application or receive representations although applicants and Town/Parish Councils are advised of the arrangements. These are not public meetings. A summary of what was viewed is given on the Planning Addendum. 5. PLANNING POLICY All planning applications must be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise (Section 38(6) of the Town and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004). If the development plan contains material policies or proposals and there are no other material considerations, the application should be determined in accordance with the development plan. Where there are other material considerations, the development plan will be the starting point, and other material considerations will also be taken into account. One such consideration will be whether the plan policies are relevant and up to date. The relevant development plans are the saved policies in the South East Plan, the Hart District Local Plan including first alterations, the Hampshire, Portsmouth, Southampton, New Forest National Park Minerals and Waste Core Strategy, and the saved policies of the Hampshire, Portsmouth and Southampton Minerals and Waste Local Plan. With the passing of the Localism Act, 2011 Parliament has expressed its intention to revoke the South East Plan and consequently weight can be given to this intention, but until it is formally revoked it remains part of the development plan. Although not necessarily specifically referred to in the Committee report, the relevant development plan will have been used as a background document and the relevant policies taken into account in the preparation of the report on each item. Significant departures must be notiﬁed to the Secretary of State who will decide if it is necessary to intervene. The Council should not however, refuse planning permission for a development that accords with the development plan. Where a development represents a departure from the development plan and it is proposed to recommend that planning permission be granted, the application will be advertised as a departure and this will be highlighted in the Committee report. If the Planning Committee is then minded to grant planning permission under the Council’s Constitution the Planning Committee has to refer the application to Full Council for determination. The Council has also approved its Local Plan: Core Strategy as a pre-Submission plan. This is therefore a material consideration in the determination of planning applications. However, it does not form part of the development plan for the purposes of section 38(6) and has less weight than the adopted policies of those documents. However, where the Local Plan: Core Strategy has a high degree of consistency with the NPPF greater weight may be given to the Local Plan: Core Strategy. 6. LOCAL FINANCE CONSIDERATIONS In dealing with planning applications the Council can have regard to local finance considerations as far as they are material. These are defined as being any grant or other financial assistance provided by Central Government or any sum received through the Community Infrastructure Levy. It is specifically stated that this is not to alter the weight to be given to any consideration. 7. THE NATIONAL PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK Government statements of planning policy are material considerations that must be taken into account in deciding planning applications. These statements cannot make irrelevant any matter that is a material consideration in a particular case. Nevertheless, where such statements indicate the weight that should be given to relevant considerations, decision-makers must have proper regard to them. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is a material consideration in determining applications. The NPPF states that the purpose of the planning system is to contribute to the achievement of sustainable development with its economic, social and environmental roles. All three aims should be sought jointly and simultaneously. The presumption in favour of sustainable development in decision making means: approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting permission unless: o any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole; or o specific policies in the NPPF indicate development should be restricted. The NPPF indicates that a local plan will not be considered up to date on housing policies where the Council cannot demonstrate a 5 year supply of deliverable housing land. 8. OTHER MATERIAL CONSIDERATIONS Material considerations must be genuine planning considerations, i.e. they must be related to the development and use of land in the public interest. They must also fairly and reasonably relate to the application concerned. The Courts are the arbiters of what constitutes a material consideration. All the fundamental factors involved in land-use planning are included, such as the number, size, layout, siting, design, and external appearance of buildings and the proposed means of access, together with landscaping, impact on the neighbourhood, and the availability of infrastructure. Matters that should not be taken into account are: a) loss of property value b) loss of view c) land and boundary disputes d) matters covered by leases or covenants e) the impact of construction work f) property maintenance issues g) need for development (save in h) the identity or personal characteristics of certain defined circumstances) the applicant i) ownership of land or rights of way j) moral objections to development like public houses or betting shops k) change to previous scheme l) competition between firms, m) or matters that are dealt with by other legislation, such as the Building Regulations (e.g. structural safety, fire risks, means of escape in the event of fire etc). - The fact that a development may conflict with other legislation is not a reason to refuse planning permission or defer a decision. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure compliance with all relevant legislation.

9. PLANNING CONDITIONS AND OBLIGATIONS Conditions on planning permissions can only be imposed where there is a clear land-use planning justiﬁcation for doing so. Conditions should be used in a way that is clearly seen to be fair, reasonable, and practicable. One key test of whether a particular condition is necessary is if planning permission would have to be refused if the condition were not imposed. Otherwise, such a condition would need special and precise justiﬁcation. Where it is not possible to include matters that are necessary for a development to proceed in a planning condition the Council can agree a planning obligation under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Planning obligations should meet the Secretary of State's policy tests. They should be: necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; directly related to the proposed development; and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the proposed development;

It should be noted that these tests are statutory requirements of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010. 10. PLANNING APPEALS Applicants have the right of appeal to the Secretary of State if an application is refused, or granted subject to conditions, or if it has not been determined within the specified period. Appeals are administered by the Planning Inspectorate - an executive agency reporting to the Secretary of State. Appeals are considered by written representation, hearings, and public inquiries. In planning appeals, it is normally expected that both parties will pay their own costs. Costs can however, be awarded against the Council where it: (a) Fails to determine a planning application in good time – the Council must have good planning reasons to explain and justify why it did not make a decision in time. (b) Fails to carry out adequate prior investigation consistent with national policy and guidance. (c) Prevents or delays development that should clearly be permitted having regard to the development plan, national policy statements and any other material considerations. It is the Councils responsibility to produce evidence to show clearly, why the development cannot be permitted. Reasons for refusal must be complete, precise, specific relevant to the application, and supported by substantiated evidence. (d) Fails to show reasonable planning grounds for taking a decision contrary to officer advice (e) Gives too much weight to neighbour objections, the extent of local opposition is not, in itself, a reasonable ground for resisting development. To carry significant weight, opposition should be founded on valid planning reasons that are supported by substantial evidence. (f) Relies on unsubstantiated objections where they include valid reasons for refusal but rely almost exclusively on local opposition from third parties, through representations and attendance at an inquiry or hearing, to support the decision. (g) Fails to show that it has considered the possibility of imposing relevant planning conditions to allow development to proceed. The following are examples given in Government Circular 03/09 of circumstances that may lead to an award of costs against the Council: (a) Ignoring relevant national policy – for example, the advice in the NPPF on Telecommunications concerning health risks arising from a mobile phone base station (b) Where a proposal is contrary to the development plan but the relevant policy has been superseded by national policy which advocates an entirely different approach. (c) Acting contrary to, or not following, well-established case law (d) Persisting in objections to a scheme, or part of a scheme, which has already been granted planning permission or which the Secretary of State or an Inspector has previously indicated to be acceptable. (e) Not determining like cases in a like manner – for example, imposing an additional reason for refusal on a similar scheme to one previously considered by the planning authority where circumstances have not materially changed (f) Failing to grant a further planning permission for a scheme the subject of an extant or recently expired permission where there has been no material change in circumstances (g) Refusing to approve reserved matters when the objections relate to issues that should already have been considered at the outline stage (h) Imposing a condition that is not necessary, precise, enforceable, relevant to planning, relevant to the development permitted or reasonable and thereby does not comply with the advice in DOE Circular 11/95 on The Use of Conditions in Planning Permissions (i) Requiring the appellant to enter into or complete a planning obligation which does not accord with the tests in the NPPF set out above. (j) Not imposing conditions on a grant of planning permission where conditions could effectively have overcome the objection identified – for example, in relation to highway matters. 11. THE ROLE OF THE SECRETARY OF STATE The Secretary of State has reserve powers to direct the council to refer an application to him/her for decision. This is what is meant by a 'called-in' application. In general, this power of intervention is used selectively and the Secretary of State will not interfere with the jurisdiction of local planning authorities unless it is necessary to do so. 12. PROPRIETY Members of the Planning Committee are obliged to represent the interests of the whole community in planning matters and not simply their individual Wards. When determining planning applications they must take into account planning considerations only. This can include views expressed on relevant planning matters. Local opposition or support for a proposal is not in itself a ground for refusing or granting planning permission, unless it is founded upon valid planning reasons. 13. PRIVATE INTERESTS The planning system does not exist to protect the private interests of one person against the activities of another, although private interests may coincide with the public interest in some cases. It can be difficult to distinguish between public and private interests, but this may be necessary on occasion. The basic question is not whether owners and occupiers of neighbouring properties would experience financial or other loss from a particular development, but whether the proposal would unacceptably affect amenities and the existing use of land and buildings that ought to be protected in the public interest. Covenants or the maintenance/ protection of private property are therefore not material planning consideration. 14. OTHER LEGISLATION Non-planning legislation may place statutory requirements on planning authorities, or may set out controls that need to be taken into account (for example, environmental legislation, or water resources legislation). The Council, in exercising its functions, also must have regard to the general requirements of other legislation, in particular: The Human Rights Act 1998, which incorporated provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into UK law. The general purpose of the ECHR is to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms and to maintain and promote the ideals and values of a democratic society. It sets out the basic rights of every person together with the limitations placed on these rights in order to protect the rights of others and of the wider community. The specific Articles of the ECHR relevant to planning include Article 6 (Right to a fair and public hearing), Article 8 (Right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence), Article 14 (Prohibition of discrimination) and Article 1 of Protocol 1 (Right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions and protection of property). All planning applications are assessed to make sure that the subsequent determination of the development proposal is compatible with the Act. If there is a potential conflict, this will be highlighted in the report on the relevant item. The Equality Act 2010 which replaced previous discrimination legislation. This puts a duty on public bodies, such as the Council, to have due regard to the need to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity, and foster good relations in the course of developing policies and delivering services. The aim is for public bodies to consider the needs of all individuals in their day to day work, in developing policy, in delivering services, and in relation to their own employees. The need to advance equality of opportunity involves considering the need to: o remove or minimise disadvantages suffered by people due to their protected characteristics; o meet the needs of people with protected characteristics; and o encourage people with protected characteristics to participate in public life or in other activities where their participation is low 15. PUBLIC SPEAKING The Council has a public speaking scheme, which allows a representative of the relevant Parish Council, objectors and applicants to address the Planning Committee. Full details of the scheme are on the Council’s website and are sent to all applicants and objectors where the scheme applies. Speaking is only available to those who have made representations within the relevant period or the applicant. It is not possible to arrange to speak to the Committee at the Committee meeting itself. Speakers are limited to a total of three minutes each per item for the Parish Council, those speaking against the application and for the applicant /agent. Speakers are not permitted to ask questions of others or to join in the debate, although the Committee may ask questions of the speaker to clarify representations made or facts after they have spoken. For probity reasons associated with advance disclosure of information under the Access to Information Act, nobody will be allowed to circulate, show or display further material at, or just before, the Committee meeting. 16. LATE REPRESENTATIONS To make sure that all documentation is placed in the public domain and to ensure that the Planning Committee, applicants, objectors, and any other party has had a proper opportunity to consider further or new representations no new additional information will be allowed to be submitted less than 48 hours before the Committee meeting, except where to correct an error of fact in the report. 17. INSPECTION OF DRAWINGS All drawings are available for inspection on the internet at www.hart.gov.uk and at the Planning Development Reception area during our normal office hours. Planning Committee Procedure

Parish, Objector and Officer Presentation Applicant Speaking followed Main Issues Highlighted and by questions of fact or Questions of fact or clarification of clarification Officer

MOTION PUT DEBATE Ward Member (Normally in line with (Including any amendments) opportunity for right Recommendation) of reply

Final Officer If vote lost Comment VOTE

Annex A to Planning Report

Contributions towards Community Infrastructure and Mitigation to the effects of Residential Development on European Sites

Introduction In considering any development proposal it is necessary to consider is whether it will have a planning impact. This may be an impact on policy, on the environment, amenity or the physical capacity of the infrastructure to accommodate the development, with the Council not seeking to rectify any deficiencies.

Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 (as amended) allows for the completion of a legal deed, a “planning obligation”, to a) Restrict the development or use of the land in any specified way; b) Require specified operations or activities to be carried out in, on, under or over the land; c) Require the land to be used in any specified way; or d) Require a sum or sums to be paid to the authority on a specified date or dates or periodically.

