Agenda Document for Planning Committee, 07/01/2021 10:00

Public Document Pack

Agenda for Planning Committee Thursday, 7th January, 2021, 10.00 am

Members of Planning Committee

Councillors E Wragg (Chair), S Chamberlain, K Bloxham, East Devon District Council C Brown, A Colman, O Davey, B De Saram, Border House S Gazzard, M Howe, D Key, K McLauchlan Heathpark Industrial Park (Vice-Chair), G Pook, G Pratt, P Skinner, Honiton J Whibley and T Woodward EX14 1EJ DX 48808 HONITON Venue: Online via the Zoom App. All Councillors and Tel: 01404 515616 registered speakers will have been sent an www.eastdevon.gov.uk appointment with the meeting link.

Contact: Wendy Harris, Democratic Services Officer 01395 517542; email [email protected] (or group number 01395 517546) Issued: Thursday 17 December 2020

Important - this meeting will be conducted online and recorded by Zoom only. Please do not attend Blackdown House. Members are asked to follow the Protocol for Remote Meetings

This meeting is being recorded by EDDC for subsequent publication on the Council’s website and will be streamed live to the Council’s Youtube Channel at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmNHQruge3LVI4hcgRnbwBw

Speaking on planning applications In order to speak on an application being considered by the Development Management Committee you must have submitted written comments during the consultation stage of the application. Those that have commented on an application being considered by the Committee will receive a letter or email detailing the date and time of the meeting and instructions on how to register to speak. The letter/email will have a reference number, which you will need to provide in order to register. Speakers will have 3 minutes to make their representation.

The number of people that can speak on each application is limited to:  Major applications – parish/town council representative, 5 supporters, 5 objectors and the applicant or agent  Minor/Other applications – parish/town council representative, 2 supporters, 2 objectors and the applicant or agent

The day before the meeting a revised running order for the applications being considered by the Committee and the speakers’ list will be posted on the council’s website (agenda item 1 – speakers’ list). Applications with registered speakers will be taken first.

Mark Williams, Chief Executive page 1

Parish and town council representatives wishing to speak on an application are also required to pre-register in advance of the meeting. One representative can be registered to speak on behalf of the Council from 10am on Friday 18 December 2020 up until 12 noon on Wednesday 23 December 2020 by leaving a message on 01395 517525 or emailing [email protected].

Speaking on non-planning application items A maximum of two speakers from the public are allowed to speak on agenda items that are not planning applications on which the Committee is making a decision (items on which you can register to speak will be highlighted on the agenda). Speakers will have 3 minutes to make their representation. You can register to speak on these items up until 12 noon, 3 working days before the meeting by emailing [email protected] or by phoning 01395 517525. A member of the Democratic Services Team will only contact you if your request to speak has been successful.

1 Speakers' list and revised order for the planning applications (Pages 4 - 5) The speakers’ list and revised order has been removed.

2 Apologies 3 Declarations of interest Guidance is available online to Councillors and co-opted members on making declarations of interest

4 Matters of urgency Information on matters of urgency is available online

5 Confidential/exempt item(s) To agree any items to be dealt with after the public (including press) have been excluded. There are no items that officers recommend should be dealt with in this way.

Applications for Determination

PLEASE NOTE - The meeting will be adjourned at approximately 1pm for a 30 minutes break

6 19/2145/MFUL (Major) WOODBURY AND LYMPSTONE (Pages 6 - 41) Woodbury Park Hotel And Golf Club, Woodbury Castle, Woodbury

7 20/0728/FUL & 20/0729/LBC (Minor) OTTERY ST MARY (Pages 42 - 59) Kings Arms Hotel, Gold Street, Ottery St Mary, EX11 1DG.

8 20/1746/FUL (Other) SIDMOUTH SIDFORD (Pages 60 - 73)

page 2 Woolbrook Reservoir, Balfours, Sidmouth, EX10 9EF.

9 20/1726/FUL (Minor) FENITON (Pages 74 - 90) 1 Hamlet Cottages, Weston, Honiton, EX14 3PB.

10 20/1166/FUL (Minor) EXMOUTH BRIXINGTON (Pages 91 - 107) Bystock Court, Old Bystock Drive, Exmouth, EX8 5EQ.

11 20/1633/FUL (Minor) AXMINSTER (Pages 108 - 119) Rose Farm, Wyke, Axminster, EX13 8TN.

12 20/2293/FUL (Other) DUNKESWELL AND OTTERHEAD (Pages 120 - 126) Kains Park Farm, Awliscombe, Honiton, EX14 3NN.

13 20/2310/FUL (Other) TRINITY (Pages 127 - 133) Ware Barn, Ware, Lyme Regis, DT7 3RH.

Please note: Planning application details, including plans and representations received, can be viewed in full on the Council’s website.

Decision making and equalities For a copy of this agenda in large print, please contact the Democratic Services Team on 01395 517546

page 3 Agenda Item 1

[Blank page]

page 4

[Blank page]

page 5 Agenda Item 6 Ward Woodbury And Lympstone

Reference 19/2145/MFUL

Applicant The Club Company Ltd

Location Woodbury Park Hotel And Golf Club Woodbury Castle Woodbury Exeter Devon EX5 1JJ

Proposal Change of use of land for the siting of 14 no. holiday lodge caravans and associated access and development.

RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the Habitat Regulations Appropriate Assessment outlined within the Committee Report be adopted; and, 2. That the application be APPROVED subject to conditions.

Crown Copyright and database rights 2020 Ordnance Survey 100023746

page 6

Committee Date: 7th January 2021

Woodbury And Target Date: Lympstone 19/2145/MFUL 28.01.2020 (Woodbury)

Applicant: The Club Company Ltd

Location: Woodbury Park Hotel And Golf Club, Woodbury Castle

Proposal: Change of use of land for the siting of 14 no. holiday lodge caravans and associated access and development

RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the Habitat Regulations Appropriate Assessment outlined within the Committee Report be adopted; and, 2. That the application be APPROVED subject to conditions.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This application is before Members as the views of the Ward Members and Parish Council are contrary to the officer recommendation.

Planning permission is sought for the siting of 14 holiday lodges together with associated development within part of the existing nine-hole golf course at Woodbury Park Hotel and Golf Club.

The proposal has evolved since its submission with the lodges moved away from the green lane (Warkidons Way) to the east of the site and all access taken from the main hotel car park to the site where the individual lodges will be sited. Concerns raised in respect of the impact of the proposal on this historic lane are considered to have been overcome by the revisions to the proposed development, such that any potential impact will be limited to glimpsed views of the development through established hedging.

The development represents a diversification to the existing accommodation offer at Woodbury Park, and as a consequence will encourage further visitors to the site and surrounding area, which is also likely to provide wider economic benefit to the local economy. This is considered to comply with Policy E19 of the Local Plan.

There are no landscape designations pertaining to the site and the suggested siting is not considered to be visually intrusive or prominent within the countryside. The site is in relatively close proximity to the protected landscapes of the East Devon Pebblebed Heaths, however it is considered that appropriate

19/2145/MFUL page 7

mitigation measures have been provided to offset any impact arising from additional activity generated by the proposed development.

Impacts arising from the proposed development in terms of traffic, landscape, trees, ecology and additional activity have been considered and subject to appropriate conditions the application is recommended for approval.

CONSULTATIONS

Local Consultations

Parish/Town Council NOT SUPPORTED. Would regard the application more favourably if certain lodges were located a further distance from Warkidons Way. Conditions attached should include no alterations to Warkidons Way and its hedging, no vehicle access (except for golf carts) and not to be used for residential use (with guests staying no more than 28 days for one particular stay).

Woodbury And Lympstone - Cllr Ben Ingham I recommend this application for refusal. I do not think this site is appropriate for caravan usage due to the proximity of the pebble bed heaths.

Woodbury And Lympstone - Cllr Geoff Jung 17.02.20:

I have viewed the further documentation regarding the Planning Application 19/2145/MFUL for the change of use of land for the siting of 14 holiday lodge caravans and associated access and development at Woodbury Park Hotel and Golf Club Woodbury Castle Woodbury I did not support the Application and the further information provided do not provide information that changes my view, but I reserve my final views on the application until I am in full possession of all the relevant arguments for and against.

24.09.20:

19/2145/MFUL Woodbury Park Hotel and Golf Club Woodbury Castle Woodbury.

I have viewed the further documents submitted in Sept for the planning application 19/2145/MFUL for the change of use of land for the siting of 14 no. holiday lodge caravans and associated access and development at Woodbury Park Hotel and Golf Club Woodbury Castle Woodbury. My views are still the same as the location is considered "special" between the village of Woodbury Salterton and the common providing an almost vehicle free access to the open common. I refer to my comments I summitted earlier this year, regarding access for emergency vehicles that has not been resolved. The access will be via Golf Buggy and not vehicles. Will this access be suitable for emergency vehicles (Fire Engines and Ambulances) and how is the treatment of refuse and recycling going to be managed?

19/2145/MFUL page 8

I therefore did not support the Application , but I reserve my final views on the application until I am in full possession of all the relevant arguments for and against.

Further comments 20.04.20:

I have viewed the further documents for the planning application 19/2145/MFUL for the change of use of land for the siting of 14 no. holiday lodge caravans and associated access and development at Woodbury Park Hotel and Golf Club Woodbury Castle Woodbury. This application is contentious as the location is considered "special" between the village of Woodbury Salterton and the common providing an almost vehicle free access to the open common. Rereading most of the documents and comments, I would like to point out a further concern I have with the Application. The access will be via Golf Buggy and not vehicles. Will this access be suitable for emergency vehicles (Fire Engines and Ambulances) and how is the treatment of refuse and recycling going to be managed? I did not support the Application and this further information provided does not provide information that changes my view, but I reserve my final views on the application until I am in full possession of all the relevant arguments for and against.

Further comments 11.11.20:

I have viewed the documents for the planning application for 19/2145/FUL for the proposed change of use of land for the siting of 14 no. holiday lodge caravans and associated access and development at Woodbury Park Hotel and Golf Club Woodbury Castle Woodbury. I have been contacted by a local conservation group who are very concerned regarding the byway next to this proposed development. They say that Walkidons Way is a rare example in our locality of a green lane, a route adopted from at least Saxon times,

The boundaries banks, hedges and woodland edges, are features which can be seen along the length of Walkidons Way. The hedges and woodland edges here are particularly rich in examples of hedge-laying and coppicing of great age, and possibly also an ancient boundary trees.

In terms of bio-diversity, green lanes are mini-landscapes with their own micro-climate and ecology, due to the combination of the track and its boundary features. They may be more botanically species-rich than a single hedge, act as wildlife corridors, and their sheltered conditions are of great importance, for example, to butterfly populations. The former agricultural land here has been much altered for leisure use, and the lane now passes between golf courses at the higher end, and fishing lakes lower down, which were both created during the 1990s. The Woodbury Park complex, which opened in 1995, was a highly controversial development at the time, but has become a generally accepted element of the modern landscape.

The track and its verges are unfortunately suffering degradation from modern vehicular traffic, but Walkidons Way offers a beautiful walk of very different character to that of most of our local lanes, to the open spaces of the Common."

19/2145/MFUL page 9

Because of the sensitive nature of this byway I would like Historic England to be consulted on this application. If this Application is to be agreed I would also like to see conditions attached to cover the appropriate management and continued maintenance. Until Natural England and appropriate conditions are agreed I cannot support this application at this time. I reserve my final views on this application, until I am in full possession of all the relevant arguments for and against.

Further comment 09.12.20:

Thank you for the report that explains the reason to support, however I will wish to speak at the meeting, and I still oppose the application.

Technical Consultations

Devon County Highway Authority 03.12.19

Observations: Woodbury Park Hotel and Golf club resides on the C341. The proposal from this planning application has been reviewed under two pre-applications, 19/0049/preapp and 18/0199/preapp

The collision record for the last 5 years show no records of collisions in the vicinity on the immediate access onto the C341.

The 14 caravans will be providing for many golf visitors that are already day visitors to the golf club, however a travel plan to show how any increase in vehicle and pedestrian trip generation from both additional employees and visitors will be mitigated for is lacking from this application, also missing is a Construction and Environment Management plan (CEMP) to outline how the construction process will be managed including construction waste and disposal and the delivery route for the caravan units.

Though the dedicated parking spaces adjacent each holiday lodge are for golf buggies only, the planning statement does not show if the 14 additional vehicles can be accomodated for in the main car park. Also no details are given upon how the golf- buggies will be re-charged sufficiently to provide the shuttle service.

Therefore until the above documents are submitted for review, the County Highway Authority is unable to remain impartial to this application and recommends refusal.

Addendum 24.02.2020:

The CHA has been made aware of the updated documents submitted but does not believe the car park tally carried out at a specific time on one or two days in early December accurately reflects the demand upon the car park as an average. Therefore our stance remains the same.

Further comments 08.04.20:

19/2145/MFUL page 10

Due to the current Covid-19 pandemic, the concern of this applications parking survey being over one day in December cannot be addressed by the usual increase of seasonal survey days/times. Therefore the applicant would like to raise the possibility of the following condition, which I believe they have already separately approached yourselves with.

We as the CHA would have no objection to this condition and if it was up taken, we would be willing to review our current stance upon this application.

'Car Parking Surveys of the existing Car Parking areas to be undertaken, at agreed peak times, over the next 12 month period, to establish car parking capacity and availability. A Parking Survey Report to then be submitted to DCC, including photographs and tabulated results. If it is found that insufficient car parking is available for the users of the 14 lodges, measures are to be taken to control the number of cars on-site at any one time which could include for example implementing a Travel Plan for the site'

Further comments 30/09/2020:

It is understood that the applicant has proposed a condition of planning permission where:

Unfortunately the LPA believes that the above proposed condition would not reach planning tests and has recommended that a condition requiring a Travel Plan to be approved in writing within twelve months of any planning permission would be more appropriate.

The CHA agrees with the LPA proposed condition.

Recommendation: THE HEAD OF PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION AND ENVIRONMENT, ON BEHALF OF DEVON COUNTY COUNCIL, AS LOCAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, MAY WISH TO RECOMMEND CONDITIONS ON ANY GRANT OF PLANNING PERMISSION

Note: The County Highway Authority is content for the LPA to word a suitable Planning Condition requiring a Travel Plan to be approved in writing within 12 months of any planning permission.

19/2145/MFUL page 11

Natural England

SUMMARY OF NATURAL ENGLAND'S ADVICE DESIGNATED SITES [EUROPEAN] -

FURTHER INFORMATION REQUIRED

Habitats Regulations Assessment - Recreational Impacts on European Sites

This development falls within the 'zone of influence' for the East Devon Pebblebed Heaths SAC, East Devon Heaths SPA and the Exe Estuary SPA, as set out in the Local Plan and the South East Devon European Sites Mitigation Strategy (SEDEMS). It is anticipated that new housing and tourist development in this area is 'likely to have a significant effect', when considered either alone or in combination, upon the interest features of the SAC/SPA due to the risk of increased recreational pressure caused by that development.

In line with the SEDEMS and the Joint Approach of Exeter City Council, Teignbridge District Council and East Devon District Council, we advise that mitigation will be required to prevent such harmful effects from occurring as a result of this development. Permission should not be granted until such time as the implementation of these measures has been secured.

Natural England's advice is that this proposed development, and the application of these measures to avoid or reduce the likely harmful effects from it, may need to be formally checked and confirmed by your Authority, as the competent authority, via an appropriate assessment in view of the European Site's conservation objectives and in accordance with the Conservation of Habitats & Species Regulations 2017 (as amended).

In accordance with the Conservation of Habitats & Species Regulations 2017 (as amended), Natural England must be consulted on any appropriate assessment your Authority may decide to make.

Other advice

PROTECTED LANDSCAPES

The proposed access to the development is within a nationally designated landscape, namely the East Devon AONB. Natural England advises that the planning authority uses national and local policies, together with local landscape expertise and information to determine the proposal and that you have regard to the advice of the East Devon AONB Partnership.

