Appeal Decision 4/11 Eagle Wing Temple Quay House 2 the Square Site Visit Made on 9 November 2009 Temple Quay Bristol BS1 6PN

The Planning Inspectorate Appeal Decision 4/11 Eagle Wing Temple Quay House 2 The Square Site visit made on 9 November 2009 Temple Quay Bristol BS1 6PN 0117 372 6372 by Keith Manning BSc (Hons) BTP MRTPI email:[email protected] ov.uk Decision date: an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government 9 December 2009 Appeal Ref: APP/B3410/A/09/2109546 Parkside, 73 Stone Road, Uttoxeter, Staffordshire ST14 7QP • The appeal is made under section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against a refusal to grant outline planning permission. • The appeal is made by Mr H & Mrs J Williams against the decision of East Staffordshire Borough Council. • The application Ref OU/15701/008/AG/PO, dated 1 May 2009, was refused by notice dated 23 June 2009. • The development proposed is the demolition of existing dwelling house and residential development with site access. Application for costs 1. An application for costs was made by Mr H & Mrs J Williams against East Staffordshire Borough Council. This application is the subject of a separate Decision. Procedural Matters 2. The application is in outline with all matters reserved except for access. 3. A unilateral undertaking dated 28 September 2009 has been completed obliging the owners of the site, as defined, to pay the County Council a sum of money in respect of education provision in the area. Decision 4. I allow the appeal, and grant planning permission for the demolition of existing dwelling house and residential development with site access at Parkside, 73 Stone Road, Uttoxeter, Staffordshire ST14 7QP in accordance with the terms of the application, Ref OU/15701/008/AG/PO, dated 1 May 2009, and the plans submitted with it, subject to the conditions set out in Annex A hereto: Main issues 5. I consider the main issues to be: • The effect of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area with particular regard to the scale and density of the existing housing and the street scene of Stone Road; and • The effect of the proposed development on highway safety. Appeal Decision APP/B3410/A/09/2109546 Reasons 6. The appeal site is previously-developed land within the Uttoxeter development boundary. Its surroundings are residential in character and the Council does not contest the principle of redeveloping the existing dwelling and the land within its curtilage. 7. Stone Road is characterised by a variety of properties, including terraced houses close to the road and detached dwellings, the latter including the appeal site and The Mount, its neighbour to the north. The site is opposite the junction with New Street and its southern boundary coincides with Colne Mount, a street that gives access to a small terrace of houses behind and broadly speaking at right angles to the terrace of houses fronting Stone Road immediately to the south. The properties in New Street are predominantly terraced and close to the pavement, whereas those north of the junction are mainly semi-detached and detached houses with front gardens. 8. Owing to its location, the appeal site is at a point of transition between a densely developed and enclosed urban environment and a less dense area that is rather more suburban in character, albeit characterised by substantial boundary definition and the presence at the back of pavement of The Mount, features that tend to prolong the sense of enclosure experienced in Stone Road in the vicinity of its junction with New Street. That sense of enclosure away from the terraced housing is heightened by the position and maturity of trees associated with certain of the larger properties including some on the frontage of the appeal site. The front garden of the appeal site, although substantial, gives the visual impression of being rather enclosed and secluded owing to the existing wall and hedge, but it is a visually significant front garden nonetheless. 9. PPS3 Housing states clearly that the density of existing development should not dictate that of new housing by stifling change or requiring replication of existing style or form. In any event, I consider, in view of the circumstances of the site at the point of transition between residential environments of differing character, that there is a genuine choice to be made between equally valid responses to the design objective set out in PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development of achieving design that is appropriate in context. Essentially, that choice is between increasing the sense of enclosure currently experienced, the response implicit in the material supporting the outline planning application subject to this appeal, and the retention of a more open frontage, the response that the Council states it would prefer. 10. To my mind, given the circumstances of the site, either approach could be successfully deployed as the change between the high density housing to the south and the lower density housing to the north is simply a reflection of the manner in which development has occurred but without any strong design rationale derived from the form and function of the urban area or the topography or any notable historic or architectural influence. 11. Bearing in mind the national policy context provided by PPS3 the key question, therefore, is whether the appellants’ preference would in practice be harmful to the character and appearance of the area, the street scene in particular, so as to conflict with the intentions of the development plan as the Council maintains that it does: In addressing that question, it must also be borne in mind that 2 Appeal Decision APP/B3410/A/09/2109546 this is an outline application and that appearance, landscaping, layout, and scale are reserved for subsequent approval. Nevertheless, up to 8 houses are proposed and bearing in mind the indicative layout provided, it must also be assumed that a development which includes a terrace of houses closely fronting Stone Road would be subsequently worked up in detail at reserved matters stage on the basis that the indicated approach was, in principle, considered to be acceptable. Circular 01/2006 states that a basic level of information on layout, even if reserved, is required. 12. Policy regarding the main issue cited by the Council includes saved policies BE1 and H6 of the East Staffordshire Local Plan, saved policy D2 of the Staffordshire and Stoke-on-Trent Structure Plan and policies QE1 and QE3 of the Regional Spatial Strategy. The relevant intentions of those policies essentially concern the maintenance and promotion of environmental quality and the achievement of design appropriate to its context. At national level such intentions are emphasised in PPS1 and the Council’s East Staffordshire Design Guide provides more specific guidance, again emphasising context. 13. Given my conclusion that the physical circumstances of the site and its context within the street scene allow for a choice in terms of design strategy and the considered fashion in which, as the Design and Access Statement explains, the choice concerning layout has been arrived at through a series of iterations informed by context, I see no reason in principle why housing development of the type indicated should not make a positive contribution to the street scene of Stone Road and, bearing in mind the existing layout to the south, the character and appearance of the area more generally. Therefore, notwithstanding that the proposed development would be more prominent in the street scene than the existing dwelling, owing to the proximity of the terrace, as indicated, to Stone Road, I consider that the proposed development would accord with the relevant policy and guidance referred to. 14. Highway safety is not an issue raised by the Council. However, the narrowness of the pavements, the volume of vehicular traffic at certain times, together with that of pedestrians including schoolchildren, and recent accidents in the vicinity all serve to promote a clearly articulated sense of unease amongst third parties that existing problems would be exacerbated and I understand that there is pressure for and investigation of traffic calming measures. Be that as it may, the specific form of access proposed at the position shown follows detailed investigations of current average speeds in free flow traffic conditions and the achievability of adequate visibility splays as allowed for by Manual for Streets . Consequently, there is no objection from the highway authority. 15. I have examined carefully the proposed access and the highway conditions, allowing for the factors that have been mentioned as creating problems at certain times of the day. It seems to me inevitable that the road must experience problems at certain times because it is relatively narrow, it functions as a significant thoroughfare for both vehicles and pedestrians and the pavements are not particularly commodious. Whether or not traffic calming is required is not a matter for me, but that would be directed at a situation as it now exists. In view of that situation, and the limited number of houses proposed, however, I consider the small volume of traffic generated by the proposed development would not materially exacerbate any existing problems because the effect would, in practice, be of marginal significance. 3 Appeal Decision APP/B3410/A/09/2109546 16. PPG13 Transport promotes safety for all road users as a general principle. However, bearing in mind that at times of congestion vehicle speeds are likely to be lower than under free flow conditions and the highway authority’s confirmation of the acceptability of the proposed junction geometry, I do not consider that highway safety would be significantly compromised so as to create undue conflict with such policy intentions in that regard and thereby justify refusal. 17.

Load more