This will have the effect of mitigating the effect of development to allow it to take place.

The Council’s Community Infrastructure Policy was agreed at Cabinet in December 2010 and sets out the Council’s overall approach towards the collection of contributions towards transport, education, leisure and open space, and the Thames Basins Heath SPA.

It stipulates that planning obligations would only be sought: a) On case by case basis, and b) Taking into account development viability, c) Where they meet the three policy test as set out in the National Planning Policy Frameworks (NPPF) as well as the CIL Regulations, and d) Where there are agreed projects that meet the criteria set out in the advice note issued by the Planning Inspectorate, and e) Where an agreed programme exists to implement the infrastructure.

The Council’s Cabinet subsequently updated the list of projects at its meeting held on 1 November 2012.

Reference should also be made to the preface to the Committee report paper which sets out information on Government Policy.

This Annex sets out the Council’s policy position in respect of contributions and should be read in conjunction with the individual reports which will set out the justification for the contribution sought in each individual case.

Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area Saved local plan policies CON1 and CON2 relate to the Thames Basin Special Protection Area (SPA) and state that development which would adversely affect the nature conservation value of a site will only be permitted if it can be subject to conditions that will prevent damaging impacts on wildlife habitats or other natural features of importance on the site or if other material factors are sufficient to override the nature conservation interest. South East Plan policy NRM6 requires adequate measures to avoid or mitigate any potential adverse effects on the Thames Basin Special Protection Area (SPA).

The SPA is a network of heathland sites which are designated for their ability to provide a habitat for the internationally important bird species of woodlark, nightjar and Dartford warbler. The area is designated as a result of the Birds Directive and the European Habitats Directive and protected in the UK under the provisions set out in the Habitats Regulations. These bird species are particularly subject to disturbance from walkers, dog walkers and cat predation because they nest on or near the ground.

Natural England has indicated that it believes that within 5km of the SPA additional residential development in combination will have a significant effect on the SPA. Thus without mitigation any proposal is contrary to the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010.

In April 2008 the Thames Basin Heaths Joint Strategic Partnership agreed a Thames Basin Heaths Delivery Framework to enable the delivery of housing in the vicinity of the SPA without that development having a significant effect on the SPA as a whole. The delivery framework is based on avoidance measures and the policy indicates that these measures can take the form of areas of open space known as Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspace (SANG). The policy also states that local authorities will collect developer contributions towards mitigation measures including the provision of SANGs land and joint contributions to the funding of Strategic Access Management and Monitoring (SAMM) the effects of mitigation measures across the SPA.

The Council has adopted an revised Interim Avoidance Strategy for the SPA whereby, subject to the completion of a relevant legal agreement to provide in perpetuity funding towards, depending on location the Hitches Lane or Hawley Meadows SANG, together with a payment towards SAMM, it would be possible to conclude that the development will have no likely significant impact on the SPA. The sums the Council considers appropriate to mitigate the impacts of the development and how they are calculated, are set out in the policy.

In terms of the tests set out in the NPPF, a planning obligation is necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms by mitigating against the impact of an increase in population within 5km of the SPA. The size of contribution sought relates to the population that will be likely to occupy the development. The direct link between the contribution and the development is set out above.

Through the completion of a planning obligation it would be possible to conclude that the development will not have an adverse effect on the SPA and therefore complies with saved policies CON1 and CON2, South East Plan policy NRM6 and the CIL Regulations.

Transport Saved Local Plan policies T14 and T16 seek to ensure that development is served effectively by public transport, cycling or walking and that improvements made necessary by development are to be funded by that development. This relates not only to physical improvements required to permit development to take place (such as sight lines at an entrance to a site), but also to the wider network, seeking to allow development provided that it could be effectively served by public transport, cycling and walking.

The Hampshire Local Transport Plan (LTP) relates to the years 2011 - 2031 and makes reference to the North Hampshire Transport Strategy (NHTS) which covers the areas administered by Hart District Council, Rushmoor and Basingstoke and Deane Borough Councils and that part of the area of Test Valley Borough Council north of the A303.

Within the Fleet/Church Crookham/Elvetham Heath area the County Council has also adopted the Fleet Town Access Plan (FTAP) as a sub-programme of NHTS.

The Hampshire wide Local Transport Plan identifies a number of key themes: a) Supporting the economy through resilient highways; b) Management of traffic; c) The role of public transport; d) Quality of life and place; e) Transport and growth areas

Additional development brings with it additional multi-modal transport impacts. This is additional cars, cycles and use of public transport which has an incremental impact on the transport infrastructure. In line therefore with saved policy T14 it is incumbent on developers to show how they intend the development to be served by public transport, cycling and walking. The provision of a contribution towards either NTHS or FTAP would provide that mitigation.

In terms of the policy tests in the NPPF a contribution will mitigate the effects of the development on the local transport infrastructure. The scale and kind of the contribution sought relates to the increase in transport activity. The details of the direct link between the schemes the contribution will fund and the development are set out in the Committee report.

Leisure As part of living in a dwelling its residents will use the local leisure infrastructure to undertake recreation. The impact on infrastructure used for recreation is clearly a material planning consideration.

Some of this infrastructure is of a strategic, District-wide, nature while other is more local. At a local level the Council has determined that as a general rule the local infrastructure will be considered at the Parish level.

Even where infrastructure is of a District wide nature it is clear that the further from a development itself the less likely that the residents will use that infrastructure. Utilising visitor data, the Council has set “zones of influence” of the individual elements where it is known that residents visit and will have an impact.

In terms of the policy tests in the NPPF a contribution will mitigate the effects of the development on the leisure infrastructure. The scale and kind of the contribution sought relates to the increase in leisure activity. The details of the direct link between the projects the contribution will be spent on and the development are set out in the Committee report.

Without the necessary obligation additional development would exacerbate the existing deficiency in provision for leisure facilities within the vicinity of the site through an increase in population who would have access to the facilities. The scale of the contribution has been assessed through the Council's Leisure Strategy as being appropriate to mitigate these effects.

Education Hampshire County Council has advised in their policy document Developers’ Contributions towards Children’s Services Facilities December 2011 where the availability of school places is particularly critical, contributions should be sought in relation to each individual dwelling. Hampshire County Council has confirmed that there are particular pressures on places at the primary and secondary schools in the Fleet/Church Crookham schools catchment area, and in the catchment of the Robert Mays secondary school in Odiham where any increase in population will add to the demand beyond the available capacity. Full details of the issues are set out in the Community Infrastructure Policy.

In both Fleet/Church Crookham and in Odiham programmes for the provision of additional educational facilities are well advanced. The County Council considers it preferable to invest in existing schools where achievable in building terms and where agreement can be reached with the headteacher and governors of the schools involved.

Schools are ideally organised into classes of 30 pupils across the age range of the school to support curriculum delivery relevant to the pupil year group and to meet statutory class size regulations whereby no class can be larger than 30 for pupils aged 5 to 7. It is not practical, therefore, for schools to marginally increase their capacity, have larger than ideal class sizes, or create a budget deficit due to the need to employ an additional teacher for very small increases to pupil numbers.

At a primary level as a result of this significant level of new housing in the Fleet area discussions have taken place with local schools regarding provision of additional places. At primary level the current plan is to provide additional places at the Tweseldown Infant and Church Crookham Junior schools, Tavistock Infant and All Saints CE(A) Junior schools, and Heatherside Infant and Junior schools.

At the secondary level discussions have taken place with the headteacher of Calthorpe Park School on a planned increase in pupil numbers to reflect the need for additional places. A phased approach is being developed to reflect expected demand over the next 15 years with up to 750 additional places being provided. Additional land to the south of the school site will be required to provide the additional playing pitches required to cater for the increase in the size of school. 9

Similarly, there have been discussions with the headteacher of Robert Mays School on a planned increase in pupil numbers to reflect the need for additional places. Additional land to the east and west of the school site is likely to be required to provide the additional playing pitches required to cater for the increase in the size of school.

In terms of the policy tests in the NPPF a contribution will mitigate the effects of the development on the education infrastructure. The scale and kind of the contribution sought relates to the facilities being provided. The details of the direct link between the contribution and the development are set out above.

Item No: 101 Page: 12 - 21 14/00449/MAJOR Grant Permission

1-9 Dairy Walk Hartley Wintney Hook RG27 8XX

Demolition of existing building and erection of a block of 23 sheltered apartments for the elderly with vehicular access off of High Street via Dairy Walk and the public car park to the east; and associated parking.

Item No: 102 Page: 22 - 35 14/01462/FUL Refuse Permission

Land At James Farm West Green Road Hartley Wintney Hook Hampshire

Erection of four dwellings with associated car ports, parking and landscaping

Item No: 103 Page: 36 - 45 14/00797/FUL Grant Permission

Land Adjacent To Ivy Cottage Lees Hill South Warnborough Hook Hampshire

Erection of detached three bedroom dwelling.

Item No: 104 Page: 46 - 51 14/00819/FUL Grant Permission

Mill Farm Mill Lane Yateley Hampshire GU46 7SS

Detached barn to provide secure storage for tractor and associated agricultural equipment.

Item No: 105 Page: 52 - 59 14/00971/HMC Grant Permission

67 Wood Lane Fleet Hampshire GU51 3ED

Construction of a rear dormer window extension.

Item No: 106 Page: 60 - 66 14/01075/HMC Grant Permission

Hatch Farm Hazeley Heath Hartley Wintney Hook Hampshire RG27 8NB

Erection of a detached double garage with attached workshop

Item No: 107 Page: 67 - 75 14/01289/FUL Grant Permission

Clare Park Private Retirement Residences Ltd Clare Park Farnham Surrey

Proposed General Managers Bungalow in the grounds of Clare Park House

Item No: 108 Page: 76 - 83 14/01354/HMC Grant Permission

23 Fleet Road Fleet Hampshire GU51 3QF Two storey side extension

COMMITTEE REPORT ITEM NUMBER: 101 APPLICATION NO. 14/00449/MAJOR LOCATION 1-9 Dairy Walk Hartley Wintney Hook RG27 8XX PROPOSAL Demolition of existing building and erection of a block of 23 sheltered apartments for the elderly with vehicular access off of High Street via Dairy Walk and the public car park to the east; and associated parking. APPLICANT Renaissance Retirement Ltd CONSULTATIONS EXPIRY 25 July 2014 APPLICATION EXPIRY 26 May 2014 PLANNING COMMITTEE Cllr Tim Southern WARD MEMBER RECOMMENDATION Grant Permission (subject to adjustment to legal agreement)

Reproduced from the Ordnance Survey map with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office © Crown Copyright 2000. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Please Note: Map is not to scale

Proposed site plan 12

Proposed Ground Floor Plan

INTRODUCTION

This application has been deferred from two previous Planning Committee meetings. The reasons for deferral were to seek amendments to the development to reduce the number of units on site and to improve the parking arrangements without compromising the amenity space.

AMENDMENTS

The following amendments have been: 1- The two storey section on the southwest elevation has been removed; 2- There has been a reduction in units from 25 to 23; 3- Parking provision has been increased from 17 to 20 spaces; and 4- The outdoor amenity space area has been amended.

CONSULTEE COMMENTS

Hartley Wintney Parish Council: Objection. Whilst Members appreciate the considerable improvement made to this application with the further increase in parking numbers, the re-working of the outside amenity space and the reduction in the size of the development to 23 units, the application is still unacceptable in terms of parking provision; the requirement was to deliver 1 parking space per dwelling which has still not been provided; with the courtesy bus and the staff car this leaves 18 spaces for 23 units, a shortfall of 5.

OFFICER NOTE – The Parish Council has also made reference to issues related with compliance with the Building Regulations and also the implication of construction worker parking occurring within Central car park. These are not material planning considerations relevant to the determination of this or any other planning application and therefore have not reported or commented upon further

Highways Officer: NO OBJECTION: The parking layout has been amended and now incorporates 18 parking spaces. The fence separating the A30 access and the car park access is retained limiting the number of vehicles exiting onto the A30 as previously requested. 5 vehicles exit onto the A30 whilst 13 exit to the existing public car park. This is adequate. I have no issues with accessibility for the new parking layout.