PROTECTED SPECIES

We have not assessed this application and associated documents for impacts on protected species. Natural England has published Standing Advice on protected species. The Standing Advice includes a decision checklist which provides advice to planners on deciding if there is a 'reasonable likelihood' of protected species being

19/2145/MFUL page 12

present. It also provides detailed advice on the protected species most often affected by development.

You should apply our Standing Advice to this application as it is a material consideration in the determination of applications in the same way as any individual response received from Natural England following consultation.

The Standing Advice should not be treated as giving any indication or providing any assurance in respect of European Protected Species (EPS) that the proposed development is unlikely to affect the EPS present on the site; nor should it be interpreted as meaning that Natural England has reached any views as to whether a licence may be granted.

For any queries regarding this letter, for new consultations, or to provide further information on this consultation please send your correspondences to [email protected].

Further comments:

Thank you for your email below, consulting Natural England on the attached Appropriate Assessment in accordance with Paragraph 63 (3) of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017.

Please be advised that, on the basis of the appropriate financial contributions being secured to the South-East Devon European Sites Mitigation Strategy (SEDESMS), Natural England concurs with your authority's conclusion that the proposed developments will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of Dawlish Warren SAC, the Exe Estuary SPA, Exe Estuary RAMSAR and the East Devon Pebblebed Heaths SAC.

DCC Flood Risk Management Team Recommendation:

At this stage, we object to this planning application because we do not believe that it satisfactorily conforms to Policy CP12 (Flood Risk) of Exeter City Council's Core Strategy (2012) which requires all developments to mitigate against flood risk and utilise sustainable drainage systems, where feasible and practical. The applicant will therefore be required to submit additional information in order to demonstrate that all aspects of the proposed surface water drainage management system have been considered.

Observations:

The applicant must note that infiltration tests, undertaken in strict accordance with BRE Digest 365 Soakaway Design (2016) must be undertaken in order to demonstrate whether infiltration is a viable means of surface water drainage management on this site. A representative number of tests must be conducted in order to provide adequate coverage of the site, with particular focus placed on the locations and depths of potential infiltration devices.

19/2145/MFUL page 13

In accordance with the hierarchy of drainage solutions, infiltration must first be explored as a means of surface water drainage management. Discharging the surface water runoff from this site to a watercourse will only be permitted once the applicant has submitted evidence which adequately demonstrates that infiltration is not a viable means of surface water management on this site (e.g. results of percolation testing conducted in accordance with BRE Digest 365 Soakaway Design (2016)).

Where infiltration is not used, long term storage must be provided to store the additional volume of runoff caused by any increases in impermeable area, which is in addition to the attenuation storage required to address the greenfield runoff rates. Long term storage should therefore be included within the surface water drainage management plan to ensure that each element is appropriately sized, and this should discharge at a rate not exceeding 2 litres/second/hectare.

The applicant currently proposed the permeable driveway and access road but there is no concrete evidence of the suitability of rainwater to infiltrate through the surface and into underlying soil layers.

Should infiltration is not viable, the applicant should review the 300mm freeboard allowance for the proposed attenuation pond as the submitted MicroDrainage model outputs indicate that this allowance is not met.

Further comments:

- We will not be providing a comment as this stage as the plans submitted are unrelated to drainage. Our previous response dated 11/02/2020 still stands.

Further comments:

At this stage, we have no in-principle objections to the above planning application, from a surface water drainage perspective, assuming that the following pre- commencement planning conditions are imposed on any approved permission:

- No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until a programme of percolation tests has been carried out in accordance with BRE Digest 365 Soakaway Design (2016), and the results approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with Devon County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority. A representative number of tests should be conducted to provide adequate coverage of the site, with particular focus placed on the locations of the proposed infiltration devices/permeable surfaces.

Reason: To ensure that surface water from the development is discharged as high up the drainage hierarchy as is feasible.

Reason for being a pre-commencement condition: This data is required prior to the commencement of any works as it will affect the permanent surface water drainage management plan, which needs to be confirmed before development takes place.

- No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until the full results of a groundwater monitoring programme (should infiltration is viable), undertaken over

19/2145/MFUL page 14

a period of 12 months, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with Devon County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority. This monitoring should be conducted to provide adequate coverage of the site, with particular focus placed on the locations and depths of the proposed infiltration devices.

Reason: To ensure that the use of infiltration devices on the site is an appropriate means of surface water drainage management.

Reason for being a pre-commencement condition: This data is required prior to the commencement of any works as it could affect the permanent surface water drainage management plan, which needs to be confirmed before development takes place.

- No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until the detailed design of the proposed permanent surface water drainage management system has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with Devon County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority. The design of this permanent surface water drainage management system will be in accordance with the principles of sustainable drainage systems, and those set out in the Flood Risk Assessment & Outline Drainage Strategy Woodbury Park Hotel and Golf Club, Woodbury Castle, Woodbury, Exeter, EX5 1JJ (Report Ref. 01B902911, Rev. 1, dated September 2019). No part of the development shall be occupied until the surface water management scheme serving that part of the development has been provided in accordance with the approved details and the drainage infrastructure shall be retained and maintained for the lifetime of the development.

Reason: To ensure that surface water runoff from the development is managed in accordance with the principles of sustainable drainage systems. Advice: Refer to Devon County Council's Sustainable Drainage Guidance.

- No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until the detailed design of the proposed surface water drainage management system which will serve the development site for the full period of its construction has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with Devon County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority. This temporary surface water drainage management system must satisfactorily address both the rates and volumes, and quality, of the surface water runoff from the construction site.

Reason: To ensure that surface water runoff from the construction site is appropriately managed so as to not increase the flood risk, or pose water quality issues, to the surrounding area.

Reason for being a pre-commencement condition: A plan needs to be demonstrated prior to the commencement of any works to ensure that surface water can be managed suitably without increasing flood risk downstream, negatively affecting water quality downstream or negatively impacting on surrounding areas and infrastructure. Advice: Refer to Devon County Council's Sustainable Drainage Guidance.

- No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until the full details of the adoption and maintenance arrangements for the proposed permanent surface

19/2145/MFUL page 15

water drainage management system have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with Devon County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority.

Reason: To ensure that the development's permanent surface water drainage management systems will remain fully operational throughout the lifetime of the development.

Reason for being a pre-commencement condition: These details need to be submitted prior to commencement of any works to ensure that suitable plans are in place for the maintenance of the permanent surface water drainage management plan, for the reason above.

Observations: Following my previous consultation response (FRM/ED/2145/2019, dated 19th November 2019), the applicant has submitted additional information in relation to the surface water drainage aspects of the above planning application, for which I am grateful.

The applicant has provided the Response to DCC Flood Risk Management Team Recommendation Regarding Application Ref: 19/2145/FUL at Woodbury Park, Woodbury Castle, Woodbury, EX5 1JJ, dated 2nd December 2019.

Should infiltration is not viable, the proposed attenuation pond should be provided with a 300mm freeboard allowance.

An ordinary watercourse runs through this site, so if any temporary or permanent works need to take place within this watercourse to facilitate the proposed development (such as an access culvert or bridge), Land Drainage Consent must be obtained from Devon County Council's Flood and Coastal Risk Management Team prior to any works commencing. Details of this procedure can be found at: https://new.devon.gov.uk/floodriskmanagement/land-drainage-consent/.

Environment Agency

Environment Agency position We object to the proposed development on the grounds that insufficient information has been provided to demonstrate that an adequate non-mains foul drainage arrangement is in place to support the proposed development. The reason for this position and advice is provided below.

Reason - This application proposes a major development which, as the Flood Risk Assessment & Outline Drainage Strategy (Avison Young, September 2019) states, requires a new pumping station to discharge foul water to an existing foul water treatment plant south east of the development site. We consider that further information is required in order to ascertain whether there is currently a lawful or unlawful discharge on site and to consider whether the additional sewage from the addition of the caravans is likely to cause an environmental risk if discharged to the current treatment plant.

19/2145/MFUL page 16

We have no record of granting a permit for the discharge of treated effluent from a sewage treatment plant at this site. The applicant needs to provide confirmation on whether there is a current permit for this activity and provide a copy of the permit if they do. To be able to comment further on if the proposed non-mains arrangement is acceptable, the applicant needs to confirm the peak flow of foul water to the treatment plant as per the flows and loads code of practice, and also advise where the effluent from the treatment plant discharges in the form of an NGR to confirm whether this is to ground or to surface water. Overcoming our objection The applicant may overcome our objection by submitting further information to cover the deficiencies outlined in this letter. Please re-consult us on any revised information and we will respond within 21 days.

Further comments:

Thank you for the re-consultation regarding the above referenced application. We consider that the revised red line boundary and landscaping detail does not change our position as outlined in our letter dated 3rd February 2020 (reference DC/2019/121055/02-L01).

Further comments:

Thank you for re-consulting us on this application.

Environment Agency position

Following review of the letter from Michaela Kekeri of Avison Young regarding the foul drainage arrangement, we have no objection to the proposed development. The reason for this position and advice is provided below.

Reason - The letter from Michaela Kekeri of Avison Young dated 17th January 2020 outlines the proposed foul drainage arrangement. We consider that the arrangement described whereby the effluent will eventually discharge to the public foul sewer is acceptable.

Advice to the applicant - We note from the further information submitted that the water supply to the site is from a borehole. We recommend that the operators of the site investigate further whether they will be able to operate within the conditions of their abstraction license considering the proposed expansion of the site.

EDDC Landscape Architect - Chris Hariades 1 INTRODUCTION

This report forms the EDDC's landscape response to the full application for the above site.

The report provides a review of landscape related information submitted with the application in relation to adopted policy, relevant guidance, current best practice and existing site context and should be read in conjunction with the submitted information.

19/2145/MFUL page 17

2 LOCATION, SUMMARY PROPOSALS, SITE DESCRIPTION AND CONTEXT

2.1 Site location and summary of proposals

The proposed site is situated to the northern edge of Woodbury Park Golf Club, 1.5km east of Woodbury Salterton and 1.5km north of Woodbury Common.

The proposals comprise the erection of 14 holiday lodges within a new planted woodland strip on the edge of the golf course accessed from Warkindows Way via a new access track to the northeast of the site.

2.2 Site description and context

The site is located on gently sloping ground with a northwesterly aspect at approximately 110m AOD and is presently part of an established 9-hole golf course. The site is bounded to the east by Warkindows Way, the boundary being marked by established, high Devon hedgebanks topped with a mix of native trees and shrubs. A further established hedgebank marks the northern site boundary with meadow beyond forming part of the grounds of Meerhaven Manor. Land to the south and west of the proposed site is open to the golf course.

Warkindows Way itself is a narrow, historic track and unclassified county road connecting between Woodbury Common and the edge of Woodbury Salterton. It is presently metttled at its western end between Woodbury Salterton and the entrance to Lyndhayne Farm to the northeast of the site, and from its southern end at Woodbury Common as far as the Country Club complex. Between these points, a distance of about 1km, the track is unmettled.

Surrounding land use to the north is generally agricultural. Land to the east, south and west is leisure use (golf course and fishing lakes).

There are views from the site westwards to the recent development of Meerhaven Manor and lake and northwestwards to the large farm complex and anaerobic digesters of Hogsbrook Farm 500m distant and beyond this to Mill Park Industrial Estate and Windmill Hill on the A3052. Views to the south and east are restricted by landform and nearby trees and woodland.

2.3 Landscape and Conservation designations

The East Devon AONB boundary lies 700m to the south. Rockham Wood County Wildlife Site (CWS) comprising deciduous and part ancient woodland is situated 80m to the east.

3 RELEVANT PLANNING POLICY

The following local plan policies are applicable to the proposal in terms of landscape and green infrastructure: Strategy 3 - Sustainable Development

19/2145/MFUL page 18

The objective of ensuring sustainable development is central to our thinking. We interpret sustainable development in East Devon to mean that [inter-alia] the following issues and their inter-relationships are taken fully into account when considering development: a) Conserving and Enhancing the Environment - which includes ensuring development is undertaken in a way that minimises harm and enhances biodiversity and the quality and character of the landscape. b) Prudent natural resource use - which includes minimising fossil fuel use therefore reducing carbon dioxide emissions. It also includes minimising resource consumption, reusing materials and recycling. Renewable energy development will be encouraged c) Promoting social wellbeing - which includes providing facilities to meet people's needs such as health care, affordable housing, recreation space and village halls.

Strategy 7 - Development in the Countryside

Development in the countryside will only be permitted where it is in accordance with a specific Local or Neighbourhood Plan policy that explicitly permits such development and where it would not harm the distinctive landscape, amenity and environmental qualities within which it is located, including:

1. Land form and patterns of settlement.

2. Important natural and manmade features which contribute to the local landscape character, including topography, traditional field boundaries, areas of importance for nature conservation and rural buildings.

3. The adverse disruption of a view from a public place which forms part of the distinctive character of the area or otherwise causes significant visual intrusions.

Strategy 46 - Landscape Conservation and Enhancement and AONBs

Development will need to be undertaken in a manner that is sympathetic to, and helps conserve and enhance the quality and local distinctiveness of, the natural and historic landscape character of East Devon, in particular in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.

Development will only be permitted where it:

1. conserves and enhances the landscape character of the area;

2. does not undermine landscape quality; and 3. is appropriate to the economic, social and well-being of the area.

D1 Design and Local Distinctiveness

Proposals will only be permitted where they:

19/2145/MFUL page 19

1. Respect the key characteristics and special qualities of the area in which the development is proposed.

2. Ensure that the scale, massing, density, height, fenestration and materials of buildings relate well to their context.

3. Do not adversely affect inter alia:

- Important landscape characteristics, prominent topographical features and important ecological features. - Trees worthy of retention.

4. Have due regard for important aspects of detail and quality and should incorporate inter alia:

- Use of appropriate building materials and techniques respecting local tradition and vernacular styles as well as, where possible, contributing to low embodied energy and CO2 reduction. - Appropriate 'greening' measures relating to landscaping and planting, open space provision and permeability of hard surfaces.

D2 Landscape Requirements

Landscape schemes should meet all of the following criteria:

1. Existing landscape features should be recorded in a detailed site survey, in accordance with the principles of BS 5837:2012 'Trees in Relation to Construction' (or current version)

2. Existing features of landscape or nature conservation value should be incorporated into the landscaping proposals and where their removal is unavoidable provision for suitable replacement should be made elsewhere on the site. This should be in addition to the requirement for new landscaping proposals. Where appropriate, existing habitat should be improved and where possible new areas of nature conservation value should be created.

3. Measures to ensure safe and convenient public access for all should be incorporated.

4. Measures to ensure routine maintenance and long term management should be included.

5. Provision for the planting of trees, hedgerows, including the replacement of those of amenity value which have to be removed for safety or other reasons, shrub planting and other soft landscaping.

6. The layout and design of roads, parking, footpaths and boundary treatments should make a positive contribution to the street scene and the integration of the development with its surroundings and setting.

19/2145/MFUL page 20

D3 Trees and Development Sites

Permission will only be granted for development, where appropriate tree retention and/or planting is proposed in conjunction with the proposed nearby construction. The council will seek to ensure, subject to detailed design considerations, that there is no net loss in the quality of trees or hedgerows resulting from an approved development. The development should deliver a harmonious and sustainable relationship between structures and trees. The recommendations of British Standard 5837:2012 (or the current revision) will be taken fully into account in addressing development proposals.

No building, hard surfacing drainage or underground works will be permitted that does not accord with the principles of BS 5837 or Volume 4 National Joint Utilities Group (NJUG) Guidelines for the Planning, Installation and Maintenance of Utility Apparatus in Proximity to Trees - Issue 2 (or the current revision or any replacement) unless, exceptionally, the Council is satisfied that such works can be accommodated without harm to the trees concerned or there are overriding reasons for development to proceed.

The Council will as a condition of any planning permission granted, require details as to how trees, hedges and hedge banks will be protected prior to and during and after construction. The Council will protect existing trees and trees planted in accordance with approved landscaping schemes through the making of Tree Preservation Orders where appropriate or necessary.

Planning permission will be refused for development resulting in the loss or deterioration of ancient woodland and the loss of aged or veteran trees found outside ancient woodland, unless the need for, and benefits of, the development in that location clearly outweigh the loss.

E19 - Holiday Accommodation Parks

Outside of designated landscape areas, proposals for new sites and extensions of existing sites will be permitted where they meet the following six criteria:

2. They are within, or in close proximity, to an existing settlement but would not have an adverse impact on the character or setting of that settlement or the amenities of adjoining residents.

3. They would not use the best and most versatile agricultural land.

4. They will be provided with adequate services and utilities.

5. Traffic generated by the proposal can be accommodated safely on the local highway network and safe highway access to the site can be achieved.

19/2145/MFUL page 21

6. The development will be subject to the provisions of plan policy in terms of sustainable construction and on site renewable energy production.

4 Review of landscape related documents

4.1 Landscape and visual impact assessment (LVIA) Instead of a full LVIA, a visual assessment only has been submitted with the application. The assessment finds that, beyond the golf course itself, there are very limited locations which afford views of the site, the principle ones being a section of Warkindows Way to the east of the site (viewpoint 4); in the vicinity of Hogsbrook Farm (viewpoint 6); and from the entrance to Greendale Business Park south of the junction with the A3052 (viewpoint 9).

In respect of view point 6, the accuracy of the indication of the site location on the context baseline photograph is questioned. The correct site location seems to be to the right (south) of the large conifer in the mid-distance where it would largely be screened by the northern boundary hedgerow. This should be checked and confirmed, however, if anything, it is likely to result in a lowering of the assessed visual impact for this viewpoint. Otherwise, in so far as it goes, I would accept the findings of the visual assessment.

There is no indication in the submitted details of how required utilities services are to be brought to site and the route of these and extent of any above ground cabling or apparatus should be confirmed and considered in the visual assessment. The visual assessment does not cover the construction phase and further consideration should be given to this which should include any impacts arising from the delivery and unloading of the lodge units.

Consideration should also be given to the landscape effects of the proposed development. These include the introduction of new buildings and associated infrastructure including lighting into the landscape, the creation of a new hedge-break approx. 6-7m wide on to Warkindows Way, the felling of two trees, one of which is a mature oak, and the impacts of the proposal on the character and tranquillity of Warkindows Way.

4.2 Reports and surveys

Tree survey - Not provided.

Ecological assessment - The ecological assessment finds no issues with the application although it recommends that consideration should be given as to whether a Habitat Regulations Assessment should be carried out with respect to possible indirect impacts.

It notes the opportunity for bio-diversity enhancement through additional woodland planting proposed and makes the following recommendations: - Further surveys to be carried out for bats in respect of any trees to be felled and dormice in respect to any hedgerow removal. - Installation of bat/ bird boxes in trees around the site and integrated bird boxes on the lodges themselves.

19/2145/MFUL page 22

- Creation of an additional area of rough grassland as reptile habitat to compensate for losses elsewhere.

Flood risk assessment (FRA) including drainage strategy - The drainage strategy provides for the collection of surface water by underground drains discharging to a new swale and attenuation pond with controlled discharge to the existing drainage system to the north of the site. Foul drainage is directed to a proposed new pumping station in the northwest of the application site from where it is to be pumped to an existing treatment plant north of the service yard.

4.3 Landscape proposals

The proposed lodges should be set a minimum of 7m off the centre line of the existing hedgebank forming the eastern site boundary to ensure that there is sufficient visual and sound buffer between them and Warkindows Lane.

The proposed access drive is shown coming off Warkindows Lane at the southwestern corner of Rockham Wood. This would entail the creation of a new hedge-break and associated grading works which is considered unnecessary and will adversely impact the character of Warkindows Lane. The proposed new track should instead be extended on golf course land around the back of the driving range ball-stop fence (which requires replacement) to meet the existing path to the north of the service yard and join Warkindows Way via the existing access.

The width of the proposed new track is 4.1m which is wide enough for two cars to pass. As golf buggies are only 1.2m wide a track width of 2.7m would be adequate for 2-way buggy use and occasional service vehicle access. This would reduce visual impact and loss of soft ground to hardstanding. A mature oak tree (tree T2 in ecological report) is proposed to be removed, apparently to accommodate the new track. Dependent on arboricultural advice, the alignment of the track should be adjusted to avoid this or suitable no-dig construction measures specified to prevent adverse impact on the root protection area.

The proposed access track is also shown passing through scrub thicket to the southeast of the green south of the lodges and the track alignment should be adjusted to skirt around this.

4.4 Other issues to be addressed

The lodges have a total visitor capacity of 56 people which is likely to require 20+ parking spaces for visitors. The applicant should submit details to verify that sufficient car parking capacity currently exists to accommodate this extra demand.

Although the application is based on visitors leaving their cars in the main car park and using golf buggies to access the lodges, there is nothing to prevent the applicant at some future time allowing visitors to drive down to the lodges and park there. This is likely to have adverse impacts on the amenity and tranquillity of Warkindows Way and should be prevented through an appropriately worded section 106 agreement.

19/2145/MFUL page 23

Warkindows Way is a public highway and as such, for golf buggies to legally cross it, or use any section of it, they would need to be DVLA registered and compliant with relevant vehicle standards for highway use. While that is not in itself a planning issue, failure to comply with this requirement is likely to endanger the public using Warkindows Lane and negate public liability insurance in the event of an accident involving a buggy and other path user. Other users of Warkindows Way should be safeguarded by requiring that buggies are DVLA registered as part of an S106 agreement.

5 CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Acceptability of proposals

There are a number of shortcomings with the submitted information as noted at sections 4.1, 4.3 and 4.4 above, which should be satisfactorily addressed prior to determination of the application, and unless it is the application should be considered unacceptable in terms of landscape/ visual impact and design and contrary to local plan policies E19 (1), Strategy 3(a), Strategy 7(2), Strategy 46(2), D1, D2 and D3.

5.2 Conditions

In the event that satisfactory amended information as noted at sections 5.1 above is provided prior to determination and approval is granted, the following condition(s) should be imposed:

1) No development shall take place until a landscape scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; such a scheme shall include the following:

- Planting proposals. - Hard or soft boundary treatments. - Hard surface treatments. - Proposed external lighting scheme incorporating recommendations from the Ecological Impact Assessment and in compliance with Guidance note 08/18 - Bats and Artificial Lighting in the UK, Institute of Lighting Professionals/ Bat Conservation Trust, 2018. - Existing and proposed levels and extent of proposed earthworks.

19/2145/MFUL page 24

- An ecological enhancement and mitigation plan indicating the extent and locations of measures as recommended in the submitted ecological assessment together with copies of any further surveys required.

- Soft landscape proposals shall be accompanied by a specification detailing the proposed species, their planting size, the density at which they will be planted, any specific planting matrices, the number of plants of each species and notes describing how the scheme will be implemented.

- Hard landscape proposals shall be accompanied by a material specification.

- If the scheme has significant level changes, sections shall be provided showing how the proposed development will integrate into the existing context.

- Construction details of any proposed walls, fences and other boundary treatments

- The various tree pits and/or Devon bank construction details. The landscaping scheme shall be carried out in the first planting season after completion of the groundworks and the building construction works or prior to first occupation whichever is the earliest unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the landscaping shall be maintained for a period of 5 years. Any trees or other plants which die during this period shall be replaced during the next planting season with specimens of the same size and species unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - In the interests of amenity and to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the area in accordance with Strategy 3 (Sustainable Development), Strategy 5 (Environment), Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) and Policy D2 (Landscape Requirements) and Policy D3 (Trees in relation to construction) of the East Devon Local Plan. The landscaping scheme is required to be approved before development starts to ensure that it properly integrates into the development from an early stage.) 2 A 25 year Landscape and Ecology Management Plan, including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape/ habitat areas shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to any development taking place. The plan shall include the following: - Extent, ownership and responsibilities for management and maintenance. - Inspection and monitoring arrangements for existing and proposed trees and hedgerows - Detailed schedules covering management and maintenance of the following: - Trees and hedgerow. - Grass areas. - Measures for enhancement of biodiversity value. - Management and maintenance of any boundary structures, drainage swales and other infrastructure.

The proposals shall be carried out for the full duration of the approved plan. (Reason - To ensure that the details are considered at an early stage in the interests of amenity and to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the area in

19/2145/MFUL page 25

accordance with Policies D1 - Design and Local Distinctiveness and D2 - Landscape Requirements of the East Devon Local Plan.

Further comments:

Having reviewed the amended Concept Masterplan, drawing no. P18-2176-05 Revision F, recently submitted in respect of the above scheme I confirm I am happy with the amendments made and subject to conditions as set out in my previous response dated 5.5.2020 and an S106 agreement to prevent future access to the cabins by cars consider the proposed scheme acceptable in terms of landscape and visual impact and design.

Further comments:

Please see below my comments in response to amended information received in respect of the above application.

I have reviewed the amended site masterplan and accompanying agent's letter dated 25.6.2020 in response to my previous comments. I am generally satisfied that these address my previous concerns except in relation to the following:

Access track width: I note the requirement for emergency vehicle access over the proposed access track. Having checked relevant standards including Building Regs it seems that a minimum access width of 3.7m rather than 4.1m as proposed is required for fire appliances. As a fire tender is not more than 2.6m wide a 3.7 m wide track would seem to be ample provision, widening out if necessary by the lodges. Please could this be checked and reduced if possible, although I would accept that on tight bends some additional width may be required.

Construction access: I note the confirmation that construction access will be over the route of the proposed path and not from Warkindows Lane and a suitably worded condition should be included to this effect, should the application be approved.

Need for s106 agreement: I do not accept the agent's argument against this that 'if cars were to be brought on the site, parking bays provision would be required which would not accord with the submitted plans and therefore a new application would have to be submitted for new planning permission' as the buggy parking bays as proposed are wide enough and mostly deep enough to accommodate a car and any minor adjustments required are likely to be too small to necessitate planning approval. I therefore recommend that a section 106 agreement is needed to prevent this.

Further landscape conditions should be imposed as set out in my previous response dated 5.5.2020.

Sports England

06.07.20

Thank you for consulting Sport England on the above application.

19/2145/MFUL page 26

Sport England has no further comment to make on this particular application. Please refer to our previous responses.

Should you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me on the number provided.

Please note: this response relates to Sport England's planning function only. It is not associated with our funding role or any grant application/award that may relate to the site.

Previous response to pre-app 09.04.19:

Original comments:

The nature of this specific proposal is such that Sport England does not consider that this development would fall under any requirement to consult Sport England as a statutory (Statutory Instrument 2015/595) or non-statutory consultee (Planning Practice Guidance 'Open Space, Sports and Recreation Facilities, Public Rights of Way and Local Green Space, Paragraph 003).

As such Sport England has not provided detailed pre application comments in this instance and would not expect to be consulted on the planning application, unless any revisions would require consultation in accordance with the Statutory Instrument or National Planning Practice Guidance referenced above.

If the proposal involves the provision of local sports facilities then guidance, in relation to design, can be found on our website: http://www.sportengland.org/facilities-planning/tools-guidance/design-and-cost- guidance/

If the proposal involves the loss of local sports facilities then National Planning Policy Framework Para. 97 and any relevant local plan policy, need to be considered in determining whether the application is acceptable in terms of planning policy. If the proposal involves the provision of less than 300 houses and the existing sports provision cannot meet the additional demand generated, sufficient new provision should be provided by implementing either local policy, standards or CIL charging schedule and recommendations and priorities set out in any local playing pitch and/or built facility strategy.

Should you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact the planning administration team on the number provided.

Other Representations

A total of 12 representations have been received in relation to the application. Of these 10 raise objections, 1 makes a representation with the other supporting. The observations are summarised below

Objections

19/2145/MFUL page 27

 Impact on ancient drove road Warkidons Way through additional usage  Additional noise and disturbance  Impact on wildlife and ecology  Further traffic  Damage to the green lane  Will destroy ancient woodland  Conflict with users of Warkidons Way  Construction traffic will cause damage to verges and hedgerows  The lane should be maintained for walkers and horses  Light pollution  Increased surface water run-off and potential flooding  Detrimental visual impact from additional development in the countryside  Exacerbate existing parking problems  No need for further holiday accommodation  Loss of residential amenity due to pro

Representation  There is great potential for high quality development which will benefit the area  Access needs to be addressed so that no impact on Warkidons Way  New woodland beneficial to wildlife  Will improve ecology through loss of low ecological quality grassland  Chalets are located too close to the ancient hedgerow  Opportunity to improve existing ecology

PLANNING HISTORY

There have been a number of planning applications relating to the hotel and golf club facilities, although none of relevance to the application site.

POLICIES

Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031 Policies Strategy 5 (Environment) Strategy 7 (Development in the Countryside) Strategy 33 (Promotion of Tourism in East Devon) Strategy 46 (Landscape Conservation and Enhancement and AONBs) Strategy 47 (Nature Conservation and Geology)

D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) D2 (Landscape Requirements) D3 (Trees and Development Sites)

EN13 (Development on High Quality Agricultural land of the Local Plan) E16 (Proposals for Holiday or Overnight Accommodation and Associated Facilities) E19 (Holiday Accommodation Parks)

RC1 (Retention of Land for Sport and Recreation)

TC2 (Accessibility of New Development)

19/2145/MFUL page 28

TC4 (Footpaths, Bridleways and Cycleways) TC9 (Parking Provision in New Development)

Government Planning Documents NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework 2019) National Planning Practice Guidance

Site Location and Description

The application site forms part of the land associated with Woodbury Park Hotel and Golf Club a well-established golf course and leisure/spa venue located on the edge of Woodbury Common.

The site is located on the northern edge of the golf club around 1.5km to the east of Woodbury Salterton and a similar distance to the north of Woodbury Common. It comprises part of the existing nine-hole golf course and is bounded to the east by Warkidons Way, a narrow and historic unclassified county road which connects the edge of Woodbury Salterton to the Common. The boundary with the road comprises an established hedgebank with a number of native trees and shrubs on top of this. The northern boundary of the site also comprises an established hedgbank which defines the boundary between the golf course and the grounds associated with Meerhaven Manor. Land to the south and west of the site is undefined and forms part of the golf course.

The site is accessed from the main hotel car park via the existing driveway to the nine- hole course which is to be extended to serve the area within which it is proposed to site the lodges.

Proposed Development

Planning permission is sought for the siting of 14 self-contained holiday lodges together with associated development. The submitted information indicates that the lodges measure 12.2m by 6.7m, with a timber decked area to the front and site, and an inset area housing a sunken hot tub to the rear. The proposed accommodation comprises an open lounge, kitchen and dining area, with 2 en-suite bedrooms.

It is proposed to site the lodges on a concrete base with a permeable paved area to the front for a golf buggy. The proposed access drive serving the lodges is also to have permeable paving.

The layout plan and supporting information suggest extensive new planting to the west of the proposed lodges adjacent to the golf course, together with reinforced native woodland planting to the existing hedge banks to the north and east abutting Warkidons Way.

During the course of the application, and in response to some of the concerns raised the access to serve the proposed lodges has been amended and is proposed to be taken from the main car park serving the hotel and golf course, following an existing track leading to the golf driving range, and then extending northwards across the nine- hole golf course to the site.

19/2145/MFUL page 29

ANALYSIS

The main issues in the determination of this application relate to the policy context and principle of the development together with an assessment of the proposed development on:-

Visual and Landscape Impact Surface Water Run-off and Flood Risk Access and Highway Safety Ecology Economic Benefit Residential Amenity

Policy Context and Principle of the Development

Planning law requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the development plan, including local and neighbourhood plans, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

The Council formally adopted the East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031 on 28th January 2016 and the policies contained within it are those against which applications are being determined and carry full weight. There is no Neighbourhood Plan which covers this area.

In planning terms, the site is located in open countryside where Strategy 7 (Development in the Countryside) of the Local Plan states that development will only be permitted where it is in accordance with a specific Local or Neighbourhood Plan policy that explicitly permits such development and where it would not harm the distinctive landscape, amenity and environmental qualities within which it is located.

Strategy 33 (Promotion of Tourism in East Devon) states that tourism growth should be sustainable and should not damage the natural assets of the District but aim to attract new tourism relate businesses that can complement the high quality environment of East Devon.