NEIGHBOUR REPRESENTATIONS

Five letters of objection (including the Hartley Wintney Preservation Society) have been received regarding the amended plans which raise the following main points: (i) Access from Dairy Walk is dangerous (ii) Not enough parking (iii) Future occupiers will use parking spaces in public car park which is harmful to viability of High Street (iv) Height and design of the building is not appropriate.

CONSIDERATIONS

1- Does the scheme address the reason for deferral- to reduce the number of units on site and to improve the parking arrangements without compromising the amenity space

The scheme reduces the number of units from 25 to 23 and increases the number of parking spaces from 17 to 20. The accommodation proposed is sheltered accommodation for the elderly, therefore applying general residential parking standards is not appropriate. The applicant provided a transport report which looked at the likely parking requirements of the development which recommended that 0.4 spaces per apartment should be provided; this would mean that 10 spaces should be provided. The number of spaces currently proposed is 20, so significantly over the recommendation in the applicant’s report. This level of parking is more than sufficient

17 to meet the needs arising from the development. Furthermore the adjacent public car park has capacity in the event that short term parking spills off site.

The southern amenity space has been adjusted and increased in size. The more significant change is the removal of the two storey section on the southwest elevation which results in better quality amenity space as it would allow more sunlight to this garden. The outdoor amenity space is therefore, acceptable.

The proposed amendments therefore, address the reason for deferral- the number of units on site has been reduced, the parking arrangements have been improved, and following the removal of the two storey element on the southwest elevation, the amenity spaces has been significantly improved.

2- Other issues

The proposed changes results in a reduction in the number of units from 25 to 23 which means that the financial contributions are reduced for both SANG, SAMM and for off site affordable. A new legal agreement has therefore been prepared.

CONCLUSION

The amended proposal provides fewer units, more parking and better quality amenity space, and therefore addresses the reason for deferral from the June planning committee.

RECOMMENDATION

Subject to the prior completion of an appropriate legal agreement to secure SANG, SAMM and affordable housing contributions, the Head of Regulatory services be authorised to GRANT permission subject to the following conditions:

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

2 No development shall take place until details and samples of all external surfaces have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with approved details.

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building(s) is/are satisfactory and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

3 No development shall take place until large scale drawings of all the windows and doors, including materials, method(s) of opening, finishes, and window reveal details, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details, and shall be retained as such.

Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the area and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 in the Hart District Local Plan.

4 No development shall take place until details of the design and materials of all external rainwater goods have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details and the materials shall not subsequently be altered without the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of maintaining the character of the building and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

5 No development shall take place until details of the boundary treatment for the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be fully completed before the development hereby permitted is first occupied.

Reason: In the interests of amenity and in order to preserve the appearance of the locality.

6 No development shall take place on the bin store until full details of the bin store (plans and elevations) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The bin store will be built in accordance with the approved plans and be brought into use at or before first occupation.

Reason: To ensure that the development is properly planned and to satisfy saved Local Plan Policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan

7 All works and development shall be in accordance with the Construction Method Statement received on 02.06.14, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period.

Reason: To protect the amenities of the locality and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

8 Unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority, development other than that required to be carried out as part of an approved scheme of remediation must not commence until conditions 1 to 4 have been complied with. If unexpected contamination is found after development has begun, development must be halted on that part of the site affected by the unexpected contamination to the extent specified by the Local Planning Authority in writing until condition 4 has been complied with in relation to that contamination.

1. Site Characterisation An investigation and risk assessment, in addition to any assessment provided with the planning application, must be completed in accordance with a scheme to assess the nature and extent of any contamination on the site, whether or not it originates on the site. The contents of the scheme are subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken by competent persons and a written report of the findings must be produced. The written report is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The report of the findings must include:

(i) a survey of the extent, scale and nature of contamination;

(ii) an assessment of the potential risks to:

human health, property (existing or proposed) including buildings, crops, livestock, pets, woodland and service lines and pipes, adjoining land, groundwaters and surface waters, ecological systems, archeological sites and ancient monuments;

(iii) an appraisal of remedial options, and proposal of the preferred option(s).

This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR 11’.

2. Submission of Remediation Scheme 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, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. The scheme must include all works to be undertaken, proposed remediation objectives and remediation criteria, timetable of works and site management procedures. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in relation to the intended use of the land after remediation.

3. Implementation of Approved Remediation Scheme The approved remediation scheme must be carried out in accordance with its terms prior to the commencement of development other than that required to carry out remediation, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Local Planning Authority must be given two weeks written notification of commencement of the remediation scheme works.

Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme, a verification report (referred to in PPS23 as a validation report) that demonstrates the effectiveness of the remediation carried out must be produced, and is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

4. Reporting of Unexpected Contamination 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. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of condition 1, and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared in accordance with the requirements of condition 2, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.

Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with condition 3.

9 No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Hard details shall include, as appropriate, proposed finished levels and/or contours, means of enclosure of unbuilt open areas, car parking layouts, other vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas, hard surfacing materials and artefacts and structures (e.g. furniture, refuse or other storage units, signage, lighting, external services, manholes, etc.).

Soft landscape details shall include planting plans, written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant establishment), schedules of plants, noting species, planting sizes and proposed densities where appropriate.

Details shall further include a proposed timetable for planting and laying out of hard surfaces and roads.

Reason: To ensure the provision of amenity afforded by appropriate landscaping and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

10 Hard and soft landscaping works shall be fully carried out in accordance with the approved details, including the approved timetable, and to a reasonable standard in accordance with the relevant provisions of appropriate British Standards or other recognised codes of good practice. The Council shall be notified in writing of the completion of the scheme or any agreed phase of such scheme.

Any trees or plants which, within a period of five years after approved completion, are removed, die or become, in the opinion of the local planning authority, seriously damaged or defective, shall be replaced as soon as is reasonably practicable with others of similar species, size and number as originally approved, unless the Council gives its written consent to any variation.

Reason: To ensure the provision of amenity afforded by appropriate landscaping and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

11 No development or demolition work or delivery of materials shall take place at the site except between 07:30 hours to 18:00 hours weekdays or 08:00 to 13:00 hours Saturdays. No development or demolition work or deliveries of materials shall take place on Sundays or Public Holidays.

Reason: To protect the amenity of nearby residential occupiers and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

12 The approved parking/ turning facilities for vehicles shall be available prior to the occupation of the development hereby approved and thereafter be retained for these purposes and access shall be maintained at all times to allow them to be used as such.

Reason: To ensure that the development is provided with adequate parking to prevent the likelihood of on-street car parking and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 in the Hart District Local Plan.

13 The approved cycle storage facilities shall not be used for any purpose other than the storage of cycles.

Reason: To ensure that the development is provided with adequate cycle storage and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 in the Hart District Local Plan.

INFORMATIVES

1 The applicant is advised that under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, bats are a protected species and it is illegal to intentionally or recklessly damage, disturb or destroy a bat or its habitat. If any evidence of bats is found on site, Natural England must be informed and a licence for development obtained from them prior to works continuing. For further information go to www.naturalengland.org.uk or contact Natural England (S.E. regional office) on 0238 028 6410.

2 The Council works positively and proactively on development proposals to deliver sustainable development in accordance with the NPPF. In this instance the applicant received advice on recently withdrawn application 13/02577/MAJOR regarding the impact on neighbour amenity and access arrangements; amendments have been made in line with this advice. Further amendments have been made to decrease the unit number and to increase parking and amenity space. The applicant was advised of the issues relating to the SPA and affordable housing as part of the processing of the application and was assisted to complete a Section 106 Planning Obligation to address these concerns. Consequently the application was considered acceptable.

COMMITTEE REPORT ITEM NUMBER: 102 APPLICATION NO. 14/01462/FUL LOCATION Land At James Farm West Green Road Hartley Wintney Hook Hampshire PROPOSAL Erection of four dwellings with associated car ports, parking and landscaping APPLICANT Mr & Mrs A Timpany CONSULTATIONS EXPIRY 1 August 2014 APPLICATION EXPIRY 21 August 2014 PLANNING COMMITTEE Cllr Tim Southern WARD MEMBER CASE OFFICER Miss Karen Haizelden RECOMMENDATION Refuse Permission

Site plan

INTRODUCTION

This application is identical to a previously refused proposed (reference 14/00689/FUL) and is brought to Planning Committee at the discretion of the Head of Regulatory Services. This report should be read in conjunction with the previous report which is appended.

THE SITE

The site lies on West Green Road approximately 240m east of the Hartley Wintney. It lies in designated open countryside well beyond any defined settlement boundary.

The site is currently an open undeveloped area adjacent to a nursery school for Under 5's and its associated car park. It is bounded by a field boundary to the north, open land to the east, West Green Road to the south and James Farm Cottages beyond to the west. The existing access via the highway is shared with the nursery.

Planning permission was granted in 2009 for the use of the site as a nursery school and music studios (08/02735/FU). Part of that permission agreed a two storey music studio with classrooms above. This latter element has not been constructed. The development was contrary to the Local Plan. To justify it the applicant had to submit a comprehensive financial viability appraisal/business case. Without this the application would have been refused. Given the exceptional circumstances the application was then referred to Full Council to approve.

This planning permission however, in recognition of its special circumstances, is the subject of a restrictive planning condition which states:

“The buildings shall be used as a nursery school and music school respectively and for no other purpose including any other purpose in classes D1 of the schedule to the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2987, or in any provision equitant to those classes in any statutory instrument revoking or re-enacting that order.

Reason: In order to limit the use and occupation of the building in accordance with the terms of the application”.

PROPOSAL The proposal seeks planning permission for the erection of 4 dwellings. It is proposed to construct a terrace of three properties perpendicular to West Green Road and a detached property to the rear of the site facing the road. Car parking would be located to the front of the dwellings with a car port located adjacent to the site entrance parallel to West Green Road. The access to the site is broadly as existing.

CONSULTEES RESPONSES

Hartley Wintney Parish Council No Objection. Members were surprised to see this application refused last month given the applicants care over pre-planning advice and consultation with both Hart DC and the Parish Council to ensure an acceptable scheme was advanced which is sympathetic to its surroundings and addresses a need for smaller rural dwellings.

Highways (Internal) Summary: Access: Further details are required of the visibility splays that can be achieved in both directions and speed of traffic used to justify the splays A swept path analysis for delivery vehicles is required. Clarification is required regarding the access to the field to the rear of site; how is this to be retained or is it no longer required. Bin Collection point: this is acceptable

Cycle and bin stores: these are acceptable Transport contribution: The number of multi-modal trips will increase therefore a transport contribution should be sought and directed toward scheme reference HDC0164 (Pedestrian & cycle link between Hook and Hartley Wintney) in the Hart Transport Statement adopted September 2012

Environmental Health (Internal) No objections.

Thames Water Property Services No objections

NEIGHBOUR REPRESENTATIONS

Four letters of support and one neutral letter: 1) There is a flooding that is ongoing rather than a one off event and the clearing of ditches hasn't made any difference 2) The site is currently untidy and this would improve its appearance 3) Design is sympathetic 3) Such housing is needed in Hartley Wintney 4) The site is close to facilities without the need to 'jump in the car'.

POLICY AND DETERMINING ISSUES

Hart District Council Local Plan (Replacement) 1996 – 2006

GEN1 - General policy for development

GEN4 - General Design Policy

CON8 - Trees, Woods & Hedgerows Amenity Value

RUR2 - Devl. in open countryside General

RUR3 - Devl. in open countryside Control

T1 - Integrated Transport Network

T16 - Improvements Made Necessary by Dev

GEN9 - Contaminated Land

South East Plan 2006 – 2026

NRM6 - THAMES BASIN HEATHS SPECIAL PROTECTION A

CONSIDERATIONS

Principle of Development

Planning permission was recently refused for the following reason:

“In the absence of any overriding need which would justify an exception being made to policy, the proposal would result in unnecessary development outside any settlement boundary in the open countryside and represents an unwarranted intrusion into the countryside. As such the proposal is contrary to saved policies RUR2 and RUR3 in the adopted Hart District Local Plan (Replacement) 1996-2006 and the National Planning Policy Framework.”