Whilst there no is support within the adopted plan for new build holiday accommodation in the open countryside, there is support for the expansion and improvement of businesses within the countryside, and the promotion of tourism. Adopted policy E16 (Proposals for Holiday or Overnight Accommodation and Associated Facilities) support conversions of existing buildings to holiday accommodation as opposed to the provision of new buildings; and policy E4 (Rural Diversification) and E5 (Small Scale Economic Development in Rural Areas) allow rural diversification and small scale economic development to support existing businesses, agricultural enterprises and A class uses where appropriate.

The thrust of adopted policy is to guide new tourism development (unless they are conversions of existing buildings to holiday accommodation) away from environmentally sensitive areas such as AONBs, Coastal Preservation Areas and the countryside and instead into existing holiday sites, main holiday accommodation areas

19/2145/MFUL page 30

(the coastal towns) and more sustainable locations including those parts of the district with built-up area boundaries. The site is located within the countryside and relatively close to protected landscapes, although not within any designated sites.

Policy E19 (Holiday Accommodation Parks) of the East Devon Plan is also relevant and it is considered that the facilities and accommodation offered at Woodbury Park are similar in form to those offered by many of the ‘accommodation parks’ within the district, having leisure facilities, including accommodation, both within the hotel and existing lodges, restaurants a wellness spa and health centre. As such it is considered that the policy lends support to the proposal and as such an assessment of the proposed development against the criteria within this policy is required. The policy stating the following:

Outside of designated landscape areas, proposals for new sites and extensions of existing sites will be permitted where they meet the following six criteria:

1. The proposal relates sensitively in scale and siting to the surroundings and includes extensive landscaping and visual screening to mitigate against adverse impacts. They do not affect habitats or protected species. 2. They are within, or in close proximity, to an existing settlement but would not have an adverse impact on the character or setting of that settlement or the amenities of adjoining residents. 3. They would not use the best and most versatile agricultural land. 4. They will be provided with adequate services and utilities 5. Traffic generated by the proposal can be accommodated safely on the local highway network and safe highway access to the site can be achieved. 6. The development will be subject to the provisions of plan policy in terms of sustainable construction and on site renewable energy production.

In terms of compliance with the criteria, this is considered below.

Landscape and Visual Impact

The area where the lodges are proposed lies to the north of the edge of the East Devon Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, although part of the access drive extends over the existing golf course and just within the AONB. No built development is proposed within this area.

The siting of the proposed lodges and any visual impact arising from these has been the subject of considerable discussion, with a detailed visual appraisal having been undertaken and the potential impact having been fully appraised by the Councils Landscape Architect. The site is located at a higher level than the neighbouring Warkidons Way, and forming part of the existing open golf course has the potential to be seen in wider ranging views from the west and northwest.

Having said this the proposed location of the lodges is such that there would be limited views from beyond the golf course, with the principle ones being long range views from the entrance to Greendale Business Park, from Hogsbrook Farm, and from a section of Warkidons Way to the east of the site. Although the lodges would introduce some built form within what is essentially a natural environment, albeit a manicured

19/2145/MFUL page 31

golf course, it is not considered that they would appear to be unduly prominent or alien within this part of the countryside, given their scale and positioning. No other physical structures are proposed within the site. As a result of this it is considered that the landscape impact arising from the siting of the proposed lodges is limited and subject to appropriate conditions relating to landscaping and operational management of the development, including external lighting, the proposal is considered to be acceptable in terms of landscape impact.

Proximity to a settlement

Criteria 2 to Policy E19 requires site to be in close proximity to an existing settlement. The site is within the land associated with the existing hotel and golf course and adjacent Woodbury Common and there are therefore a range of leisure opportunities within close proximity. Woodbury which has additional facilities and services is located around 2.5km to the south west of the site, although this would not be easily accessible by foot, given the nature of the narrow and unlit roads. Any visits to the town or other services would therefore require journeys to be made by alternative means of transport which would fail to meet this criteria as the site is not considered to be sustainable.

Having said this the lodges are proposed to be an alternative to the accommodation already existing within the complex, and are proposed to be offered as part of the wider Woodbury Park experience, with the golfing and leisure offer being the main attraction. Whilst visitors would be likely to leave the site to access wider services or facilities, and in doing so journeys would probably be undertaken by private vehicle, it would not be necessary to do so for a short break given the level of facilities available on the site.

However, Policy E19 supports the extension of existing facilities, which this applications represents, and as such its close proximity to Woodbury and the existing facilities at the site are considered to meet this criteria with the site being well located and by the nature of the proposal and facilities at the golf club, reduce reliance upon the car.

Loss of agricultural land

The land is designated Grade 3, but believed to be Grade 3b, and as such is not considered to represent the best and most versatile agricultural land. In any case the extent of agricultural land to be lost is not significant and the site could be brought back into agricultural use in the future if needed. The proposal is not therefore in conflict with Policy EN13 – Development on High Quality Agricultural land of the Local Plan.

Adequate Services and Facilities

The site will benefit from the full range of services and facilities available at the golf course.

Access and Highway safety

19/2145/MFUL page 32

Public highway arrangement serving the site are considered to be adequate, with the existing road network offering safe and suitable access to the strategic highway network.

During the course of the application, the proposed access arrangements to the lodges have been amended so that no access to the site is now proposed from Warkidons Way, with access being taken directly from the car park serving the main hotel and golf course, using an existing golf buggy track which leads to the driving range, and then extended to the north across part of the nine hole course to the application site. The access driveway is proposed to be 4.1m wide which is considered to be reasonable to accommodate the golf buggies, pedestrians and the occasional maintenance vehicles. It is noted that this would be of sufficient width to accommodate emergency vehicles should the need arise.

No vehicular access is proposed to serve the lodges, with access only by golf buggies, with parking and electric charging points provided by each of the lodges. Parking for guests is proposed within the existing car parks, and whilst the submitted traffic survey was undertaken over a limited period of time, it is considered that the submission of a travel plan to ensure that appropriate parking and travel arrangements can be made would ensure that the additional traffic attracted to the site can be accommodated. On this basis no highway safety objection is raised.

It has been suggested that a Section 106 Agreement should be entered into to ensure that no parking of guest vehicles takes place within the site, however whilst the need to restrict the vehicular movements within the site is considered to be reasonable it is considered that this could be achieved by a suitably worded condition, and that a legal agreement would be unduly onerous.

A construction and environment management plan will also be necessary to ensure that the construction process, caravan delivery and construction waste is managed appropriately.

Surface Water Run-off and Flood Risk

It is understood that the surface water is proposed to be disposed of through a combination of infiltration measures and attenuation ponds and the use of gravel/crushed shell surfacing for the tracks, with the only hardsurfacing proposed being that on which the lodges are proposed to be sited. The submissions have been the subject of discussion and revision by the Flood Risk Management Team and subject to appropriate conditions have been found to be acceptable.

Sustainability

In light of the nature of the proposal, the provision of renewable energy is no possible or necessary.

Ecology

The application site has been the subject of a preliminary ecological assessment, which has found that due to the relatively manicured and managed nature of the site

19/2145/MFUL page 33

there is generally little ecological value, other than in the surrounding hedgerows, particularly those to the north and east of the site, abutting Walkidons Way, which are recognised as mature species-rich intact hedgerows and considered to meet the ‘important’ criteria under the Hedgerow Regulations of 1997. Whilst the land within the protected landscapes to the south of the site are recognised for their significant ecological importance there is little of this within the main body of the site itself.

The nature of the proposed development is such that minimal disturbance of the land is proposed, with the access track and siting of the lodges within the areas of the site which have the least ecological value and unlikely to disturb the more valuable hedgerow boundaries of the site. Subject to appropriate management it is not considered that the proposed development will have a significant impact on the wider ecological value of the area, and that there is the opportunity for further enhancement of the ecology of the immediate environment through significant additional planting and managing and improving the boundary hedging to provide enhanced ecological value.

Economic Benefit

The application is accompanied by supporting information suggesting that whilst there is a decrease in the numbers of participants playing golf, and that a number of golf facilities have closed as a result of this, those clubs which remain successful are those which have been able to diversify their business model to adapt to changing circumstances. Such alterations include proving a wider range of leisure facilities and the offer of different types of accommodation for those attracted to the site. Such facilities are considered to attract not only those playing golf, but other family members who are attracted by the other leisure activities.

In this respect it is considered that offering self-catering accommodation will attract a wider range of visitors to the country club than those currently using the hotel accommodation, and will also contribute to the wider tourism activity, and local economy.

Whilst it is difficult to quantify the exact benefit to the local economy arising from the proposed accommodation, the location of the country club which is well related to a number of local visitor attractions and the surrounding coast and countryside, in conjunction with the on-site facilities is likely to result in some increase in visitors to the area which in turn will have a positive impact on the local tourism offer.

Residential and other Amenity

The application site is located within the open countryside, with the nearest residential properties not associated with the country club being located to the north and west of the site, around 350m away. The site is not visible from either of these locations, due to boundary planting and the topography of the land. It is therefore not considered that the siting, access or occupation of the proposed lodges would have any significant impact on the residential amenities presently enjoyed by the occupiers of these dwellings.

19/2145/MFUL page 34

The use of external lighting has the potential to create some loss of amenity and nuisance in the form or light pollution, and it is therefore considered to be appropriate to ensure that suitable conditions be included in any permission to ensure that this issue is addressed.

The other main amenity issue raised by this proposal was the impact of additional use and potential conflict between existing users of Warkidons Way and those visiting the lodges. These concerns have been addressed by amending the access arrangements so that the existing track serving the 9-hole golf course directly from the main car park would be used to provide access, thereby negating any potential conflict.

Habitats Mitigation

The nature of the application and its location close to the Exe Estuary and East Devon Pebblebed Heaths and their European Habitat designation is such that the proposal requires a Habitat Regulations Assessment. The Appropriate Assessment is required as a result of the Habitat Regulations Assessment and Likely Significant Effects from the proposal. In partnership with Natural England, the council and its neighbouring authorities of Exeter City Council and Teignbridge District Council have determined that housing and tourist accommodation developments in their areas will in- combination have a detrimental impact on the Exe Estuary and East Devon Pebblebed Heaths through impacts from recreational use. The impacts are highest from developments within 10 kilometres of the designation. It is therefore essential that mitigation is secured to make such developments permissible. This mitigation is secured via a combination of funding secured via the Community Infrastructure Levy and contributions collected from residential developments within 10km of the designations. This development will be CIL liable and the financial contribution has been secured. On this basis, and as the joint authorities are working in partnership to deliver the required mitigation in accordance with the South-East Devon European Site Mitigation Strategy, this proposal will not give rise to likely significant effects.

Other Matters

The application site lies within an area identified as being within the consultation zone of the Barrington to Kenn Hazzard Pipeline, and as such the acceptability of new development has to be assessed using the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) guidance.

Using the HSE Planning Advice Web App, the nature of the development is considered to have a level 2 Sensitivity (DT2.2 – HOTEL / HOSTEL / HOLIDAY ACCOMMODATION Hotels, motels, guest houses, hostels, youth hostels, holiday camps, holiday homes, halls of residence, dormitories, accommodation centres, holiday caravan sites, camping sites Accommodation up to 100 beds or 33 caravan / tent pitches) and falls within the Middle Zone where the advice is ‘DAA = Don’t Advise Against development’.

On this basis there is no HSE objection to the proposed development.

CONCLUSION

19/2145/MFUL page 35

The application is submitted to diversify the offer at the golf course and is considered to gain support from Policy E19.

There are economic benefits from the proposal and subject to conditions, the proposal will not result in any harm to the local area or local amenities.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Adopt the Appropriate Assessment 2. APPROVE 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 and shall be carried out as approved. (Reason - To comply with section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans listed at the end of this decision notice. (Reason - For the avoidance of doubt.)

3. A Construction and Environment Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to any works commencing on site, and must be implemented and remain in place throughout the development. The CEMP shall include at least the following matters: Air Quality, Dust, Water Quality, Lighting, Noise and Vibration, Pollution Prevention and Control, and Monitoring Arrangements. Construction working hours shall be 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday and 8am to 1pm on Saturdays, with no working on Sundays or Bank Holidays. There shall be no burning on site. There shall be no high frequency audible reversing alarms used on the site. (Reason: A pre-commencement condition is required to ensure that the details are agreed before the start of works to protect the amenities of existing and future residents in the vicinity of the site from noise, air, water and light pollution in accordance with Policies D1 - Design and Local Distinctiveness and EN14 - Control of Pollution of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

4. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until a programme of percolation tests has been carried out in accordance with BRE Digest 365 Soakaway Design (2016), and the results approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with Devon County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority. A representative number of tests should be conducted to provide adequate coverage of the site, with particular focus placed on the locations of the proposed infiltration devices/permeable surfaces. (Reason: To ensure that surface water from the development is discharged as high up the drainage hierarchy as is feasible.

19/2145/MFUL page 36

5. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until the full results of a groundwater monitoring programme (should infiltration is viable), undertaken over a period of 12 months, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with Devon County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority. This monitoring should be conducted to provide adequate coverage of the site, with particular focus placed on the locations and depths of the proposed infiltration devices. (Reason: To ensure that the use of infiltration devices on the site is an appropriate means of surface water drainage management.

6. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until the detailed design of the proposed permanent surface water drainage management system has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with Devon County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority. The design of this permanent surface water drainage management system will be in accordance with the principles of sustainable drainage systems, and those set out in the Flood Risk Assessment & Outline Drainage Strategy Woodbury Park Hotel and Golf Club, Woodbury Castle, Woodbury, Exeter, EX5 1JJ (Report Ref. 01B902911, Rev. 1, dated September 2019). No part of the development shall be occupied until the surface water management scheme serving that part of the development has been provided in accordance with the approved details and the drainage infrastructure shall be retained and maintained for the lifetime of the development. (Reason: To ensure that surface water runoff from the development is managed in accordance with the principles of sustainable drainage systems. Advice: Refer to Devon County Council's Sustainable Drainage Guidance.

7. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until the detailed design of the proposed surface water drainage management system which will serve the development site for the full period of its construction has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with Devon County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority. This temporary surface water drainage management system must satisfactorily address both the rates and volumes, and quality, of the surface water runoff from the construction site. (Reason: To ensure that surface water runoff from the construction site is appropriately managed so as to not increase the flood risk, or pose water quality issues, to the surrounding area.

19/2145/MFUL page 37

8. No part of the development hereby permitted shall be commenced until the full details of the adoption and maintenance arrangements for the proposed permanent surface water drainage management system have been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with Devon County Council as the Lead Local Flood Authority. (Reason: To ensure that the development's permanent surface water drainage management systems will remain fully operational throughout the lifetime of the development.

9. No development shall take place until a landscape scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; such a scheme shall include the following:

- A Green infrastructure statement describing the various types of proposed planting and features, and how they tie into the local landscape character and other elements of the proposed development. - A tree survey prepared in accordance with BS5837, 2012 - Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction recommendations. - Measures for protection of existing perimeter trees/ hedgerows/ undisturbed ground during construction phase in accordance with BS5837: 2012. Approved protective measures shall be implemented prior to commencement of construction and maintained in sound condition for the duration of the works. -Detailed layouts providing the following information: - Planting proposals. - Hard or soft boundary treatments. - Hard surface treatments. - Proposed external lighting scheme incorporating recommendations from the Ecological Impact Assessment and in compliance with Guidance note 08/18 - Bats and Artificial Lighting in the UK, Institute of Lighting Professionals/ Bat Conservation Trust, 2018. - Existing and proposed levels and extent of proposed earthworks. - An ecological enhancement and mitigation plan indicating the extent and locations of measures as recommended in the submitted ecological assessment together with copies of any further surveys required. - Soft landscape proposals shall be accompanied by a specification detailing the proposed species, their planting size, the density at which they will be planted, any specific planting matrices, the number of plants of each species and notes describing how the scheme will be implemented. - Hard landscape proposals shall be accompanied by a material specification. - If the scheme has significant level changes, sections shall be provided showing how the proposed development will integrate into the existing context. - Construction details of any proposed walls, fences and other boundary treatments - The various tree pits and/or Devon bank construction details.

19/2145/MFUL page 38

The landscaping scheme shall be carried out in the first planting season after completion of the groundworks and the building construction works or prior to first occupation whichever is the earliest unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the landscaping shall be maintained for a period of 5 years. Any trees or other plants which die during this period shall be replaced during the next planting season with specimens of the same size and species unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - In the interests of amenity and to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the area in accordance with Strategy 3 (Sustainable Development), Strategy 5 (Environment), Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) and Policy D2 (Landscape Requirements) and Policy D3 (Trees in relation to construction) of the East Devon Local Plan. The landscaping scheme is required to be approved before development starts to ensure that it properly integrates into the development from an early stage.)

10. A 25 year Landscape and Ecology Management Plan, including long term design objectives, management responsibilities and maintenance schedules for all landscape/ habitat areas shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to any development taking place. The plan shall include the following: - Extent, ownership and responsibilities for management and maintenance. - Inspection and monitoring arrangements for existing and proposed trees and hedgerows - Detailed schedules covering management and maintenance of the following: - Trees and hedgerow. - Grass areas. - Measures for enhancement of biodiversity value. - Management and maintenance of any boundary structures, drainage swales and other infrastructure. The proposals shall be carried out for the full duration of the approved plan. (Reason - To ensure that the details are considered at an early stage in the interests of amenity and to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the area in accordance with Policies D1 - Design and Local Distinctiveness and D2 - Landscape Requirements of the East Devon Local Plan.

11. Before development above foundation level is commenced, a schedule of materials and finishes, and, where so required by the Local Planning Authority, samples of such materials and finishes, to be used for the external walls and roofs of the proposed development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To ensure that the materials are sympathetic to the character and appearance of the area in accordance with Policy D1 - Design and Local Distinctiveness of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

12. Notwithstanding the submitted details, within 6 months of the date of the decision notice, a travel plan should be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This should include details of the peak traffic times, parking capacity and how sufficient spaces will be available for the holiday units at all times. This should also provide details of how any increase in vehicle and

19/2145/MFUL page 39

pedestrian trip generation from both additional employees and visitors will be managed and mitigated. (Reason – To ensure that adequate and safe provision is made for visitors to the holiday accommodation and users of the existing facilities in the interests of highway safety and with the requirements of Policy TC7 (Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access) of the East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

13. Notwithstanding the submitted details, and with the exception of golf buggies, service/maintenance or emergency vehicles, no other vehicular traffic shall be brought onto or permitted to park on the site at any time. (Reason – in the interests of highway safety and to promote sustainable travel in accordance with Policies TC7 (Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access) and TC9 (Parking Provision in New Development) of the East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.

14. The development hereby permitted shall only be occupied for holiday purposes under the supervision and management of the owners or occupiers of the Woodbury Park Hotel and Country Club and shall not be occupied as a person's sole or main place of residence. A register (including names and main home addresses) of all occupiers of the holiday unit shall be collated and maintained by the owners or occupiers of Woodbury Park Hotel and Country Club, and this information shall be available at all reasonable times on request by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - To ensure that the accommodation hereby permitted may not be used as a separate dwelling in this open countryside location where new development is restricted in accordance with Policy E19 (Holiday Accommodation Parks) and Strategy 7 - Development in the Countryside of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

15. No external lighting shall be installed on site unless details of such lighting, including the intensity of illumination, have been first submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority prior to first occupation/use of the site. Any external lighting that is installed shall accord with the details approved and maintained as such in perpetuity. (Reason - To protect the amenity of adjoining occupiers in accordance with Strategy 7 - Development in the Countryside and Policies D1 - Design and Local Distinctiveness and EN14 - Control of Pollution of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

16. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the mitigation and enhancement measures set out in the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal report dated July 2019 prepared by BSG Ecology unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason: In the interests of nature conservation and to comply with Policy EN5 (Wildlife Habitats and Features) of the East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031

Plans relating to this application:

19/2145/MFUL page 40

1A : Proposed Combined 23.10.19 floor/elevations Plans

P19-2176_05 F Landscaping 07.09.20

AY01.02B82030 Location Plan 29.06.20 4.01 REV B (amended)

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

19/2145/MFUL page 41 Agenda Item 7 Ward Ottery St Mary

Reference 20/0728/FUL & 20/0729/LBC

Applicant Mr and Mrs Graham Hudson

Location Kings Arms Hotel Gold Street Ottery St Mary EX11 1DG

Proposal Conversion of hotel accommodation to 5 flats, retaining existing bar, lounge and skittle alley, fenestration changes and provision of bin storage and bicycle parking

RECOMMENDATION: RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the Habitat Regulations Appropriate Assessment outlined within the Committee Report be adopted; 2. That application 20/0728/FUL be APPROVED subject to conditions; and 3. That application 20/0729/LBC be APPROVED subject to conditions.

Crown Copyright and database rights 2020 Ordnance Survey 100023746

page 42

Committee Date: 7th January 2021

Ottery St Mary Target Date: (Ottery St Mary) 20/0728/FUL & 20/0729/LBC 01.06.2020

Applicant: Mr and Mrs Graham Hudson

Location: Kings Arms Hotel Gold Street

Proposal: Conversion of hotel accommodation to 5 flats, retaining existing bar, lounge and skittle alley, fenestration changes and provision of bin storage and bicycle parking AND Conversion of hotel accommodation to 5 flats, retaining existing bar, lounge and skittle alley and external alterations, including re-roofing, new rooflights and installation of double glazing in existing window frames

RECOMMENDATION: 1. That the Habitat Regulations Appropriate Assessment outlined within the Committee Report be adopted; 2. That application 20/0728/FUL be APPROVED subject to conditions; and 3. That application 20/0729/LBC be APPROVED subject to conditions.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

These applications are before Members as the officer recommendation is contrary to the view of one of the Ward Members.

Planning permission and listed building consent are sought for the conversion of underused space within a grade II listed pub in the town centre to create five flats.

A proposal in 2015 to convert the whole building to eight flats was refused owing to concerns about the loss of the pub. The current proposal is now limited to conversion of the redundant floorspace and retains the pub on the ground floor which since 2018 benefits from enhanced protection under the Neighbourhood Plan.

The core of the building is three stories in height with further attic accommodation and there is ample space for the flats without the need for extensions or substantial alterations. Most of the alterations would take place internally but the proposal also includes much needed renovation of the exterior.

This proposal offers the benefits of retaining a pub in the town centre, bringing underused floorspace back into use, providing dwellings in a sustainable location

20/0728/FUL page 43

and, importantly, provides a means by which the building will be restored if the scheme is implemented. For all of these reasons the proposal is supported.

CONSULTATIONS

Local Consultations on both applications

Parish/Town Council Ottery St Mary Town Council supports this application

Further comments:

Ottery St Mary Town Council supports this application, subject to keeping the building sympathetically looking so that the character of the listed building is not lost and is retained.

Ottery St Mary - Cllr Peter Faithfull 27.04.20:

Dear Planning Central Team

These applications, for the Kings Arms to five flats, are in my ward and my view, based on the information presently available to me is that they should be refused.

The proposed plans are of a very poor quality, lacking proper drawings and details of heritage features. I am also very concerned about the proposal to remove the central base of the chimney in main pub lounge area. This is a major structural load bearing feature, supporting a very major chimney along with other parts of the building. I would want to see much more detailed plans of this important building before I would be prepared to support this application.

I am also very concerned about a stress fracture in the external brickwork bellow the rear east wing third floor window. I have been advised that this crack is continuing to open up, endangering the structure of the building.

These are my views, based on the information presently available to me. I reserve my right to change my views in the event that further information becomes available to me.

Technical Consultations on both applications

Devon County Highway Authority LOCATION: Kings Arms Hotel Gold Street Ottery St Mary EX11 1DG Observations: The site is located on Gold Street, B3177 with a vehicular access on Brook Street, W2504. The proposal will use the existing vehicular access on Brook Street, parking numbers are a policy for East Devon District Council to administer, however I would note that I

20/0728/FUL page 44

do not believe the visitor bay nearest to the pub, will be able to successfully be entered and exited without excessive reversing. I believe the trip generation for five residential units instead of hotel accommodation will be of a similar value therefore, I do not believe the local highway network will suffer from this application. I believe cycle storage would be beneficial in this this town centre environment to encourage sustainable travel and reduce vehicular trip generations for short trip journeys to the local facilities and services. Therefore in summary the County Highway Authority has no objection to this application. Recommendation: THE HEAD OF PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION AND ENVIRONMENT, ON BEHALF OF DEVON COUNTY COUNCIL, AS LOCAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, MAY WISH TO RECOMMEND CONDITIONS ON ANY GRANT OF PLANNING PERMISSION 1. No development shall take place until details of secure cycle/scooter storage facilities have been submitted to and approved in writing by the County Planning Authority. The development shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. REASON: To promote sustainable travel in accordance with the East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.

Environmental Health We have been contacted by the agent prior to submission and as a result the layout of the proposed flats has been amended. There is potential for noise transmission between residential units in this kind of conversion of an existing building and therefore I recommend that the following condition is included on any approval:

Prior to the first occupation of any of the residential units hereby approved a sound insulation scheme shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Such a scheme shall be designed to reduce the transmission of noise between the commercial premises and the residential development with the airborne sound insulation performance designed to achieve, as a minimum, a 10dB increase in the minimum requirements of Approved Document E. The standard must be applied to party walls between flats, as well as floors and ceilings shared with the commercial premises. The scheme to be submitted shall also provide for post construction testing certification to demonstrate the sound insulation performance has met the required standard and where necessary set out what further mitigation measures will be employed to achieve the required levels. The sound insulation scheme shall be installed and maintained only in accordance with the details approved by the Local Planning Authority.

(Reason -To protect the amenity of future occupiers of the dwelling in accordance with policies D1 (Design and Distinctiveness) and EN15 (Control of Pollution) of the adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013 - 2031.)

Conservation In general there is scope for the principle of conversion, however, unfortunately there is an absence of any heritage impact assessment and evidence for the loss of internal fabric.

20/0728/FUL page 45

The design and access statement makes a brief reference to the fact that only the external fabric is in the listing description, this is a misrepresentation for the intention of the description itself.

The drawings, although they indicate approximate positions of all features, such as windows and doors, it is grossly inadequate in quality of clarity and scale. It is very difficult to make a fair assessment when the drawings submitted lack detail. A typical example of this is a large area in the ground floor lounge bar. It is assumed that it is a chimney stack?

More information and supporting evidence (with photographs) is required for all areas that are to be changed/demolished, including all the walls, staircase, (third floor) and doorways. This should have supporting information with regards to the areas that will require structural reinforcement. Further detailed evidence required for the full extent and methods of all of the acoustic insulation and its impact on the historic fabric.

Recommendation unacceptable.

Further comment:

The revised drawings are welcomed and provide clarity to the proposal. Overall there is support for the proposed conversion of the each floor, however, there remains concerns regarding the impact on the significance of the listed building. In general there is a huge impact on the historic fabric regarding the acoustic fitting, along with the loss of many internal partitions for instance. There could well be scope for the demolition of internal partitions, but unfortunately there is no balanced justification for their loss against historic floor plans and historic fabric.

The acoustic works are to be expected, however they (due to the lack of justification and details e.g. sections through) seem not to be sympathetic to the heritage asset or any historic structural fabric. It is unclear if there is to be any heritage gain e.g. the repair of the decorative plaster work in the paino nobile (first floor) and how the insertion of the acoustic intervention impacts (or rather is fixed) so as not to make any works irreversible, as per best conservation principles.

At present due to lack of justification and evidence regarding the impact on the significance of the listed building this is not supported. As mitigation, happy to liaise with the agent regarding the proposal in more detail.

Further comment:

These comments are based on the amended drawings following liaison between the agent, planning officer and conservation officer and are as follows; o Further investigation of the remaining historic fabric revealed the main areas are around the main staircase and in the (front) principle rooms at first floor. o The acoustic system has been agreed to be removed from the first floor room in order not to further harm the decorative plasterwork, however, the product information supplied is too generic and does not detail how this will be applied to this actual building. It is recommended that this could be set as a condition requiring more

20/0728/FUL page 46

information on products, their impact on the listed building, the actual areas of fixing, method of fixing including over flooring. o The removal of any other historic decorative features such as architrave and skirting boards etc as noted on the drawings is to remain as existing, however there is opportunity to apply a light weight covering over this, therefore no further loss of historic fabric. This could covered by a condition. o The new roof has minimal information, however it is recommend this can be satisfied by condition and that a natural slate, ridge solution and nail fixed used including samples. LBC15N & LBC8N o Details of any new fascia and rainwater goods - LBC11N & LBC13N o The rooflights are a little large, however, the details of these can also be conditioned. LBC12N o Conditions for details of any vents and extraction including any external fixings including utility boxes, lighting, mail boxes, security etc. o There is concern with regards to the works to the insertion of double glazing into the exiting windows. There is scope to consider secondary glazing in the first instance, however, along with a condition survey and a schedule of repair and large scale, detailed sectional drawings of all windows this could be as a condition. o There is no information with regards to any existing doors, it is recommended that this is included with the window schedule. o It is strongly recommend that there is a schedule of repair/stabilisation of the decorative plasterworks in the first floor room. It is important to understand what has been the causes for loss before any remedial works can be undertaken. It is recommended that a decorative plaster specialist is consulted in unison with a condition for a condition survey and schedule of repair for this significant feature. o There is flexibility within building regulations for works to a listed building. Happy to liaise with regards any recommendations from them. o LBC22N partitions remove o LBC23N - partitions new o LBC24N features o LBC27N - protect all of the decorative plaster (most of which found at first floor) o LBC3N o LBC5N

Other Representations One objection was submitted in relation to the planning application prior to the submission of the better quality drawings and the following concerns were raised:

There is insufficient information to determine the application, particularly regarding the effect of the proposals on the Listed Building -The plans provided are not consistent with one another with regard to existing and proposed layouts and uses, as well as being so vague as to not be scalable. -There are only partial existing elevations and no proposed elevations -There are no details or specifications concerning materials used in the alterations -No Heritage Impact Assessment has been provided

Consideration should be given to: -removing pub use from the building to reduce the amount of antisocial behaviour in and around the premises; -a higher quality restaurant or retail use for the ground floor;

20/0728/FUL page 47

-a residential use to the ground floor -demolition or conversion of the ancillary buildings to the south of the property, partly to provide greater car parking.

PLANNING HISTORY

Reference Description Decision Date

02/P1077 Conversion To 8 Flats And Approval 05.05.2004 Retention Of Existing Flat with conditions

02/P1078 Conversion To 8 Flats And Approval 24.10.2003 Retention Of Existing Flat with conditions

10/2467/LBC Conversion of public Approval 23.06.2011 house/hotel into 8 flats with conditions

10/2468/FUL Conversion of public Refusal 22.06.2011 house/hotel into 8 flats

15/2574/FUL Conversion of public Refusal 21.12.2017 house/hotel into eight flats.

15/2575/LBC Conversion of public Approval 21.12.2017 house/hotel into eight flats. with conditions

POLICIES

Ottery St Mary and West Hill Neighbourhood (Made) Policy NP2: Sensitive, High Quality Design Policy NP12: Appropriate Housing Mix Policy NP13: Accessible and Adaptable Homes Policy NP14: Demonstrating Infrastructure Capacity Policy NP17: Community Facilities of Value Policy NP18: Supporting Ottery St Mary as the Economic Focus for the Parish Policy NP22: Ottery St Mary Conservation Area Policy NP23: Ottery St Mary Town Centre Public Realm Enhancements and Highways Improvements Policy NP24: Car parking in Ottery St Mary Town Centre

Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031 Policies Strategy 3 (Sustainable Development) Strategy 4 (Balanced Communities)

20/0728/FUL page 48

Strategy 6 (Development within Built-up Area Boundaries) Strategy 24 (Development at Ottery St Mary) Strategy 32 (Resisting Loss of Employment, Retail and Community Sites and Buildings) Strategy 47 (Nature Conservation and Geology) D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) EN9 (Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset) EN10 (Conservation Areas) H3 (Conversion of Existing Dwellings and Other Buildings to Flats) EN9 (Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset) TC9 (Parking Provision in New Development)

Government Planning Documents NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework 2019) National Planning Practice Guidance

Site Location and Description

The Kings Arms is a prominent three storey grade II listed premises that fronts onto the junction of Cornhill, Sandhill Street and Gold Street within the town centre.