There has been no material change in circumstances. Any issues associated with 5 years land supply is irrelevant. Whatever the issue with regard to the 5 years land supply the NPPF does not make unacceptable unsustainable development in the country side acceptable. Furthermore, a recent planning appeal decision has confirmed:

“There are numerous settlements within the District …….. which may be able to accommodate some additional housing either within or adjacent to the currently drawn settlement boundaries. Any decisions as to the selection of such sites to meet the housing shortfall would, however, best be addressed through the Development Plan process rather than by the grant of ad hoc planning permissions.”

The erection of 4 dwellings on this site would do little to met any perceived shortfall in housing but in any event, the Council can justify more than a 5 year supply of housing taking into account a 20% buffer.

The existing planning permission with its restricted planning condition confirms that there is no “fall-back” position and therefore, this unsustainable development in the open countryside is fundamentally contrary to Local Plan policy.

Other matters The other reasons for refusal relating to design and the lack of a legal agreement are still applicable and the justification for developer contributions is set out in the appended report and in Annex A to the Committee Papers.

The concerns raised by the Highways Officer were addressed during consideration of the previous application.

CONCLUSION

There has been no material change in circumstances since the previous application was revised a couple of months ago. There is no material justification to grant permission for this development. It is contrary in principle to a number of fundamental polices of principle as set out in the Hart Local Plan and any grant of planning permission would set an unjustified precedent which would undermine the objectives of the Local Plan. Approval therefore, would require referral to Council as a departure from the Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATION - Refuse Permission

REASONS FOR REFUSAL

1 In the absence of any overriding need which would justify an exception being made to policy, the proposal would result in unnecessary development outside any settlement boundary in the open countryside and represents an unwarranted intrusion into the countryside. As such the proposal is contrary to saved policies RUR2 and RUR3 in the adopted Hart District Local Plan (Replacement) 1996-2006 and the National Planning Policy Framework.

2 The introduction of four new houses on this site would lead to an unacceptable layout in the open countryside and be out of character in the area contrary to policy GEN1 Hart District Local Plan (Replacement) 1996-2006.

3 The proposed development would give rise to additional detrimental impacts on the transport infrastructure. As such the proposal is contrary to paragraph 4.6.1 and saved policy T16 in the adopted Hart District Local Plan (Replacement) 1996-2006.

4 The proposed development would exacerbate the existing deficiency in provision for leisure facilities within the vicinity of the site. As such the proposal is contrary to paragraph 4.6.1 in the adopted Hart District Local Plan (Replacement) 1996-2006 and Hart District Council's adopted Leisure Strategy

5 The proposed development would exacerbate the existing deficiency in provision for primary and secondary schooling in the vicinity of the site. As such the proposal is contrary to paragraph 4.6.1 in the adopted Hart District Local Plan (Replacement) 1996-2006.

INFORMATIVES

1 The Council works positively and proactively on development proposals to deliver sustainable development in accordance with the NPPF. In this instance: The application is unacceptable on a point of principle and unfortunately it was not possible to amend the plans. The applicant was fully briefed on the matter and the application debated at Planning Committee.

28 APPENDIX TO 14/01462/FUL – PREVIOUS REFUSAL

DELEGATED REPORT APPLICATION NO. 14/00689/FUL LOCATION James Farm Nursery West Green Road Hartley Wintney Hook RG27 8JL PROPOSAL Erection of four dwellings with associated car ports, parking and landscaping APPLICANT Mr & Mrs A Timpany CONSULTATIONS EXPIRY 2 May 2014 APPLICATION EXPIRY 20 May 2014 RECOMMENDATION Refuse Permission

29 APPENDIX TO 14/01462/FUL – PREVIOUS REFUSAL

BACKGROUND

The application site is located on West Green Road approximately 240m east of the Hartley Wintney Settlement Policy Boundary. It can therefore be described as open country side outside the defined settlement boundary.

The application site is currently an open area. It is located adjacent to a nursery school for Under 5's and the associated car park for that use. It is bounded by a field boundary to the north, open land to the east, West Green Road to the south and James Farm Cottages beyond the nursery to the west.

The existing access via the highway is shared with the nursery.

The nursery was granted planning permission in 2009 and is now built and running. Together with that permission, reference 08/02735/FUL permission was also granted for a music studio. This studio was to be located in the area currently subject of this application. In this regard there is an extant planning permission for a two storey music studio with classrooms above the studios on this site.

Historic plans show barns on the site these have now been demolished and the area is open in character.

PROPOSAL

The proposal is for four dwellings one detached to the rear of the site and three in a terrace arrangement to the east of the site facing the nursery. The houses are two storey brick and tile traditional design.

CONSULTEES RESPONSES

Hartley Wintney Parish Council No objection

Highways (Internal) Access into the site currently serves James Farm Nursery. The access is moved marginally, but for review purposes is taken as existing. The sight lines are similar to the existing access which are adequate for the location and road speed. As the traffic using the access will be increased I will require further details of the visibility splay provided and speed assumed. See email dated 12 May with additional plan. Bin stores are required to be accessible. There is adequate access to the rear garden for each plot. The applicant confirms that the bin stores are located in the rear garden for each plot. Transport Contribution This application will increase the number of multi-modal trips for the proposed development, and therefore a Transport Contribution should be directed toward scheme reference HDC0164 (Pedestrian & cycle link between Hook and Hartley Wintney) in the Hart Transport Statement adopted September 2012.

Calculation for Transport Contribution is as follows: 2 No. 2 bedroom property 2 x 4,014 = £8,028 1 No. 3 bedroom property 1 x 4,014 = £4,014 1 No. 4 bedroom property 1x5,730 = £5,730

Total contribution required = £17,772

No highway objection subject to:

' Provide details of visibility splay proposed and speed taken to justify splay. ' Swept path analysis produced for delivery vehicles accessing the site from both directions. ' Visitor parking bay removed and swept path analysis plan produced to show turning movements for a delivery/emergency vehicle. 30 APPENDIX TO 14/01462/FUL – PREVIOUS REFUSAL

' Confirmation of bin store location. ' Payment of Transport Contribution.

Environmental Health (Internal) the site was formally a farm and mill. As processes undertaken on farm sites have the potential to give rise to soil contamination it is recommended that the following condition is placed on the decision notice granting permission.

'Contaminated Land' condition on this development. Standard condition to be based upon D.C.L.G Model conditions parts 1 to 4.

The assessment is to be made available for approval by this Department prior to development.

2)Should any land contaminants or unexpected ground conditions be identified during site development Environmental Health Department should be notified accordingly.

Comments made in relation to the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework Paras 109 and 120.

Leisure (Internal) Using the table at 4.1 at for calculation purposes a contribution is requested in the total net sum of £4876 towards Hart District Council leisure infrastructure. i.e.

2 x 2 bedroom = £1696 1 x 3 bedroom = £1272 1 x 4 bedroom = £1908

4) Reference is made to The Leisure Strategy 2007 ' 2017 adopted by Council October 2007 and available on the Leisure and Environmental Promotion website. Individual sub paragraphs within the Strategy refer to specific elements of the Strategy. Annex documents relevant to this Leisure Strategy identify the tariff and projects listings as adopted by the Hart District Council (HDC) Cabinet on 2nd Dec 2010 and the HDC Cabinet on 1st November 2012 and thus make this request for a contribution valid.

For ease of review the contribution per dwelling is reproduced in table 4.1below and the contributions include a 5% District Council monitoring and collection fee.

Streetcare Officer (Internal) The properties will require a 240 litre black for residual and blue for recycling bin along with a 48 litre crate for glass.

All containers will need to be placed on West Green Lane for colelction on the correct collection day. the vehicle will not come into the access road.

NEIGHBOUR COMMENTS

Four letters of support, good design , good use of the site, adjoining occupier the Nursery also supports

POLICY AND DETERMINING ISSUES

Areas where there may a potential for contamination either from past activities of land fill but the extent of which may not be known. The development lies within 5km of the Thames Basins Heath Special Protection Area (SPA). This is an area that has been identified as being of international importance for the breeding, feeding, wintering or the migration of rare and vulnerable species of birds found within European Union countries. They are European designated sites, classified under the ‘Birds Directive 1979’ which provides enhanced protection given by the

31 APPENDIX TO 14/01462/FUL – PREVIOUS REFUSAL

Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) status all SPAs also hold. New residential development in particular must be strictly controlled within areas up to 5km from SPA's unless appropriate mitigation strategies have been put in place.

The development lies within 500m of a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI). SSSI's are designated by Natural England and are the country's very best wildlife and geological sites. They are legally protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, as amended by the Countryside and Rights of Way (CROW) Act 2000 and the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006.

Hart District Council Local Plan (Replacement) 1996 – 2006

CON8 - Trees, Woods & Hedgerows Amenity Value

GEN1 - General policy for development

GEN4 - General Design Policy

RUR2 - Devl. in open countryside General

RUR3 - Devl. in open countryside Control

T1 - Integrated Transport Network

T16 - Improvements Made Necessary by Dev

GEN9 - Contaminated Land

South East Plan 2006 – 2026

CONSIDERATIONS

The Principle of Development Design and Impact on Neighbouring Properties Access Contamination Other Matters

The Principle of Development The site is located approximately 240m from the Hartley Whitney settlement boundary. Saved Local Plan Policy RUR2 sets out that development in the open countryside, outside the defined settlement boundaries, will not be permitted unless the Local Planning Authority is satisfied that it is specifically provided for by other policies in the Local Plan.

Policy RUR3 sets out that development in the countryside which are provided for by other policies in the Plan will be permitted where they meet supporting criteria. There are no policies which specifically allows for this type of new residential development in the open countryside therefore if this application were to be approved it would need to be treated as a departure application. Accordingly this application has been advertised as a departure application.

On 2 May 2014 the Council published their position statement on the five year housing supply. Hart has a land supply of 5.85 years (with the minimum 5% buffer on the 5 year requirement).

In this instance there are no significant factors that would lead to the conclusion that new residential development should be permitted on this site. There is an extant permission for a community use however

32 APPENDIX TO 14/01462/FUL – PREVIOUS REFUSAL this cannot be compared to new residential use. The circumstances granting the previous permission were specific to a community use rather than a blanket allowance of development in open countryside. The significance of areas such as this one, are important in establishing a separation, distinguishing built up areas and villages from the surrounding open countryside.

As such the application site is outside any defined settlement boundary in the Hart Adopted Local Plan. The erection of new dwellings is contrary to the plan in line with the general presumption against new residential development in rural areas.

In line with the requirements of the NPPF Hart are able to demonstrate a five year housing land supply. Accordingly, in line with the NPPF it is considered that there is no compelling need to release additional sites for housing outside the defined settlement boundaries.

The site lies approximately 1.2 kilometres away from the High Street shops and amenities. In this respect the new occupiers could walk and cycle to shops and school facilities. The location is in theory accessible by other modes of transport not just a car. However this factor does not outweigh the existing designation of the site within open countryside and is therefore subject to all the relevant policies pertaining to that designation.

Design and Impact

Saved Policy GEN1 permits development where, amongst other requirements, the design, scale, massing, height, materials and layout, density and prominence of the proposal is in character with the local area and sympathetic to existing dwellings and surrounding properties.

The proposed layout for the four dwellings are an L shape with the detached dwelling at the top of the site and the three other dwellings in a terrace to the side facing on to the nursery. The layout does not respect the existing pattern of development of small cottage style houses fronting onto the highway. The layout at right angles to the highway allows for the parking area to be in the front of the three houses dominating the layout contrary to the aims and objectives of good design. The Design and Access Statement provided by the Applicants mentions that this layout has been based on traditional groupings of buildings in the countryside. The layout has been discussed with the Parish Council and it was felt rotating the houses to face the road was not felt to be successful. This layout out and the over dominance of parking would represent an intrusion into the countryside to an unacceptable level. The car park area would be screened to an extent by the landscaping strip to the front of the site however the development and the resultant necessary parking is considered over development of the plot.

The scale of the detached barn style house is considered acceptable further its design would blend in with the surrounding area and set back from the main road would not be readily visible. However the smaller terrace of three houses more modern in design will be very visible from the highway and surrounding area. The introduction of four houses on the site changes the character of the area to an unacceptable level.

The design and elevational treatment of the three smaller terraced dwellings do not entirely identify with the rural setting and are more traditional to urban areas or new housing developments.

The proposed dwellings would have a significantly increased visual impact in the countryside in a prominent position which would be contrary to policy GEN1 of Hart District Local Plan.

Four letters of support have been received from neighbouring properties. Given the proximity to neighbouring properties impact on amenities of neighbours is not an issue.

Policy CON8 states that where development is proposed which would affect trees, woodlands or hedgerows of significant landscape or amenity value planning permission will only be granted if these features are shown to be capable of being retained in the longer term.

33 APPENDIX TO 14/01462/FUL – PREVIOUS REFUSAL

Within the application site and in the surrounding area there are number of trees which are of varying age and quality which are not protected and are part of a woodland area. It is considered that these trees have woodland landscape amenity value. A Tree Survey prepared by David Sanger of the Aboricultural and Environmental Consultancy accompanies this application. It is considered that if this application was to be approved conditions relating to appropriate tree protection and landscaping would ensure trees are protected. CON8 could therefore be satisfied.

Access The technical highway concerns raised by the Officer have been addressed by the Applicant in their revised plans and email submitted on the 12 May 2014.

However when the Applicant learnt about the refusal recommendation, he has decided not to enter into a S106 or unilateral undertaking at this time. In this respect issues relating to necessary transport solutions are detailed below.

Contamination Environmental Health has advised that there is a potential for the land to be contaminated given its former use. In this respect they recommend conditions.

Other Matters Community Infrastructure and Mitigation In their Planning Statement the Applicants indicated a willingness to enter into a S106 Agreement. However on learning that the application was likely to be recommended for refusal the Applicants have not proceeded with a S106 Agreement. At the time of writing this report the applicants have not signed a S106 Agreement in accordance with relevant policy to provide necessary funding for community issues arising from the construction and occupation of new dwellings in the area.

Areas to be addressed include:-

Transport - In line with Policy T16 to mitigate the impacts of this development a contribution towards the North Hampshire Transport Strategy would be sought via a S106. This will ensure that the development mitigates its effect on the transport network and complies with the relevant policies of the Local Plan. The contribution sought by the Highways Authority towards transport schemes is based on the number of bedrooms and hence future occupiers and associated multi modal trips.

Leisure - At a District level the site lies in an area where visitor data indicates future occupants would be likely to visit Hitches Lane Country Park, Fleet Pond and the Basingstoke Canal. There are projects relating to each of these places. As such a contribution to mitigate effects of the development on strategic leisure provision is required.

At a Parish Level there are identified leisure projects which will mitigate the impact of the future occupiers of the development on the existing leisure facilities consequently it is appropriate to mitigate against the impacts of the development.

Due to the current shortage of school places in the catchment it is appropriate to seek a contribution towards secondary education.

Given the proximity to the Special Protection Area (SPA) it is appropriate to seek a contribution towards the maintenance, improvement and management of the Hitches Lane Suitable Alternative Natural Green Space (SANG) Land and the access management and monitoring of SPA Land in order to mitigate the impact of the new development.

34 APPENDIX TO 14/01462/FUL – PREVIOUS REFUSAL

CONCLUSION

While the proximity to the local settlement is noted on balance as this area has been designated as open countryside there is no overriding reason to justify an exception being made to allow housing on this site.

RECOMMENDATION - Refuse Permission

REASONS FOR REFUSAL

INFORMATIVES

1 The Council works positively and proactively on development proposals to deliver sustainable development in accordance with the NPPF. In this instance: - The applicant was advised of the necessary information needed to process the application. - The applicant was advised of the issues relating to community infrastructure/impact on a European site as part of the processing of the application and was asked to complete a Section 106 Planning Obligation to address these concerns and offered assistance in this. However, it was not completed within a reasonable period of time, of which the applicant was advised, and consequently planning permission was refused for the reason(s) set out above. - The applicant was advised of the issues relating to community infrastructure/impact on a European site as part of the processing of the application and was asked to complete a Section 106 Planning Obligation to address these concerns. They were offered assistance in drawing up the Obligation but declined to accept this offer.

COMMITTEE REPORT ITEM NUMBER: 103 APPLICATION NO. 14/00797/FUL LOCATION Land Adjacent To Ivy Cottage Lees Hill South Warnborough Hook Hampshire PROPOSAL Erection of detached three bedroom dwelling. APPLICANT Mr Tony Murley CONSULTATIONS EXPIRY 27 July 2014 APPLICATION EXPIRY 3 June 2014 PLANNING COMMITTEE Cllr Stephen Gorys WARD MEMBER CASE OFFICER Mrs Kerri Crutchfield RECOMMENDATION Grant Permission

Site Plan

Proposed section

Proposed ground floor plan

Proposed roof plan

BACKGROUND

This application was deferred at June’s Planning Committee to seek amended plans to overcome the overbearing effect and loss of light to the adjoining property to the west (The Old Riding School).

AMENDMENTS The following amendments have been made to the scheme: a) Reduced width of dwelling by 1 metre b) Moved the dwelling to the east to increase separation with The Old Riding School to 6 metres c) Lowered roof by approximately 650mm d) Reduced height and bulk of chimney e) Addition of hip to western gable end f) Replacement of balcony with Juliet balcony g) Minor changes to fenestration

CONSULTEE COMMENTS

South Warnborough Parish Council: No objections.

NEIGHBOUR REPRESENTATIONS

No letters have been received regarding the amended plans.

CONSIDERATION

1. Does the scheme address the reason for deferral- to avoid the overbearing effect and loss of light to The Old Riding School?

The Old Riding School lies to the west of the application site and is a single storey dwelling; it is on higher ground level than the application site therefore the ground floor windows are visible above the common boundary wall. The windows on the east side elevation of The Old Riding School are all secondary windows.

The applicant has provided a useful cross section drawing which shows the relationship between The Old Riding School and the proposed new dwelling. The amended scheme through its increased separation from The Old Riding School, and decreased roof height and massing avoids an overbearing effect and loss of light to The Old Riding School.

2. Other issues

The addition of a hip to the western gable end is regretted from a design perspective but this, amongst other changes, has been incorporated to avoid an overbearing effect and loss of light to the neighbour. On balance the overall design of the amended scheme is acceptable and would preserve the character of the Conservation Area.

CONCLUSION

The amended scheme, through its increased separation from The Old Riding School, and decreased roof height and massing avoids an overbearing effect and loss of light to this property and therefore addresses the reason for deferral from the June planning committee.

RECOMMENDATION – Grant permission

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building is satisfactory and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

3 Notwithstanding the details provided no development shall take place until large scale drawings of all the windows and doors, and glazing including type, materials, method(s) of opening, reveal details, and finishes, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved details, and shall be retained as such.

Reason: In the interests of the character and appearance of the area and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 in the Hart District Local Plan.

Reason: In the interests of maintaining the character of the building and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

5 No works shall commence on site until a Tree Survey, Arboricultural Implications Assessment, Arboricultural Method Statement and Tree Protection Plan have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall include root protections areas, foundation details, tree protection fencing and ground protection. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with the approved tree protection details.

The trees shall be retained and protected in accordance with the approved details for the duration of works on the site and for at least five years following occupation of the approved development, unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority. Any such vegetation immediately adjoining the site shall be protected on the site in a similar manner for the duration of works on the site.

Any such vegetation removed without the Local Planning Authority's consent, or which die or become, in the Authority's opinion, seriously damaged or otherwise defective during such period shall be replaced and/or shall receive remedial action as required by the Authority. Such works shall be implemented as soon as is reasonably practicable and, in any case, replacement planting shall be implemented by not later than the end of the following planting season, with planting of such size and species and in such number and positions as may be agreed with the Authority in writing.

Reason: To ensure the continuity of amenity afforded by existing vegetation and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

6 Notwithstanding the details provided no development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Details shall further include a proposed timetable for planting and laying out of hard surfaces and roads.

Reason: To ensure the provision of amenity afforded by appropriate landscaping and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

7 The development hereby permitted shall not begin until details of the photovoltaic panels have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To prevent the introduction of an undesirable development in this rural area and to satisfy saved policies GEN1 and RUR2 in the Hart District Local Plan.

8 Notwithstanding the details provided no development shall take place until further plans showing details of the existing and proposed ground levels and proposed finished roof ridge levels within the area covered by the application have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall thereafter be carried out in complete accordance with the details so approved.

Reason: To ensure that the works are carried out at suitable levels in relation to adjoining properties and highways, in the interest of visual amenity and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 in the Hart District Local Plan.

9 No works shall take place, including any works of demolition, until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall provide for: i. the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors ii. loading and unloading of plant and materials iii. storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development iv. the erection and maintenance of security hoarding including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing, where appropriate v. wheel washing facilities vi. measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction vii. a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction works

Reason: To protect the amenities of the area and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

10 No development shall take place until details of the provision of turning and parking for six vehicles have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved access, parking and turning facilities for vehicles for the new dwelling and Ivy Cottage shall be available prior to the occupation of the development hereby approved, and thereafter be retained for these purposes and access shall be maintained at all times to allow them to be used as such.

Reason: To ensure that the development is provided with adequate parking to prevent the likelihood of on-street car parking and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 in the Hart District Local Plan.

11 Notwithstanding the details provided no development shall take place until details of the provision of storage for four cycles have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The cycle storage facilities shall be weatherproof and accessible. The cycle storage shall be available prior to the occupation of the development hereby approved and thereafter be retained for these purposes. Reason: To ensure that the development is provided with adequate cycle storage and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 in the Hart District Local Plan. 44

12 Hard and soft landscaping works shall be fully carried out in accordance with the approved details, including the approved timetable, and to a reasonable standard in accordance with the relevant provisions of appropriate British Standards or other recognised codes of good practice. The Council shall be notified in writing of the completion of the scheme or any agreed phase of such scheme.

Reason: To ensure the provision of amenity afforded by appropriate landscaping and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

13 The photovoltaic panels shall be removed from the roof of the building when they become disused, or are no longer required for their designed purpose.

Reason: To prevent the introduction of an undesirable development in this rural area and to satisfy saved policies GEN1 and RUR2 in the Hart District Local Plan.

14 No development or demolition work or delivery of materials shall take place at the site except between 07:30 hours to 18:00 hours weekdays or 08:00 to 13:00 hours Saturdays. No development or demolition work or deliveries of materials shall take place on Sundays or Public Holidays.

Reason:To protect the amenity of nearby residential occupiers and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

15 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Development Order 1995 (as amended) (or any Order revoking or re-enacting this Order with or without modification) no additional first floor windows or openings shall be constructed in the dwelling hereby permitted.

Reason: In the interest of the privacy of the occupiers of the adjoining properties, the character of the local area, and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

16 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Development Order 1995 (as amended) (or any Order revoking or re-enacting this Order with or without modification) no enlargement of the dwelling house, as permitted by Class A, C or E of Part 1 of the Second Schedule of the Order, shall be constructed.

Reason: To ensure the retention of a satisfactory appearance to the development, to avoid overdevelopment of the site, to protect neighbour amenity, and to satisfy saved Policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

INFORMATIVE

1 The Council works positively and proactively on development proposals to deliver sustainable development in accordance with the NPPF. In this instance the applicant was advised of the issues relating to the design and the impact on neighbour amenity and submitted amended plans to address these concerns. The applicant was advised of the issues relating to community infrastructure as part of the processing of the application and was assisted to complete a Section 106 Planning Obligation to address these concerns. Consequently the application was considered acceptable.