The premises comprise a public lounge bar and pool bar on the ground floor at the front of the building, with a further pool room, kitchen and preparation/storage areas housed in the ground floor of a two storey wing projecting from part of the rear of the three storey core. A single storey building to the rear of the main core houses toilets, a cellar and a skittle alley and bar.

There is a small car park on the site at the rear of the premises with access from Brook Street, onto which the site has a rear frontage.

Within the remainder of the building, at first and second floor levels and also within the roofspace, there is a former function room together with a number of guest bedrooms. However, these upper floors have suffered some neglect as well as fire damage and have not been used for a number of years.

The three storey core of the building features sliding sash timber windows, mostly incorporating glazing bars, although the windows at second floor level are not as tall as those on the ground and first floors of the premises. The roofs of all of the key elements of the entire building are finished in slate, whilst the external wall finish comprises a mix of stucco and painted brickwork.

The Kings Arms is situated amidst a mix of non-residential and residential uses on the edge of the Town Centre Shopping Area and in the Conservation Area.

Proposal

The application seeks planning permission for the conversion of part of the pub/hotel to form five flats, retaining the existing ground floor bars and skittle alley. This is a different scheme to earlier proposals which sought to convert the whole building to residential use. The new proposal has one flat on the ground floor and four flats on

20/0728/FUL page 49

three upper floors, resulting in the loss of the guest bedrooms, upstairs bar and function room and downstairs kitchen, larder, store and office. The pub would continue to be accessed from both the front and rear of the building. The flats would principally be accessed from a private entrance at the rear although there would also be a fire exit through the front lobby.

The proposal includes various internal and external works which are summarised below.

Externally, new rooflights are proposed on the rear elevation and a door would be replaced with a fixed glazed screen. Other works of renovation and restoration include:  Re-roofing in natural slate  Repair and painting of the render  Repair and painting of the fascias and bargeboards  Repair and refurbishment of the windows and reglazing in heritage ultra-slim double glazing  New rainwater goods

Internally, the separation of the retained pub from the new residential areas would require some new door openings to ground floor rooms and closure of others.

There are also extensive alterations proposed to divide the upper floors into self- contained flats and to partition the living spaces. This includes sound insulation to the floors and ceilings to provide acoustic separation. Taking each floor in turn, the alterations are as follows:

 A set of stairs between the lounge bar and flat 1 would be retained but the ceiling would be infilled to prevent access to the upper floor which would become part of flat 2.  In flat 1 partitions would be removed and new walls constructed to reorganise the space.  In flat 2 on the first floor all of the partitions would be removed and new walls constructed. The alterations for flat 3 would be less extensive but new walls would be required to create a second bedroom, an ensuite would be removed and a cloakroom and toilet would be merged to create a bathroom.  On the second floor there would be alterations to divide flat 4 from the landing area. A bathroom and shower room would also be removed and replaced with a kitchen.  On the third floor the only alterations required are the replacement of a bathroom with a kitchen, including the removal of a partition wall, and the installation of new rooflights.

ANALYSIS

The main issues in the determination of these applications for planning permission and listed building consent are: whether the alterations would preserve the special architectural and historic interest of the building; and for the planning application the additional matter of whether, having regard to the conclusions on the first main issue,

20/0728/FUL page 50

the proposal is compatible with policies seeking to retain premises in business and community use in the town centre.

Impact on the listed building

The pub/hotel is listed grade II and dates from the 18th Century. Any alterations must therefore be sensitive to the character and fabric of the building and seek to preserve its architectural and historic interest.

This application follows a number of previous schemes for conversion and initially the submission was based on the details that were first provided in 2002. The applicant subsequently provided a more detailed and up-to-date set of drawings along with detailed justification for the works and an assessment of their impact on the building.

It is now clear that although the proposal would result in extensive internal alterations, much of this would relate to modern partitions that are of little heritage significance. It is also clear that owing to the lack of a viable use, the upper floors of the building are in a state of disrepair and little has been done to address previous fire/smoke damage. Hence the proposed renovation and re-use of the upper floors is welcomed from a heritage perspective.

One area where there has been detailed discussion of the work required is the first floor function room at the front of the building. This has decorative plaster work on the walls and ceilings and while not of such importance to merit a mention in the listing description, this room is the most characterful of all of the rooms. Across all floor levels it is proposed to fix a secondary plasterboard ceiling to enhance acoustic separation but in the function room this would conceal the decorative ceiling whereas in other rooms there would be no detrimental impact. It may be possible to achieve sufficient insulation within the floor void and on the floor above but if that is not possible, a lesser standard of noise insulation would be justified for this room to avoid a loss of significance. In the interests of preserving the character and architectural features of this room, the floor plan annotation has been amended to exclude covering the ceiling.

The proposal also includes re-glazing the timber windows with slim double glazing. However, in the absence of product specifications and details of how individual windows would need to be adapted, there are reservations about accepting this change across the whole building. Notwithstanding those reservations, a condition can be imposed to secure a detailed schedule of works so that each window can be assessed individually.

Externally the building is in need of repair and redecoration and the investment in this work that would come with the re-use of the upper floors is welcomed in the interests of both the listed building and the town centre conservation area.

Like previous schemes that have been granted listed building consent, this proposal is considered to conserve the architectural and historic interest of the building.

Loss of hotel and pub accommodation

20/0728/FUL page 51

The principle of the loss of the pub/hotel has been considered on previous applications. The first in 2002 was approved but not implemented and the second in 2010 was refused over the lack of an open space contribution. On each occasion the proposal was the same and in 2015 it was put forward again. However, the adoption of the Local Plan and greater protection for community facilities led to that application being refused. Since that decision was made in 2017, the Neighbourhood Plan has been 'made' and this has introduced new policies that are relevant to the determination of what is now the fourth application in 18 years seeking to develop the building. On this occasion, however, the proposal has been scaled back and now retains the pub use on the ground floor.

The pub lies within the town centre conservation area. It is also within the built-up area and the 'town centre vitality and shopping area'. It lies outside the 'primary shopping frontage'.

Recently introduced changes to the Use Classes Order and permitted development rights do not provide any significant new options for the pub. Indeed, by making pubs a sui generis use the options are now more limited.

The main thrust of the relevant Local Plan policies is to ensure that the needs of the community are met in sustainable locations that support the vitality and viability of mixed-use town centres. Strategy 32 and Policy E9 provide particular support for the retention of the pub in this instance.

The Neighbourhood Plan adds a local dimension to the Local Plan policies and lists the pub as a ‘Community Facility of Value’ which is protected under policy NP17. In addition to this, policy NP18 supports the retention of existing business premises in the town centre.

These policies set a high bar to any proposal that would result in harm to business activity and community interests and policy NP18 in particular sets a presumption against the loss of business premises.

The pub is designated as a CFV because it makes an important contribution to residents' quality of life. To satisfy policy NP17 the applicant would need to show that the proposal would not result in significant harm to the quality of life of the community as a whole. Alongside this, to satisfy Policy E9 and Strategy 32, the applicant would need to demonstrate that appropriate marketing had taken place prior to any loss of business floor space being proposed. Policy NP18 takes this further and indicates that any loss of business floorspace would be unacceptable.

The main issue, therefore, is whether the losses proposed in this application are justified and whether there would be any harm to the local community and business opportunities.

The proposal would result in the loss on the ground floor of a pool room and kitchen and on the upper floors a function room and bar as well as hotel accommodation. Much of this accommodation has not been in use for a considerable time as the business has focussed on its core function as a drinking establishment. This continues to attract regular custom and the proposal seeks to ensure that that would remain the

20/0728/FUL page 52

case by retaining the important ground floor accommodation and upgrading the appearance of the building.

The retention of the pub on the ground floor is a significant point of difference between this proposal and the previous one which was refused. The current scheme would retain this key community facility and thereby achieve one of the main objectives of the relevant local and neighbourhood plan policies. This weighs strongly in favour of the proposal.

Notwithstanding this significant benefit, there would still be a loss of business floorspace in the building as a whole, albeit floorspace which has been of little economic value in recent years. Realistically, the upper floors are unlikely to achieve a viable use as a hotel or office space because the demand in this location for those uses is limited. As a result the investment required to restore the upper floors is unlikely to be repaid if the former use is restored or another business use is sought.

Marketing of the building in order to determine whether there is an alternative business use for the upper floors could be undertaken but insisting on marketing for a period of a year or more would potentially delay the restoration of the listed building which is now overdue. Strategy 32 indicates that a loss of business premises could be justified where the new use would safeguard a listed building. In this case it is considered that a residential use of the upper floors offers the best prospect of the building being restored. In combination with the retention of the pub, this proposal offers a highly attractive scheme which secures benefits to community and heritage interests. Consequently the proposal is considered to be in accordance with the suite of local and neighbourhood plan policies set out above.

Other matters

Flood risk - The lower part of the site (at the rear of the premises) is in flood zone 2 but only the end of the skittle alley building (which is to be retained in its present use) is within the area at risk.

Parking - One car parking space per flat would be provided at the rear of the building, along with two staff parking spaces. Although there would be no customer parking, this is not considered essential in a town centre location where many people can access the pub on foot. Bicycle parking provision is indicated in a combined bin/bike store but most of the space is likely to be needed for bins. The lack of good quality, dedicated provision is a shortcoming of the proposal but in this case walking is likely to be the more attractive option because of the close proximity of all the town centre amenities.

Conservation area - The proposal would restore and improve the appearance of the building with minimal alterations to the exterior and would therefore enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area. This would contribute towards the public realm enhancements sought in neighbourhood plan policy NP23.

Bin storage - The proposal makes external provision for the flats as well as the pub. Further details of the enclosure are required but these can be secured by condition.

20/0728/FUL page 53

Habitats Regulation Assessment and Appropriate Assessment

The nature of this application and its location close to the Pebblebed Heaths and their European Habitat designations is such that the proposal requires a Habitat Regulations Assessment. This section of the report forms the Appropriate Assessment required as a result of the Habitat Regulations Assessment and Likely Significant Effects from the proposal. In partnership with Natural England, the council and its neighbouring authorities of Exeter City Council and Teignbridge District Council have determined that housing and tourist accommodation developments in their areas will in-combination have a detrimental impact on the Pebblebed Heaths through impacts from recreational use. The impacts are highest from developments within 10 kilometres of these designations. It is therefore essential that mitigation is secured to make such developments permissible. This mitigation is secured via a combination of funding secured via the Community Infrastructure Levy and contributions collected from residential developments within 10km of the designations. This development will be CIL liable and the financial contribution has been secured. On this basis, and as the joint authorities are working in partnership to deliver the required mitigation in accordance with the South-East Devon European Site Mitigation Strategy, this proposal will not give rise to likely significant effects.

CONCLUSION

This proposal is a considerable improvement on previous schemes, both in terms of the quality of the submission (following the receipt of amended plans and further justification) and in terms of its compatibility with the objectives of the local and neighbourhood plans. It offers the benefits of retaining a pub in the town centre, bringing underused floorspace back into use, providing dwellings in a sustainable location and, importantly, provides a means by which the building will be restored if the scheme is implemented. For all of these reasons the proposal is supported.

RECOMMENDATION

1. That the Habitat Regulations Appropriate Assessment outlined within the Committee Report be adopted

2. That planning application 20/0728/FUL be APPROVED subject to the following conditions:

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans listed at the end of this decision notice. (Reason - For the avoidance of doubt.)

3. Prior to the first occupation of any of the residential units hereby approved a sound insulation scheme shall have been submitted to and approved in writing

20/0728/FUL page 54

by the local planning authority. Such a scheme shall be designed to reduce the transmission of noise between the commercial premises and the residential development with the airborne sound insulation performance designed to achieve, as a minimum, a 10dB increase in the minimum requirements of Approved Document E. The standard must be applied to party walls between flats, as well as floors and ceilings shared with the commercial premises and details of the method of fixing shall be provided. The scheme to be submitted shall also provide for post construction testing certification to demonstrate the sound insulation performance has met the required standard and where necessary set out what further mitigation measures will be employed to achieve the required levels. The sound insulation scheme shall be installed and maintained only in accordance with the details approved by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason -To protect the amenity of future occupiers of the dwelling in accordance with policies D1 - Design and Distinctiveness and EN14 - Control of Pollution of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

4. No flat hereby permitted shall be occupied until facilities for the external storage of refuse and recycling have been provided in accordance with details that have first been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved storage facilities shall be retained thereafter. (Reason - To ensure that early consideration is given to the provision of refuse storage facilities for the residents in the interest of health and hygiene in accordance with Policies D1- Design and Local Distinctiveness, H3 - Conversion of Existing Dwellings and Other Buildings to Flats and EN14 - Control of Pollution of the East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

5. Until the parking space associated with each individual flat has been completed in accordance with the approved plans that flat shall not be occupied. Thereafter at all times the parking spaces shall be kept free of obstruction and available for use by the occupants of the flats in perpetuity. (Reason - To ensure that adequate and safe provision is made for the occupiers and in the interests of highway safety in accordance with the requirements of Policy TC7 - Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access and TC9 - Parking Provision in New Development of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

NOTE FOR APPLICANT

Informative: In accordance with the requirements of Article 35 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 in determining this application, East Devon District Council has worked positively with the applicant to ensure that all relevant planning concerns have been appropriately resolved.

Plans relating to this application:

2133 1.0 Proposed Floor Plans 13.11.20

2133 1.9 Proposed Elevation 21.07.20

20/0728/FUL page 55

2133 0 Location Plan 03.04.20

AND

3. That listed building consent application 20/0729/LBC be APPROVED subject to the following conditions:

1. The works to which this consent relates must be begun not later than the expiration of three years beginning with the date on which this consent is granted. (Reason - To comply with Sections 18 and 74 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.)

2. The works hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans listed at the end of this decision notice. (Reason - For the avoidance of doubt.)

3. Samples of the proposed roofing materials including slates, tiles or ridge tiles and details of the method of fixing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of works to the roof, and no other materials shall be used without consent. (Reason - To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the building in accordance with Policy EN9 - Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

4. In re-roofing where ventilation is necessary, ventilation should be provided at eaves level. Details of any alternative means of ventilation shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of works. (Reason - To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the building in accordance with Policy EN9 - Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

5. All new approved barge boards, soffit boards, fascia boards and external cladding shall be constructed in timber only. The timber shall be painted in a colour to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the work being carried out. (Reason - To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the building in accordance with Policy EN9 - Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

6. Details of replacement and new rainwater goods including profiles, materials and finishes shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of these works. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

20/0728/FUL page 56

(Reason - To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the building in accordance with Policy EN9 - Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

7. The rooflights indicated on the approved plans shall be of a conservation design with integral bar and flush with the roof, the model specification of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of these works. (Reason - To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the building in accordance with Policy EN9 - Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

8. Before external fixings are installed, including utility boxes, lighting, mail boxes, and security/access features, the details and specification for these items shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and specification. (Reason - In the interests of the architectural and historic character of the building in accordance with Policy EN9 - Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

9. A full schedule of works to all windows and doors shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any such works are undertaken. The schedule of works shall comprise a condition survey, a schedule of repairs and large scale, detailed sectional drawings of all windows and doors. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the building in accordance with Policy EN9 (Extension, Alteration or Change of use of Buildings of Special Architectural and Historic Interest) of the East Devon Local Plan.)

10. A condition survey of the decorative plasterworks in the first floor function room and a schedule of repair/stabilisation works shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any such works are undertaken. The works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the building in accordance with Policy EN9 (Extension, Alteration or Change of use of Buildings of Special Architectural and Historic Interest) of the East Devon Local Plan.)