COMMITTEE REPORT ITEM NUMBER: 104 APPLICATION NO. 14/00819/FUL LOCATION Mill Farm Mill Lane Yateley Hampshire GU46 7SS PROPOSAL Detached barn to provide secure storage for tractor and associated agricultural equipment. APPLICANT Mr John Illsley CONSULTATIONS EXPIRY 20 July 2014 APPLICATION EXPIRY 29 July 2014 PLANNING COMMITTEE Cllr G Cockarill WARD MEMBER CASE OFFICER Mrs Kerri Crutchfield RECOMMENDATION Grant Permission

Location plan

Proposed elevations

BACKGROUND

This application is reported to the Planning Committee only because the planning agent is a District Councillor.

SITE

The site relates to a piece of agricultural land surrounded by fir trees. The total land holding is 9.2 hectares; this mostly consists of open fields, apart from the front part of the site which contains the farmhouse and buildings associated with a wedding venue which was granted planning permission in 2008 (06/01423/MAJOR). The site lies within the Blackwater Valley Strategic gap.

PROPOSALS

The application is for the erection of a detached barn to provide secure storage for tractors and associated agricultural equipment. The barn would measure 30.5 metres by 12.2 metres with a shallow pitched roof which would measure 5 metres at the ridge falling to 4 metres at the eaves.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

06/01423/MAJOR- Redevelopment and change of use of existing cattery unit and adjoining barns to provide a facility for the holding of civil weddings and wedding receptions, together with associated car parking- permission granted.

CONSULTEES RESPONSES

Yateley Town Council:

No objection.

Highways (Internal):

No objection.

Environmental Health (Internal):

No objection.

Environment Agency Southeast:

No objection.

NEIGHBOUR REPRESENTATIONS

None.

POLICY AND DETERMINING ISSUES

Hart District Council Local Plan (Replacement) 1996 – 2006

GEN1 - General policy for development

GEN11 - Areas affected by flooding-poor drainage

RUR2 - Devl. in open countryside General

RUR3 - Devl. in open countryside Control

RUR11 - Agricultural Development

CON20 - Blackwater Gap

CONSIDERATIONS

1. Principle of development, impact on the character of the countryside and impact on strategic gap.

As the application site is within the open countryside, the proposal has to be assessed against saved policies RUR2 and RUR3 of the Hart District (Replacement) Local Plan 1996-2006 wherein the aim is to protect the countryside by minimising the impact of new development. Saved policies RUR2 and RUR3 allow new development in the open countryside provided that it is specifically provided for by other policies in the local plan and that it can be demonstrated that the proposal would not have a significant detrimental effect on the character and setting of the countryside.

Saved Policy RUR11 states that planning permission will be granted for development necessary for the purposes of agriculture, where the criteria of policy RUR3 are met. The supporting text states that the provision or replacement of agricultural buildings may be necessary to meet modern requirements of agriculture, and the Council will generally encourage this as a benefit to the rural economy. It is important that the need for such buildings can be justified, in order not to create large inappropriate buildings in the countryside.

The justification for the agricultural need for the development makes the following main points: (i) It is a land holding of twenty two acres (ii) The site consists of a large detached house and a "function" barn (Riverview Barn) that is used for weddings and corporate events, sixteen acres are set aside as hay meadow for the production of hay which is bailed and sold for winter cattle feed. (iii) Hay production is long established on this farm and the following equipment is used:

1 x John Dear Tractor. 1 x 5m Hedge Flail. 1 x Hay Trailer. 1 x Dump Truck. 1 x JCB Digging Machine. (for ditch clearing) 1 x 3m Ridged Harrow. 2 x Tractor Rotating Cultivators. 1 x 3m Tractor Grass cutting Deck. 1 x Fork Lift Truck.

(iv) There is no barn on this farm therefore barn is needed for secure storage of equipment, seasonal storage for hay bales, and to enable the purchase and secure storage of additional equipment i.e grass cutting, hay turning and spraying equipment. (v) The location for the proposed agricultural barn was chosen as it was the footprint of a previous wooden barn that was a total fire loss some time ago. It is also the only site on the farm that is not on the flood plain and it is well screened by mature conifers. (vi) The height and size are dictated by the size of equipment to be stored. (vii) The wedding Venue is a self contained business with ample storage for its own needs so the proposed agricultural barn will not be used by the Wedding Venue business.

The proposed design is typical of modern agricultural buildings seen in the countryside. It would not be visible from Mill Lane and there are no public footpaths within the local area. The only potential public view would be from the adjacent sports ground, but even this view would be screened by fir trees on the common boundary. Therefore it is considered that there would be no material harm to the character of the countryside.

As the proposal is for an agricultural building with a low ridge height it is considered that it would not diminish the strategic gap physically or visually and would retain the open nature of the Blackwater Valley in compliance with saved policy CON20.

*Flood Risk

The applicant has submitted a flood risk assessment. The Environment Agency has confirmed that the site adjoins the flood zone but does not lie within it and as such no flood mitigation measures are necessary.

CONCLUSION

The principle of an agricultural building is acceptable and the size, design and appearance of the proposed building are also acceptable. There would be no material harm to the character of the open countryside or the Blackwater Valley strategic gap. Therefore the proposed development complies with the relevant saved policies of the Hart District Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATION - Grant Permission

CONDITIONS

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

Reason: To ensure that the external appearance of the building(s) is/are satisfactory and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

3 The building shall be used for agricultural purposes only and shall be removed and the site reinstated to its former condition if at any time it ceases to be used for this purpose.

Reason: To prevent the introduction of an undesirable use in this rural area and to satisfy saved policies GEN1and RUR2 of the Hart District Local Plan.

4 Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning General Development Order 1995 (as amended) (or any Order revoking or re-enacting this Order with or without modification) there shall be no change of use of the building, as permitted by Class M of Part 3 of the Second Schedule of the Order.

Reason: To ensure protection of the countryside and to ensure sufficient parking and access arrangements.

INFORMATIVES

1 The applicant is advised to make sure that the works hereby approved are carried out with due care and consideration to the amenities of adjacent properties and users of any nearby public highway or other rights of way. It is good practice to ensure that works audible at the boundary of the site are limited to be carried out between 8am and 6pm Monday to Friday, 8am and 12 noon on Saturdays with no working on Sunday and Bank Holidays. The storage of materials and parking of operatives vehicles should be normally arranged on site.

2 The Council works positively and proactively on development proposals to deliver sustainable development in accordance with the NPPF. In this instance the applicant was advised to submit further justification on the agricultural need. Consequently the application was considered acceptable.

COMMITTEE REPORT ITEM NUMBER: 105 APPLICATION NO. 14/00971/HMC LOCATION 67 Wood Lane Fleet Hampshire GU51 3ED PROPOSAL Construction of a rear dormer window extension. APPLICANT Ms Rhianne McHale CONSULTATIONS EXPIRY 13 July 2014 APPLICATION EXPIRY 25 July 2014 PLANNING COMMITTEE Cllr Mrs Sharyn Wheale WARD MEMBER CASE OFFICER Mrs Helen Jones RECOMMENDATION Grant Permission

Site plan

Proposed rear and side elevations

Proposed ground floor plans

Proposed first floor plan

BACKGROUND

The application is brought to Committee at the request of Cllr Wheale who wishes members to consider the issues of overlooking and loss of privacy.

A previous application, reference 13/02604/HMC, was refused for the following reason:

'The bulk, design and appearance of the rear dormer is considered unsympathetic to the host dwelling and out of character with the neighbouring properties contrary to the design guidance in the Urban Characterisation and Density Study. The size and amount of glazing together with the opening French doors would cause a material loss of amenity to the neighbouring properties by actual and perceived overlooking of private garden areas and consequent loss of privacy. As such the proposal fails to comply with saved policies GEN1, GEN4 and URB16 in the Hart District Local Plan and advice in the NPPF.'

THE SITE

The property is a detached dwelling close to the end of cul de sac on the north-west side of the street. The dwelling was granted planning permission in 2012 to erect side, front and rear extensions and these works are currently nearing completion.

PROPOSAL

The proposal to install a dormer window into the rear of the new roof slope, converting this roof space to a bedroom and en-suite. The dormer would measure 2.2m wide 1.7m high and project beyond the plane of the roof by 1.9m. It would have a flat roof level with the top of the main flat roof. The rear elevation would have casement windows.

PLANNING HISTORY

12/02345/HOU - Erection of front, side and rear extensions over two floors. Approved May 2013

13/01707/PHHOU - Prior notification for the erection of a single storey rear extension. Planning approval not required October 2013

13/02604/HMC - Rear dormer. Refused February 2014

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

Fleet Town Council Objection It is required to show satisfactory parking spaces for 5 cars. Mass of building is over bearing becoming a 3 story building - This has a negative impact as it can be seen from the popular foot path near the pond. Out of keeping with surrounding area.

Furthermore:- Present drawing doesn't reflect building on site, and concern over height of brick wall and removal of vegetation to the detriment of street scene. Drawing of wall and landscape should be agreed by planners

[OFFICER NOTE – these points have been addressed by amended drawings]

NEIGHBOUR REPRESENTATIONS

Representations have been received from 4 households.

- Already substantially extended. - Glazed area reduced from previous scheme but still has a 'watchtower' effect. - Visible from the pathways around Fleet Pond. - Design is ugly, oversized, and totally inappropriate within the local setting. - Inadequate parking for a six-bed house. - Overlooking and loss of privacy - Appearance at the rear is already unsightly and this will make it worse - Overdeveloped and out of keeping with the surrounding properties. - Large, ugly flat roof - Light pollution from skylights - Visually intrusive as air conditioning units, solar panels, aerials and a satellite dish recently added

POLICY AND DETERMINING ISSUES

Hart District Council Local Plan (Replacement) 1996 – 2006

GEN1 - General policy for development

GEN4 - General Design Policy

URB1 - Definition of Areas

URB16 - Extensions

T14 - Transport and Development

CONSIDERATIONS

Principle of development

Normally rear dormers would not require an application for planning permission as they would be 'permitted development' under Class B of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development Order 1995 (as amended). However, this is dependant on the total additions to the original roof not exceeding 50 cubic metres (for a detached house). As the roof of the application property has already been extended by some 57 cubic metres under the previously approved application (12/02345/HOU), an application for planning permission is required.

Design and appearance, character of the area

The proposed dormer has been considerably reduced in size from the previous refused scheme and now sits reasonably comfortably in the roof slope and no longer has a 'top heavy' appearance. The width of the window itself is only 0.1m wider than the French doors below and is more in proportion to the main house. It would no longer be particularly prominent when viewed across the rear gardens from Fleet Pond. Therefore, as it would be located at the rear, the design and appearance would be acceptable and would not have any further adverse impact on the character of the area. As such the proposal would overcome the previous reason for refusal in terms of design and appearance.

Neighbour amenity The area of glass in this scheme has been reduced from 7.3 square metres to 2 square metres. This style and size is more usual and any views would be at an oblique angle and more restricted than in the previous

58 scheme. There are already clear views of these gardens from the first floor windows and it is considered that the views from the second floor would not be significantly different. The reduction in glazing and the removal of the balconies has also reduced the perception of overlooking.

As such there would be no unacceptable loss of amenity to these neighbours and the previous reason for refusal, in terms of loss of privacy, both perceived and actual, has been overcome.

Parking

The Councils parking standards require that 3.5 spaces should be provided for a 4 or more bed-roomed house in Zone 2. The 0.5 space is for visitor parking and can be provided off site if this is considered appropriate.

The Councils standards do not differentiate between 4 or more bed roomed houses. Three spaces are being provided on site, which was considered adequate and approved under 12/02345/HOU. This situation has not altered and there is still visitor parking available on Wood Lane. Therefore the proposal complies with saved polices GEN1 and T14 in this regard.

CONCLUSION

The dormer would be in keeping with the character of the property and there would be no material loss of amenity to neighbours. Therefore the proposal would comply with the relevant saved policies of the Local Plan and has overcome the previous reason for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION - Grant Permission

CONDITIONS

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

2 The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match in type, colour, texture and bond, those on the existing building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory visual relationship of the new development with the existing building and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

INFORMATIVES

2 The Council works positively and proactively on development proposals to deliver sustainable development in accordance with the NPPF. In this instance the applicant was advised of the issues relating to discrepancies between the plans during the processing of the application and submitted amended drawings to correct these.