11. Where partitions are to be removed in accordance with the approved works, the work shall be made good to match the original. (Reason - To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the building in accordance Policy EN9 - Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

12. Where new partitions are constructed in accordance with the approved works they shall be scribed around (not cut into) existing cornices, skirtings or other features.

20/0728/FUL page 57

13. Rooms with cornices, moulded skirtings or other features which are to be divided in accordance with the approved works, shall have new lengths of cornice, skirtings or other features to match existing unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the building in accordance with Policy EN9 - Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

14. All the decorative plaster shall be retained in the original position and shall be protected during the whole period of alterations by a plywood box cover mounted on a timber frame. (Reason - To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the building in accordance with Policy EN9 - Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

15. Before any work is undertaken to demolish any part of the building, the applicant shall take such steps and carry out such works as shall, during the process of the works permitted by this consent, secure the safety and the stability of that part of the building which is to be retained. Such steps and works shall, where necessary, include, in relation to any part of the building to be retained, measures as follows:-

a) to strengthen any wall or vertical surface; b) to support any wall, roof or horizontal surface; c) to provide protection for the building against the weather during the progress of the works, and d) in the case of cob buildings, the details of cob repairs. Details of any additional necessary repairs required as a result of the works, including methodology, specification or schedule shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before continuing with the works. (Reason - To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the building in accordance with Policy EN9 - Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

16. All stonework/brickwork repointing and rendering shall be carried out using a lime based mix, the specification of which shall be submitted to approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The colour, texture, type of bond and joint, and finish shall match original work, and a small trial area shall be prepared in a non-prominent location for inspection and approval by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of the works. (Reason - To safeguard the architectural and historic character of the building in accordance with Policy EN9 - Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

NOTE FOR APPLICANT

20/0728/FUL page 58

Informative: In the interests of preserving the character and architectural features of the first floor function room, this consent does not allow for the installation of a suspended ceiling in that room.

Informative: In accordance with the requirements of Article 35 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 in determining this application, East Devon District Council has worked positively with the applicant to ensure that all relevant listed building concerns have been appropriately resolved.

Plans relating to this application:

2133 1.0 Proposed Floor Plans 13.11.20

2133 1.9 Proposed Elevation 21.07.20

0 Location Plan 03.04.20

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

20/0728/FUL page 59 Agenda Item 8 Ward Sidmouth Sidford

Reference 20/1746/FUL

Applicant Mr Mark Laurenti

Location Woolbrook Reservoir Balfours Sidmouth EX10 9EF

Proposal Excavation of an earth bank to facilitate enlargement of the existing parking area to form three additional parking spaces and construction of a retaining wall.

RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions

Crown Copyright and database rights 2020 Ordnance Survey 100023746

page 60

Committee Date: 7th January 2021

Sidmouth Sidford Target Date: (Sidmouth) 20/1746/FUL 09.10.2020

Applicant: Mr Mark Laurenti

Location: Woolbrook Reservoir Balfours

Proposal: Excavation of an earth bank to facilitate enlargement of the existing parking area to form three additional parking spaces and construction of a retaining wall.

RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application is before members as the application is a departure from the Development Plan. In this instance the application proposes development that is not in accordance with Policy EN1 (Land of Local Amenity Importance) of the Local Plan.

The application proposes the extension of an area of hardstanding parking to provide further parking. To facilitate the development, part of the north eastern face of an existing verge would need to be removed and a small retaining feature installed. The surface finish of the extended parking is to be brick herringbone to match the existing parking area at the house entrance.

The application is opposed by the Town Council and Local Ward Member who state the development is not in accordance with the Sid-Valley Neighbourhood Plan and Sid Valley Place Analysis. In particular concerns have been raised that the development is contrary to Policies 6 (Infill Development and Trees) and 9 (Residential Development) of the Neighbourhood Plan.

The removal of various trees, including a group of alder trees located at where the new parking area is to be constructed, has already been approved under a separate tree application considered by the Town Council and Tree Officers. The justification for those works have been considered and granted in the interest of the site’s long term management. The Local Authority has also been informed that this group of Alder trees located at the application site have already been removed by the applicant. Refusing the application on the basis that the development would lead to an unacceptable loss of tree cover would therefore be unreasonable.

20/1746/FUL page 61

Furthermore, the development is of a scale highly unlikely to give rise to unacceptable impacts upon adjoining properties amenity. As such the application is not considered contrary to Policy 6 of the Neighbourhood Plan.

Third party comments have also highlighted the importance of preserving the sites wooded character and contribution within the wider townscape. The area of hardstanding is approximately 85m2 in size and would, to a degree, erode the verdant character of this particular part of the site. However, this partial loss relates to a relatively small area of the site and would only be evident from short distanced views from the south eastern end of the private track that serves Bellevue, The Water House and the Reservoir. The wider visual harm is low, if any, and is not considered that a refusal of planning permission could be justified on the grounds of visual impact.

Whilst the application is considered a departure from the Development Plan due to inability for householder development to meet Policy EN1, the proposed development does not give rise to any wider harm and as such cannot be reasonably opposed. It is therefore recommended that the application is approved subject to conditions listed below.

CONSULTATIONS

Local Consultations

Technical Consultations

Parish/Town Council NOT SUPPORT

Members were unable to support for the reasons given below and wish to draw attention to the statements below drawn from Pages 33 & 34 of the Sid Valley Place Analysis. o Character; Views to the South over the town mainly suburban streets and culs de sac distinctive buildings acting as landmarks o Connectivity; Mainly connecting streets and culs de sacs Links east towards the Byes Walking connections to Core Hill o Street Pattern: Green connecting streets older rural green lanes embedded into the street layout. Green interfaces to Woolbrook Road, Bulverton Road and Sidford Road o Landscape; Partly in the AONB and on the AONB Boundary long views of valley side to West Views of Core Hill to the North.

Also, detailed in the Sid Valley Neighbourhood Plan:

Policy 6 Infill development and Trees. Development should be designed so as not to adversely impact on the amenities of its neighbours and should seek to protect any existing trees that contribute to the overall amenity of the area, as well as being appropriately landscaped.

20/1746/FUL page 62

Policy 9 Residential Development. The proposed development at the Reservoir must be compatible with the characteristics of the character area as described in the Place Analysis which the members do not think.

Additionally, there were 2 garages that have been changed to storage and a gym back in February 2020, the Council were led to believe the car parking was not needed.

Note: Woolbrook Reservoir was an important area, included in the Local Plan as Land of Local Amenity Importance. Members would like to see a comprehensive plan for the area rather than respond to piecemeal applications.

Further comments:

NOT SUPPORT Members are still unable to support for the reasons given below and wish to draw attention to the statements below drawn from Pages 33 & 34 of the Sid Valley Place Analysis. o Character; Views to the South over the town mainly suburban streets and culs de sac distinctive buildings acting as landmarks o Connectivity; Mainly connecting streets and culs de sacs Links east towards the Byes Walking connections to Core Hill o Street Pattern: Green connecting streets older rural green lanes embedded into the street layout. Green interfaces to Woolbrook Road, Bulverton Road and Sidford Road o Landscape; Partly in the AONB and on the AONB Boundary long views of valley side to West Views of Core Hill to the North. Also, detailed in the Sid Valley Neighbourhood Plan: Policy 6 Infill development and Trees. Development should be designed so as not to adversely impact on the amenities of its neighbours and should seek to protect any existing trees that contribute to the overall amenity of the area, as well as being appropriately landscaped. A number of the trees are subject to TPO'S. Policy 9 Residential Development. The proposed development at the Reservoir must be compatible with the characteristics of the character area as described in the Place Analysis which the members do not think. o Additionally, there were 2 garages that have been changed to storage and a gym back in February 2020, the Council were led to believe the car parking was not needed. o Members also feel that there is plenty of parking in the area so the additional parking could not be justified. o Members would like to see manageable and sustainable replanting in the area. Note: Woolbrook Reservoir was an important area, included in the Local Plan as Land of Local Amenity Importance. Members would like to see a comprehensive plan for the area rather than respond to piecemeal applications.

Further comments:

NOT SUPPORT

20/1746/FUL page 63

Members are unable to support this application even with the removal of the car port for the reasons given below and wish to draw attention to the statements below taken from Pages 33 & 34 of the Sid Valley Place Analysis. ' Character; Views to the South over the town mainly suburban streets and culs de sac distinctive buildings acting as landmarks ' Connectivity; Mainly connecting streets and culs de sacs Links east towards the Byes Walking connections to Core Hill ' Street Pattern: Green connecting streets older rural green lanes embedded into the street layout. Green interfaces to Woolbrook Road, Bulverton Road and Sidford Road ' Landscape; Partly in the AONB and on the AONB Boundary long views of valley side to West Views of Core Hill to the North. Also, detailed in the Sid Valley Neighbourhood Plan: ' Policy 6 Infill development and Trees. Development should be designed so as not to adversely impact on the amenities of its neighbours and should seek to protect any existing trees that contribute to the overall amenity of the area, as well as being appropriately landscaped. A number of the trees are subject to TPO'S. ' Policy 9 Residential Development. The proposed development at the Reservoir must be compatible with the characteristics of the character area as described in the Place Analysis which the members do not think. ' Additionally, there were 2 garages that have been changed to storage and a gym back in February 2020, the Council were led to believe the car parking was not needed. ' Members also feel that there is plenty of parking in the area so the additional parking could not be justified. ' Members would like to see manageable and sustainable replanting in the area. Note: Woolbrook Reservoir was an important area, included in the Local Plan as Land of Local Amenity Importance. Members would like to see a comprehensive plan for the area rather than respond to piecemeal applications.

Sidmouth Sidford - Cllr Marianne Rixson

I agree with the comments made by Sidmouth Town Council.

Also, detailed in the Sid Valley Neighbourhood Plan:

Policy 6 Infill development and Trees. Development should be designed so as not to adversely impact on the amenities of its neighbours and should seek to protect any

20/1746/FUL page 64

existing trees that contribute to the overall amenity of the area, as well as being appropriately landscaped.

Additionally, there were 2 garages that have been changed to storage and a gym back in February 2020, the Council were led to believe the car parking was not needed.

Further comment:

I am disappointed that this application has been recommended for approval. If this is approved, I would hope that: - any hardstanding for parking could be block paving or grasscrete to reduce the potential for flooding. - bearing in mind the number of trees that have been felled already on this elevated site, that any replacement trees would have TPOs.

EDDC Trees I have no objection on Arboricultural grounds to this proposal with the following condition -

Prior to commencement of any works on site (including demolition), Tree Protection measures shall be carried out as detailed within the Arboricultural Report and method statement submitted by Advanced Aboriculture and shall adhere to the principles embodied in BS 5837:2012 and shall remain in place until all works are completed, no changes to be made without first gaining consent in writing from the Local Authority

In any event, the following restrictions shall be strictly observed: (a) No burning shall take place in a position where flames could extend to within 5m of any part of any tree to be retained. (b) No trenches for services or foul/surface water drainage shall be dug within the crown spreads of any retained trees (or within half the height of the trees, whichever is the greater) unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All such installations shall be in accordance with the advice given in Volume 4: National Joint Utilities Group (NJUG) Guidelines for the Planning, Installation and Maintenance of Utility Apparatus in Proximity to Trees (Issue 2) 2007. (c) No changes in ground levels or excavations shall take place within the crown spreads of retained trees (or within half the height of the trees, whichever is the greater) unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (d) No trees, shrubs or hedges within the site which are shown as being planted or retained on the approved plans shall be felled, uprooted, wilfully damaged or destroyed, cut back in any way or removed without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Any trees, shrubs or hedges removed without such consent,

20/1746/FUL page 65

or which die or become severely damaged or seriously diseased within five years from the occupation of any building, or the development hereby permitted being brought into use shall be replaced with trees, shrubs or hedge plants of similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. (Reason - To ensure retention and protection of trees on the site prior to and during construction in the interests of amenity and to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the area in accordance with Policies D1 - Design and Local Distinctiveness and D3 - Trees and Development Sites of the Adopted New East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031).

Other Representations

16 Objection comments have been received with concerns over the following:  Flooding from surface water run-off from the development.  Impact on the ecological value of the site.  Noise and traffic caused by the development.  Lack of need for the development.  Loss of tree cover within the site cover by a Tree Preservation Order.  Intentions to use the site within a commercial capacity.  Excessive number of parking spaces.  Impact upon residential amenity.  Increase in traffic on local highway network.  Negative impact upon Land of Local Amenity Importance.  Does not accord with the Sid Valley Neighbourhood Plan

Planning History

20/0339/FUL - Alterations to existing entrance elevation as follows:

Removal of the existing timber garage doors and replacement with continuous glazing set in powdercoated aluminium frames; replacement of the existing timber entrance door with a new timber door incorporating glazing; timber cladding added to the existing masonry pier adjacent and to the LHS of the entrance door; formation of a flat roofed porch over the entrance; the addition of stone faced cladding over the existing facade; existing entrance ramp to front door widened to improve access. APPROVED

20/0615/FUL - Demolition of existing manhole, removal of bank and construction of 2 no. timber holiday lodges, 1 no. timber hobby room, car port, enlargement of the existing parking area and associated landscaping. REFUSED

20/1803/TRE - Fell and replace a total of 15 number trees as identified within the arboricultural report. The works are part of the arboricultural management of the site. APPROVED

POLICIES

Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031 Policies Strategy 6 (Development within Built-up Area Boundaries) Strategy 46 (Landscape Conservation and Enhancement and AONBs)

20/1746/FUL page 66

Strategy 48 (Local Distinctiveness in the Built Environment) D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) D3 (Trees and Development Sites) EN1 (Land of Local Amenity Importance) TC2 (Accessibility of New Development) TC9 (Parking Provision in New Development)

Sid Valley Neighbourhood Plan (Made) Policy 1 (Sid Valley Development Principles) Policy 6 (Infill Development, Extensions and Trees) Policy 7 (Local Distinctiveness)

Site Location and Description

The application site relates to a small area of woodland located on a hilltop within Lower Woolbrook. Whilst the lower parts of the hill are characterised by residential properties, the elevated woodland, protected by a Tree Preservation Order (TPO), serves as a distinct landmark within the wider landscape. The site itself is characterised by a mix of trees including a proportion of Scotts Pine, Alder, Sycamore and Ash. The site is designated within the East Devon Local Plan as Land of Local Amenity Importance.

The site is accessed off Balfours through a driveway that also serves the residential properties of the Water House and Belleveu House. The old reservoir tank itself has been converted to a dwelling after approval of planning application 06/0522/FUL. The property is therefore concealed, largely reading as a grass mound. A private track circles the reservoir.

Proposed Development

The application proposes the extension of the existing parking area. To facilitate the construction of the area of hardstanding, part of the north eastern face of the existing mound would need to be removed. The surface finish of the extended parking is to be brick herringbone to match the existing parking area at the house entrance.

Application 20/1803/TRE was approved, on 19/10/2020, for 15 trees to be removed and replaced as part of the ongoing management of the site. The details of the tree application have also been included within this planning application. Most notably, a group of 8 Alder trees, where the development relates, have been approved to be removed a part of the ongoing management of the site.

Assessment

Issues with the application concern the impact of the development upon the site as designated Land of Local Amenity Importance and the wider visual impact of the proposals.

The application has received numerous objections from third parties. Whilst the comments received have raised concerns over various issues, it is only those

20/1746/FUL page 67

considered material planning issues that shall be discussed within the main body of this report.

Land of Local Amenity Importance

There are various pieces of land throughout the district identified for protection defined as Land of Local Amenity Importance, although this site is unique in being in residential use. It is considered that open spaces within urban areas are important to the character and identity of the area they are located in. The East Devon Local Plan designates such areas of intrinsically high value and environmental quality because of their form, tree cover and are of such particular quality and value to the character of the settlement and to the local community that they should be recognised, conserved and enhanced.

Comments from third parties, the Town Council and a Local Ward Member have raised concerns with the subsequent impact of the development upon the significance of the site. The value of the reservoir is as a result of its contribution to the landscape setting of the town and the open verdant character within the site itself. The value of which is not disputed and has underpinned past refusals at the reservoir, most notably applications 20/0615/FUL and 15/1278/OUT. In these particular cases development was considered to erode the open character of the area, have wider visual impacts and fail to meet an identified community need as specifically required within the wording of the policy.