COMMITTEE REPORT ITEM NUMBER: 106 APPLICATION NO. 14/01075/HMC LOCATION Hatch Farm Hazeley Heath Hartley Wintney Hook Hampshire RG27 8NB PROPOSAL Erection of a detached double garage with attached workshop APPLICANT Mr Alan Woolford CONSULTATIONS EXPIRY 7 June 2014 APPLICATION EXPIRY 3 July 2014 PLANNING COMMITTEE Cllr Tim Southern WARD MEMBER CASE OFFICER Mr Tim Dunkley RECOMMENDATION Grant Permission

Site plan

Elevations

Floor plan

BACKGROUND

This application is only being bought to Planning Committee because the agent is a District Councillor.

THE SITE

Hatch Farm is a traditionally styled detached dwelling on the western side of B3011, in between the junctions of Plough Lane and Red Hill.

PROPOSALS

The proposal is for a single storey detached double garage with attached workshop. The garage would measure some 6m by 6m with a 2m by 4.5m workshop on the side. The total width at the rear therefore would be some 8m. The proposed building would be some 4.7m high at the ridge and approximately 2.1m at the eaves. It would be located to the south west of other outbuildings on the outside of the driveway in an area which is currently lawn adjacent to mature hedgerows.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

07/00883/FUL, 08/00901/FUL & 10/00406/FUL are recent applications for extensions to the dwelling for a two storey side extension, conservatory, porch, chimney and garden room to replace conservatory.

CONSULTEES RESPONSES

Mattingley Parish Council No objection

Conservation/Listed Buildings Officer (Internal) No objection.

County Archaeologist No objection

NEIGHBOUR REPRESENTATIONS

None.

POLICY AND DETERMINING ISSUES

Hart District Council Local Plan (Replacement) 1996 – 2006

GEN1 - General policy for development

RUR2 - Devl. in open countryside General

RUR3 - Devl. in open countryside Control

RUR24 - Renovation Extension Extg Dwellings

The main considerations are the principle of development, whether there is a need for additional development, the design of the proposal and impact on the character of the dwelling, impact of the proposed development on the open countryside.

CONSIDERATIONS

1. The principle of development

The development of buildings within the curtilage of the dwelling which are ancillary to the primary use of the dwelling is acceptable providing the proposal is in accordance with policies of the local plan and guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

A need for additional development

The NPPF encourages the reuse of existing buildings and brownfield land. The site has a number of outbuildings that have a total floor area of approximately 248m2 and these buildings are substantially built. However, the applicants claims that the barns are used for storage of the equipment necessary for the management of the site. They also claim to use the buildings as garages for their modern cars. Therefore it could be argued that these outbuildings are already utilised and if they were used for other purposes then additional buildings would need to be added to meet the need. Furthermore, the majority of these outbuildings are less than 6m deep except for a section to the rear of the southern stable block which has an extended area of some 2m. A modern single garage should be 6m x 3m, which corresponds with the proposed garage. Therefore the majority of these barns are too shallow to meet those standards.

2. The design of the proposal and impact on the character of the dwelling

The proposed garage and workshop has been designed to match the features and materials of the surrounding outbuildings. It is also considered acceptable by the Conservation Officer that the impact of the structure is considered to be minimal and would not be contrary to legalisation.

3. Impact of the proposed development on the open countryside

The proposed development is to the south west of the outbuildings on the outside of the existing access road, located behind some mature hedging. The design and scale is in keeping with the surrounding outbuildings and its location is generally within the overall group of buildings. It is a relatively small building in relation to the surrounding outbuildings and as such it is considered the proposed building would be viewed as part of the overall mass of buildings and would not have a significant harmful effect on the countryside.

CONCLUSION

The applicant demonstrates that the existing buildings are appropriately used and that there is a need for additional storage space. The proposed development is in keeping with the local character does not have a significant detrimental effect on the character and setting of the countryside by virtue of its siting, size and prominence in the landscape. The existing landscaping satisfactorily reduces the impact of the proposal on the surrounding countryside and the proposal would not materially change the impact of the dwelling on the countryside. It is considered, therefore, that the proposed erection of detached double garage with attached workshop is in accordance with the NPPF and saved policies GEN1, RUR2, RUR3 and RUR24 of the Hart District Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATION - Grant Permission

CONDITIONS

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

2 The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted shall match in type, colour and texture those on the adjoining building. 65

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory visual relationship of the new development with the adjoining building and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan

INFORMATIVES

1 The Council works positively and proactively on development proposals to deliver sustainable development in accordance with the NPPF. In this instance the applicant was advised of the issues relating to demonstrating a need for additional buildings during the processing of the application and submitted further supporting information to address these concerns. Consequently the application was considered acceptable.

COMMITTEE REPORT ITEM NUMBER: 107 APPLICATION NO. 14/01289/FUL LOCATION Clare Park Private Retirement Residences Ltd Clare Park Farnham Surrey PROPOSAL Proposed General Managers Bungalow in the grounds of Clare Park House APPLICANT Clare Park Private Retirement Residences Limited CONSULTATIONS EXPIRY 15 August 2014 APPLICATION EXPIRY 5 August 2014 PLANNING COMMITTEE Cllr Stephen Gorys WARD MEMBER CASE OFFICER Mr Chris French RECOMMENDATION Decisions Deferred

Location plan

Proposed layout

Combined plan

BACKGROUND

The application does not accord with the Local Plan and therefore requires referral to Full Council should Planning Committee be minded to grant planning permission.

SITE DESCRIPTION

The site forms part of Clare Park Private Retirement Residence. Clare Park is a retirement community for active retired people set in open countryside with the site being located approximately 1.5km from the settlement of Crondall.

The site is surrounded by agricultural fields to the east and west with Clare Park Hospital located to the north. Access is from Dippenhall Street via a lengthily driveway. Clare Park House is a Grade II Listed Building sited to the north of the site, with existing residents and manager's bungalows to the rear and eastern side of the listed building. Parking is provided to the western side of the listed building. The grounds of the site form part of a listed park and garden.

Whilst the whole of the site relates to the retirement residents use, the application site for the purposes of this application is the part of the site to the south west of Clare Park House.

PROPOSAL

This application seeks planning permission for the erection of a general managers bungalow and includes the creation of an access through the existing car park, the provision of 2 parking spaces and the creation of a private residential garden. The bungalow would have a total floor space of 85 square metres, a mono pitched green roof to a height of approximately 4 metres, a total width of 6 metres and a total depth of approximately 17 metres.

CONSULTEES RESPONSES

Crondall Parish Council

The applicant has submitted a well thought out design in the grounds of the listed building.

Any contributions to be spent within the Crondall Parish. Existing Managers bungalow to be used as a residential unit.

Highways (Internal)

No highway objection subject to payment of transport contribution of £4,014

Conservation/Listed Buildings Officer (Internal)

No Objection The position of the bungalow is to the west of the site, on the opposite side of the road to the main house. It is then set to the rear of this plot. The new tree planting in front of the building to screen views from the main house, is welcomed. Additional tree planting along the road to further screen views should be considered.

Landscape Architect (Internal)

Objection Would be harmful to the setting of the listed building Would be harmful to the landscape to the front of the listed building

Tree Officer (Internal) No objection to standard tree protection conditions, drainage and pre commencement and site monitoring condition:

Natural England

No Objection.

NEIGHBOUR REPRESENTATIONS

None

POLICY AND DETERMINING ISSUES

Listed Buildings are designated by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. In considering whether to grant listed building consent for any works, special regard must be taken of the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses (Section 16(2) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 ).

Hart District Council Local Plan (Replacement) 1996 – 2006

GEN1 - General policy for development

RUR2 - Devl. in open countryside General

RUR13 - Business in open countryside Exceptions

CON8 - Trees, Woods & Hedgerows Amenity Value

CONSIDERATIONS

MAIN ISSUES

1. Principle of development and impact on the countryside 2. Impact on character and appearance and the heritage asset 3. Impact on the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining properties 4. Impact on the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area 5. Impact on parking and highway safety 6. Impact on trees

1. Principle of development and impact on the countryside

This site is within the countryside as identified on the proposals map of the Hart District Local Plan (as saved). Saved Local Plan Policy RUR2 permits development provided that it is specifically provided for by other policies in the local plan, and that it does not have a significant detrimental effect on the character and setting of the countryside by virtue of its siting, size and prominence in the landscape.

This site currently employs the equivalent of 30 full time members of staff. Furthermore, the submission indicates that the relocation of the managers bungalow is to allow for the redevelopment of the rear of the site to increase the residents accommodation. The wider redevelopment would lead to the creation of the equivalent of 5 new fulltime posts. Saved Local Plan Policy RUR13 (business in open countryside) seeks to permit business development in the open countryside, subject to certain criteria, in line with policy RUR2 the principle of development is specifically provided for by other policies of the saved local plan.

The NPPF also encourages an emphasis on supporting economic growth in rural areas in order to create jobs and support sustainable growth of all types of business and enterprise in rural areas, and seeks to ensure that development recognises and responds to the intrinsic character of the countryside.

For the development to comply with Policy RUR13 (business in open countryside) the development would need to comply with the following provisions:

RUR 13 i)The site already includes buildings from a previous use

The site already include buildings from the current use, these are primarily to the north of the site between Clare Park House and Clare Park Hospital. The development would comply with this part of Policy RUR13.

RUR 13 ii)The proposal is well related in location and design to the surrounding countryside and has no detrimental effects on landscape, ecology or historical features

A fully detailed landscape appraisal has been submitted with the application including drawings showing views of the site across the open countryside. These demonstrate that the building would be partly screened by planting but nevertheless, the bungalow would be visible from the surrounding area.

The Council's Landscape Architect has raised objection to the proposal on the grounds of the harm within the historic setting of the Listed Building. However, Council's Historic Buildings Officer does not share that concern and raises no objection. Therefore, having regard to the Historic Buildings Officer comments the assessment is that the location would not be to the detriment of the listed building or historical merit.

RUR 13 iii)The proposal will not cause serious harm to the character and amenities of the area;

Whilst no objections are raised to the design response of the building, the proposal would represent the intrusion of built form into parts of the site where there are currently no buildings. However, the development would still be seen in the context of the other buildings within the complex that comprise Clare Park and in itself this does not cause sufficient harm to the overall character and appearance of the site.

RUR13 iv)The site is well contained by clear boundaries

This site is well contained by clear boundaries, with the site distinguishable from the surrounding agricultural fields.

RUR13 v)The scale of development, either on its own or cumulatively with other proposals in the area, would not result in an imbalance between work force and jobs in the parish, leading to net in commuting to a rural area.

The current proposal is for a replacement manager’s bungalow. It would not result in an imbalance between work force and jobs in the parish, leading to net in commuting to a rural area.

Summary of the impact on countryside

It is recognised that there is a need for manager's accommodation to be provided on site, and that moving the bungalow allows for expansion of the use within the more developed part of the site. However, the bungalow in the location proposed would intrude to some extend into the countryside. However, in this instance the impact is acceptable as the proposed development would not adversely affect the setting of a heritage asset.

2. Impact on the character and appearance of the heritage asset

The proposed bungalow would be sited approximately 40 metres from the Clare Park House a grade II listed building and within the grounds of the listed park and garden. The Council's Conservation and Historic Buildings Officer raises no objection to the proposal.

The proposal would not conflict with the objectives of the NPPF with regards to the impact on the significance of the Heritage asset.

3. Impact on the amenities of the occupiers of adjoining properties

This is an isolated site in the countryside with the proposed bungalow sited adjacent to agricultural fields. The proposed development would not give rise to an adverse impact on the amenities of occupants of neighbouring residential properties.

4. Impact on the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area

This site is located outside of 400 metres but within 5k of the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (SPA). Any application that results in a net increase in residential accommodation would need to mitigate its impact on the SPA.

In this instance the applicant does not intend to have two managers bungalows and has confirmed that they would not convert the existing managers bungalow to additional residents accommodation until such a time that they implement any permission for the redevelopment of the wider site. The applicant is willing to enter into an legal agreement to ensure that existing manager's bungalow is not converted to habitable accommodation until such time that appropriate mitigation is secured. Natural England has confirmed that so long as the existing manager's bungalow would no longer be able to be used for residential purposes they would object to the proposal.

Subject to the completion of the Legal Agreement the development would not result in a net increase in residential accommodation and does not have an impact on the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area.

5. Impact on parking and highway safety

The proposed bungalow provides parking for two vehicles. The Council's Highways Engineer has confirmed that the development provides for appropriate parking and access arrangements. Whilst it is noted that the creation of these spaces would result in the loss of two spaces within the existing car park, this is a replacement bungalow and on this basis there would not be an increase in demand for onsite parking.

6. Impact on trees

The proposed development would result in some tree loss and replacement planting along the site boundary. The Councils Arboricultural Officer has reviewed the details of the application and the trees proposed for removal and has confirmed that no objections are raised, subject to appropriate conditions.

The proposed development would not adversely impact on significant trees and would accord with the objectives of policy CON8 of the Hart District Local Plan (as saved).

CONCLUSION

With regards to the impact of the development on the listed building and the listed park and garden, it is considered, that the proposed development would not give rise to harm to the heritage asset and would comply with the objectives of the NPPF in this regard.

The principle of development in the countryside that helps support a prosperous rural economy is supported. However, the proposed siting of the bungalow would result in the spread of built form across the site. This does not accord with the objectives of Policies RUR2 and RUR13 of the Hart District Local Plan (as saved).

RECOMMENDATION – GRANT subject to Planning Obligation

A Subject to the receipt of no substantial objections by 15 August 2014 and the prior completion of a Planning Obligation to secure that the existing managers dwelling is not used as a dwelling once the proposed new manager’s dwelling is occupied the Head of Regulatory Services is authorised to GRANT permission subject to the following conditions :

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

2. No development shall take place until details and samples of all external surfaces have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall only be carried out in accordance with approved details.

Reason To ensure that the external appearance of the building(s) is/are satisfactory and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

3. Prior to the commencement of development a BS:5837 report shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority once agreed the development shall at all times be completed in accordance with the agreed details.

Reason To ensure that the construction is undertaken in an appropriate way in relation to trees to be retained.

4. No development shall take place, including any works of demolition, until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall provide for: (i) the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors (ii) loading and unloading of plant and materials (iii) storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development (iv) wheel washing facilities (v) measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction (vi) a scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction works

5. o development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Hard details shall include, as appropriate, proposed finished levels and/or contours, means of enclosure of unbuilt open areas, car parking layouts, other vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas, hard surfacing materials and artefacts and structures (e.g. furniture, refuse or other storage units, signage, lighting, external services, manholes, etc.). Soft landscape details shall include planting plans, written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant establishment), schedules of plants, noting species, planting sizes and proposed densities where appropriate. Details shall further include a proposed timetable for planting and laying out of hard surfaces and roads.

Reason To ensure the provision of amenity afforded by appropriate landscaping and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

1. Hard and soft landscaping works shall be fully carried out in accordance with the approved details, including the approved timetable, and to a reasonable standard in accordance with the relevant provisions of appropriate British Standards or other recognised codes of good practice. The Council shall be notified in writing of the completion of the scheme or any agreed phase of such scheme.

Reason To ensure the provision of amenity afforded by appropriate landscaping and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

B In the event that the Planning Obligation is not progressed satisfactorily, the Head of Regulatory Services is authorised to use his discretion and REFUSE permission for the following reasons:

1 The site is located within 5km of the Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) which forms part of the Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (SPA). In the absence of any evidence that the test of no alternatives under Regulation 62 of The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 can be satisfied, or evidence that there are grounds of overriding public interest, the proposed development, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, would be likely to have a significant adverse effect on the SPA. As such the proposal is contrary to saved policies CON1 and CON2 in Hart District Local Plan, and policy NRM6 in the South East Plan.

2 The proposed development would exacerbate the existing deficiency in provision for leisure facilities within the vicinity of the site. As such the proposal is contrary to paragraph 4.6.1 in the adopted Hart District Local Plan (Replacement) 1996-2006 and Hart District Council's adopted Leisure Strategy, and the Council's Community Infrastructure Policy.

4 The proposed development would exacerbate the existing deficiency in provision for primary and secondary schooling in the vicinity of the site. As such the proposal is contrary to paragraph 4.6.1 in the adopted Hart District Local Plan (Replacement) 1996-2006, and the Council's Community Infrastructure Policy.

COMMITTEE REPORT ITEM NUMBER: 108 APPLICATION NO. 14/01354/HMC LOCATION 23 Fleet Road Fleet Hampshire GU51 3QF PROPOSAL Two storey side extension APPLICANT Mr G Pullen CONSULTATIONS EXPIRY 25 July 2014 APPLICATION EXPIRY 6 August 2014 PLANNING COMMITTEE Cllr Sharyn Wheale WARD MEMBER CASE OFFICER Mr Tim Dunkley RECOMMENDATION Grant Permission

Site Plan

Proposed ground floor plan

BACKGROUND

This application is bought to Planning Committee because the neighbour is an Officer of the Council who could influence the decision.

THE SITE

The property is a 3 bed semi-detached dwelling on the junction with Fleet Road and Darset Avenue. It comprises a corner plot which is wide at the front and tapers in as it goes back. There is a mature silver birch at the front approximately 8m from the dwelling. Running along the length of the southern boundary is a mature hedge which is around 1.8m high and 30m in length. The front boundary is a chain attached to wooden posts.

There is a large shed to the side of the house. The garden is laid mostly to lawn with a small palm tree part way down. There is another shed at the rear of the garden.

PROPOSAL

The proposal is for a two storey side extension that would create a 5 bed home with a large family room on the ground floor and a cloakroom entrance hall at the front. It would project southwards by approximately 3.6m requiring the removal of the existing shed.

The front fenestration details include a large casement window on the first floor, similar to the large window on the existing upper floor and two smaller casement windows on the ground floor, illuminating the entrance hall and the cloak room.

At the rear the proposed includes a large casement window on the first floor to match the existing and French doors on the ground floor leading to the garden. There is an additional window proposed on the south/side elevation which would illuminate the living room.

The proposed parking arrangements include the existing garage and space at the rear and an additional 2 spaces at the rear of the garden accessed directly off the Darset Avenue.

CONSULTEES RESPONSES

Fleet Town Council Poor design, negative impact on the street scene due to the front elevation being out of keeping with existing structure (Addition of a window in the new hall area could work) ' concern that there is no natural light in the hall area. Concern over parking arrangement.

Highways (Internal) No highway objection subject to: Existing hedge trimmed to achieve a 2m x 40m visibility splay in both directions at the point of the new access. 2 new parking bays are minimum 4.8m in length and wholly within private land ownership.

NEIGHBOUR REPRESENTATIONS

One neighbour comment raising the following points: Side extension considered a little too wide. Main concern is the position of the parking space shown in the rear garden. There is no vehicular access to the site at the rear at present and to gain access it means driving over land which belongs to Thames Water

Request that access to the proposed parking space should be from the side, directly off Darset Avenue rather than from the rear to avoid any conflict.

POLICY AND DETERMINING ISSUES

Hart District Council Local Plan (Replacement) 1996 – 2006

GEN1 - General policy for development

URB16 - Extensions

CON8 - Trees, Woods & Hedgerows Amenity Value

CONSIDERATIONS

The main considerations are the principle of the proposed development, the size, scale and design of the proposal, the impact of the proposed extension on the street scene, the impact of the proposal on highway safety and the impact of the proposal on the silver birch.

The proposed extension is relatively wide. However, it is on a relatively large plot and even though the site tapers to the rear there is some 2m gap between the corner of the proposal and the boundary. No.36 is set down and back from the original dwelling and that the immediate neighbour, No 21 is not set down or back. Whilst, it is accepted that setting an extension slightly behind the original elevation or roof height can provide a break between the old and the new, it is evident that the extension at No. 21 works perfectly well and demonstrates that setting back is not necessary. Therefore the size and scale of the proposed extension is acceptable.

With regards to the design, the proposed extension follows the features of the original dwelling, such as materials and on the whole window sizes. Amended drawings show two small windows which align with the first floor window and provide a more balanced elevation. In light of this the proposal is suitable in terms of the design.

The application site is on a corner plot and is set reasonably far back from the main road. The proposed extension follows the same line of the existing building and does not project any further towards the main road. There is also a mature silver birch on the corner of the site which provides interest and breaks up the street scene. On the southern boundary leading into Darset Avenue is the mature hedgerow which is to be part removed to provide a suitable access for parking. Whilst it is unfortunate to lose this part of the hedgerow, the majority of the hedgerow would be retained. Therefore the proposal is not considered to cause harm to the street scene.

The parking arrangements were amended in light of the Highways comments and the concern of the neighbours. These amendments propose sufficient parking. Therefore, subject to a condition requiring further details on the parking arrangement and visibility splays, the proposed parking arrangement is acceptable.

The only other consideration relates to the impact of the proposal on the Silver Birch in the front garden. Whilst it is considered that this tree is a suitable distance from the proposed development it is also considered that this tree is important in the street scene and should be retained. In order to ensure that no harm comes to the tree during the construction process a condition requesting tree protection measures will be added to the decision notice.

CONCLUSION

In light of the above the proposed development for a two storey side extension would be appropriate in terms of its size, scale and design; it would not cause harm to the street scene and would not be detrimental to highway safety and is in accordance with saved policies GEN1, URB 16 and CON 8 of the Hart District Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATION - Grant Permission

CONDITIONS

1 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended).

Reason: To ensure a satisfactory visual relationship of the new development with the existing building and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

3 No work shall take place until details of the means of protection, including method statements where appropriate, for all trees, hedges, hedgerows and shrubs on site, unless indicated as being removed, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The trees, hedges, hedgerows and shrubs shall be retained and protected in accordance with the approved details for the duration of works on the site and for at least five years following occupation of the approved development, unless otherwise agreed by the Local Planning Authority. Any such vegetation immediately adjoining the site shall be protected on the site in a similar manner for the duration of works on the site. Any such vegetation removed without the Local Planning Authority's consent, or which die or become, in the Authority's opinion, seriously damaged or otherwise defective during such period shall be replaced and/or shall receive remedial action as required by the Authority. Such works shall be implemented as soon as is reasonably practicable and, in any case, replacement planting shall be implemented by not later than the end of the following planting season, with planting of such size and species and in such number and positions as may be agreed with the Authority in writing.

Reason: To ensure the continuity of amenity afforded by existing vegetation and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 of the Hart District Local Plan.

4 The existing hedge to be trimmed to achieve a 2m x 40m visibility splay in both directions at the point of the new access. The 2 new parking bays are to be a minimum 4.8m in length and wholly within private land ownership.

Reason: In the interest of highway safety and to satisfy saved policy GEN1 in the Hart District Local Plan.

5 The proposed parking area shall be made of porous materials, or provision shall be made to direct run- off water from the hard surface to a permeable or porous area or surface within the curtilage of the dwellinghouse.

Reason: To reduce the likelihood of flash flooding.

INFORMATIVES

1 The Council works positively and proactively on development proposals to deliver sustainable development in accordance with the NPPF. In this instance the applicant was advised of the issues relating to windows on the front elevation and parking during the processing of the application and submitted amended plans to address these concerns. Consequently the application was considered acceptable.

2 You may require Building Regulations Consent and we advise that you should contact Building Control on 01252 774422.

3 Works affecting the highway need consent from the Area Surveyor, please contact Hampshire Highways on 0845 850 4422.

4 The applicant is advised to make sure that the works hereby approved are carried out with due care and consideration to the amenities of adjacent properties and users of any nearby public highway or other rights of way. It is good practice to ensure that works audible at the boundary of the site are limited to be carried out between 8am and 6pm Monday to Friday, 8am and 12 noon on Saturdays with no working on Sunday and Bank Holidays. The storage of materials and parking of operatives vehicles should be normally arranged on site.

5 Should any land contaminants or unexpected ground conditions be identified during site development the Environmental Health Department should be notified accordingly.