However, in this case, the application proposes fairly minor development that is ancillary to the existing residential use of the property at the site. Whilst, Policy EN1 sets a high threshold for development to meet, home owners should be able to make improvements at their place of living if the development does not cause any wider material harm. It is highly unlikely that any householder development would meet the requirement of EN1 to meet a community need. The policy being written to relate to the amenity areas in public use, or at least not in private residential use. As such, requiring the application to meet an identified community need for the construction of an extended parking area is deemed unreasonable given the private residential use of the site.

Despite this, EN1 does propose that two further tests are met. The policy also requires that the development cannot be accommodated elsewhere and that would either complement or not undermine the open character of the area.

The development relates to the existing property known as Woolbrook Reservoir. As such it is not thought the parking area could be reasonably provided elsewhere. However it is acknowledged that the proposed hardstanding would have a degree of impact on the open character of the site from very close range views on approach to the site and from neighbouring properties. However this impact is limited to the north eastern area of the site. These impacts of which, due to limited to no public views of the area of hardstanding, are deemed less than substantial and not considered to undermine the overarching, open verdant character of the site that underpin its designation within the Local Plan.

20/1746/FUL page 68

Despite this, consideration still needs to be given to the wider visual impact of the development.

Wider Visual Impact

Woolbrook Reservoir is designated as Land of Local Amenity Importance, in part, as a result of the site’s contribution to the landscape setting of the town.

The approval of 20/1803/TRE (Decision issued 19.10.2020) has consented the removal of various individuals from the site as part of the ongoing management of the site. The submitted Arboricultural report concludes that their removal is considered appropriate as part of the sustainable management of the site. The trees’ removals will allow for the provision of a total of fifteen new trees this coming planting season (November 2020 through March 2021), thus ensuring the continuity of a mixed age class diversity, as well as further diversifying the species present across the site.

The site is visible from wider, long reaching views from within the town. The north eastern area of the reservoir, where the parking area is to be located, is visible from various public view points within Middle and Higher Woolbrook. Removal of the group of the of Alder trees (20/1803/TRE) in the north eastern corner of the site has the potential to open up views into the site, possibly resulting in the development being visible.

From conclusions drawn on site, the loss of the Alder trees would be visible from viewpoints along Manstone Lane, the Junction between Woolbrook Rise and Woolbrook Meadows. However, whilst the loss of tree cover at these points would be evident, the hardstanding, and any parked vehicles here, would largely be obscured by the presence of Bellvue House. Although it is acknowledged that there may be other public views where glimpses of parked cars may well be apparent, these would be very distant, hard to identify and not causing any harm. As such, particularly owing to the modest scale of the development and removal of the car port, concerns over the hardstanding appearing as intrusive or incongruous addition, within the wider townscape from these distant views, are not considered to justify refusal of permission.

Flooding and Surface Water Run off

Objections from third parties have expressed concerns over flooding and surface water run-off from the application site. The application is not required to produce a Flood Risk Assessment due to the site being located outside of Flood Zones 2 and 3. Additionally the Environment Agency flood mapping does not consider the site, or the immediate properties around it to be at risk from flooding from rivers, the sea, reservoirs or from surface water. The public highway of Woolbrook Park is at risk of some surface water flooding. Despite this, it is not considered that development of this scale would significantly impact upon the level of risk. The laid block paving should be porous.

Impact on Neighbouring Amenity

During the construction phase of the development, noise caused from the build are likely to be apparent from nearby residential properties. However this would be for a

20/1746/FUL page 69

short duration of time and not significant enough to warrant further details to manage these impacts.

The extended car parking area would not be overbearing or intrusive upon the neighbouring property of Bellvue House, despite the development being located along the north eastern boundary of the site.

Highways and Parking Provision

Third party comments have raised concerns over the amount of parking to be provided and lack of justification for the development. Approval of 20/0339/FUL has seen the previous garage spaces for internal parking converted into additional living accommodation. This application was approved on the basis of no visual or other harm arising from the mainly internal works. Externally the property now has a glazed frontage with a door immediately adjacent to the existing parking area. Currently the site can just about accommodate four cars, however it has been highlighted that this causes issues when manoeuvring vehicles in and out of the site.

The applicant now wants to avoid parking forward of the new entrance to the property whilst providing additional parking and providing an enlarged turning area. Upon site visit there were two cars parked forward of the property with another on the grassed area proposed to be removed. Whilst the existing area available to park appears fairly generous, the extent of the applicants ownership includes the hardstanding located immediately forward of Bellevue House which, assumedly, needs to be kept clear. It is suggested by the applicant, that in order to exit the site, vehicles must reverse down the lane and into the drive of the Water House in order to exit the private lane onto Balfours in a forward gear. The proposed area of hardstanding would, whilst providing three additional parking spaces, also provides an improved area of space available for vehicles to turn and exit the site in a forward gear.

Whilst the area of hardstanding required is deemed fairly significant, and may have been created by the applicant as a result of them converting the original garage, each application has to be considered on its merits. On the basis that there is no harm from the proposal that could justify refusal, and given that the level of parking proposed is considered commensurate with a 5/6 bed room property and would provide a larger area for cars to turn and exit the site, how this situation has come about is not highly relevant and could not be used to justify refusal of permission.

More importantly, there is no requirement for the applicant to justify the need for the spaces when no harm can be identified arising from the proposal.

Other matters

The application is opposed by the Town Council and Local Ward Member, who feel the development is not in accordance with the Sid-Valley Neighbourhood Plan and Sid Valley Place Analysis. The Sid-Valley place analysis places specific emphasis on the characteristics of areas worth of preservation. Pages 33 and 34 place significance on parts of the Woolbrook Area as a result of their recreation or aesthetic value.

20/1746/FUL page 70

The Town Council and Local Ward member also state that the development is contrary to Policies 6 (Infill Development and Trees) and 9 (Residential Development) of the Neighbourhood Plan. These two policies are worded as follows.

 Policy 6 (Infill Development and Trees) ‘Development should be designed so as not to adversely impact on the amenities of its neighbours and should seek to protect any existing trees that contribute to the overall amenity of the area, as well as being appropriately landscaped.’

 Policy 9(Residential Development) ‘Development should be designed so as not to adversely impact on the amenities of its neighbours and should seek to protect any existing trees that contribute to the overall amenity of the area, as well as being appropriately landscaped.

As already indicated earlier within the report, the removal of the various trees has already been approved under a tree application considered by the Town Council. The justification for those works have been considered and granted in the interest of the site’s long term management. The Local Authority has also been informed that the group of Alder trees located at the application site have already been removed. Refusing the application on the basis that the development would lead to an unacceptable level of tree cover would therefore be unreasonable.

The wording of Policy 9 appears to be more applicable to applications proposing residential schemes. Despite this, it is acknowledged that any development should be in accordance with the Place Analysis. Section 6.7 of the document summarises the character of Woolbrook as follows;

 Views to the south over the town  Mainly suburban streets and cul de sacs  Some distinctive building as landmarks

Third party comments have also highlighted the importance of preserving the sites wooded character and contribution within the wider townscape. The area of hardstanding is approximately 85m2 in size and would, to a degree, erode the verdant character of the site. However, this partial loss relates to a relatively small area of the site and would only be evident from short distanced views from the south eastern end of the private track. The wider visual harm is low and is not considered harmful enough to warrant refusal of the application.

Whilst the application is considered a departure from the Development Plan due to conflict with Policy EN1, the proposed development does not give rise to wider harm and as such officers are of the opinion that the proposal cannot be reasonably opposed on any of these grounds.

20/1746/FUL page 71

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE subject to the following conditions:

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans listed at the end of this decision notice. (Reason - For the avoidance of doubt.)

3. Prior to commencement of any works on site (including demolition), Tree Protection measures shall be carried out as detailed within the Arboricultural Report and method statement submitted by Advanced Aboriculture and shall adhere to the principles embodied in BS 5837:2012 and shall remain in place until all works are completed, no changes to be made without first gaining consent in writing from the Local Authority In any event, the following restrictions shall be strictly observed: (a) No burning shall take place in a position where flames could extend to within 5m of any part of any tree to be retained. (b) No trenches for services or foul/surface water drainage shall be dug within the crown spreads of any retained trees (or within half the height of the trees, whichever is the greater) unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All such installations shall be in accordance with the advice given in Volume 4: National Joint Utilities Group (NJUG) Guidelines for the Planning, Installation and Maintenance of Utility Apparatus in Proximity to Trees (Issue 2) 2007. (c) No changes in ground levels or excavations shall take place within the crown spreads of retained trees (or within half the height of the trees, whichever is the greater) unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (d) No trees, shrubs or hedges within the site which are shown as being planted or retained on the approved plans shall be felled, uprooted, wilfully damaged or destroyed, cut back in any way or removed without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Any trees, shrubs or hedges removed without such consent, or which die or become severely damaged or seriously diseased within five years from the occupation of any building, or the development hereby permitted being brought into use shall be replaced with trees, shrubs or hedge plants of similar size and species unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. (Reason - To ensure retention and protection of trees on the site prior to and during construction in the interests of amenity and to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the area in accordance with Policies D1 - Design and Local Distinctiveness and D3 - Trees and Development Sites of the Adopted New East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031).

NOTE FOR APPLICANT

20/1746/FUL page 72

Informative: In accordance with the aims of Article 35 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 East Devon District Council works proactively with applicants to resolve all relevant planning concerns; however, in this case the application was deemed acceptable as submitted.

Plans relating to this application:

7966-LP Location Plan 14.08.2020

7966-502 Site Plan Proposed (REV C) 10.11.2020

7966-701 Proposed Combined Plans (REV C) 10.11.2020

7966-550 Sections (REV C) 10.11.2020

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

20/1746/FUL page 73 Agenda Item 9 Ward Feniton

Reference 20/1726/FUL

Applicant Mr Shane Francis

Location 1 Hamlet Cottages Weston Honiton EX14 3PB

Proposal Change of use of an existing workshop (use Class B1(c)) to a residential dwelling (use class C3) with minor alterations

RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions

Crown Copyright and database rights 2020 Ordnance Survey 100023746

page 74

Committee Date: 7th January 2021

Feniton Target Date: (Gittisham) 20/1726/FUL 04.11.2020

Applicant: Mr Shane Francis

Location: 1 Hamlet Cottages Weston

Proposal: Change of use of an existing workshop (use Class B1(c)) to a residential dwelling (use class C3) with minor alterations

RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This application is before the committee because the recommendation is contrary to the view of the Ward Member.

Planning permission is sought to convert a small workshop forming part of the premises occupied by a landscaping business. The proposal would provide a 1- bed single storey dwelling with associated garden and parking areas.

The site is in the countryside for policy purposes but close to Honiton and the amenities available at its western edge. Policy on the conversion of buildings in the countryside (D*) acknowledges opportunities for sustainable travel vary between urban and rural areas and to some degree the difference is offset by the benefits of re-using buildings. Relative to other rural locations, the occupants of this site are likely to be less car dependent being right at the edge of the BUAB for Honiton. On that basis the reuse of this building is considered to satisfy the requirements of the conversion policy.

Notwithstanding that conclusion, the proposal would result in the loss of a business premises. Although the landscaping business has no current need for the site, Strategy 32 seeks to ensure that all options for business use are explored first. In this case a restrictive condition and the proximity of residential properties on each side indicates that other business uses may not be forthcoming or appropriate. Consequently the loss is accepted.

The retained business premises comprising a yard and workshop would be about 30m beyond the rear of the site but the access would be alongside the plot and a parking area for vans would be retained adjacent to the dwelling. This would lead to some noise and disturbance which would only be partially mitigated by a robust boundary treatment.

20/1726/FUL page 75

Taking into account the wider benefits of the scheme, including re-use of the building, an improved relationship between the site and its neighbours and the moderately accessible location, the shortcomings associated with the proximity of the van and lorry movements are not considered to justify refusal.

CONSULTATIONS

Local Consultations

Feniton - Cllr Susie Bond My initial view of this application is that it should be REFUSED.

The planning history at this site shows several attempts to develop the site for residential use over a number of years, contrary to Local Plan policies (Strategy 7). The retrospective application 19/2207/FUL approved last year has a strong Condition (condition 3) which precludes conversion of the workshop to a residential building.

However, I shall keep an open mind on this application until I hear all views for and against.

Parish/Town Council Gittisham parish councillors resolved to object to this application at their meeting last night.

Members feel that granting permission would establish a new residential unit in the countryside without agricultural need being sought, and it will act as a precedent for other opportunities in the future which would be detrimental to the overall policy- making of EDDC.

Further comments:

Gittisham parish councillors resolved at their meeting to object to this application on the same grounds as previously.

Which was:

Technical Consultations

Environmental Health Change of use of an existing workshop (use Class B1(c)) to a residential dwelling (use class C3) with minor alterations

I have considered the above application with regards to Environmental Health matters.

20/1726/FUL page 76

The front of the premises appears to be on the north of the building which is referable as the site will be subject to road traffic noise from the A30. The south facade is imperforate and therefore offers good sound insulation along with some shielding to the rear garden. The low berm to the south of the access road will also offer some attenuation.

I have no objections to this COU

Further comments:

Further to my consultation and subsequent discussion with the case officer I can advise that as the land has previously been used for commercial use and potentially contaminative uses, a preliminary risk assessment report identifying the history and any evidence of sources of contamination should be provided

Condition - Contamination investigation and remediation strategy

No development approved by this planning permission shall commence until a remediation strategy to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site in respect of the development hereby permitted, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. This strategy will include the following components:

1. A preliminary risk assessment which has identified:

I. all previous uses II. potential contaminants associated with those uses III. a conceptual model of the site indicating sources, pathways and receptors IV. potentially unacceptable risks arising from contamination at the site

2. A site investigation scheme, based on (1) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off-site.

3. The results of the site investigation and the detailed risk assessment referred to in (2) and, based on these, an options appraisal and remediation strategy giving full details of the remediation measures required and how they are to be undertaken.

4. A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in the remediation strategy in (3) are complete.

Any changes to these components require the written consent of the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

20/1726/FUL page 77

to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification plan must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with condition 4.

6. Where long term monitoring and maintenance has been identified as necessary, a monitoring and maintenance scheme to include monitoring the long-term effectiveness of the proposed remediation over a period to be agreed with the LPA, and the provision of plans on the same must be prepared, both of which will be subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of the measures identified in that scheme and when the remediation objectives have been achieved, reports that demonstrate the effectiveness of the monitoring and maintenance carried out must be produced, and submitted to the Local Planning Authority.

This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency"s Land Contamination Risk Management (LCRM).

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, are minimised and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with policy EN16.

Further information and guidance can be obtained by contacting the Environmental Protection Team at East Devon District Council

Other Representations None received.

PLANNING HISTORY

Reference Description Decision Date

96/P1185 New Dwelling Refusal 24.10.1996

14/1284/FUL Creation of 2no dwellings Withdrawn 15.01.2015

15/1585/FUL Construction of 2 no detached Refusal 22.12.2015 dwellings

20/1726/FUL page 78

16/0831/FUL Relocation of existing Approval 03.03.2017 workshop/office/storage with building and compound conditions including formation of new vehicular access and extension to existing access drive.

18/0637/OUT Removal of workshops and Refusal 28.08.2018 construction of detached two storey dwelling and detached garage (outline application with all matters reserved)

19/2207/FUL Single storey workshop unit Approval 06.01.2020 (use class B1(c)) with (Retrospective application). conditions

POLICIES

Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031 Policies Strategy 7 (Development in the Countryside)

Strategy 32 (Resisting Loss of Employment, Retail and Community Sites and Buildings)

D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness)

D8 (Re-use of Rural Buildings Outside of Settlements)

EN5 (Wildlife Habitats and Features)

EN16 (Contaminated Land)

TC2 (Accessibility of New Development)

TC7 (Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access)

TC9 (Parking Provision in New Development)

Government Planning Documents NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework 2019) National Planning Practice Guidance

Site Location and Description

The site is located within the parish of Gittisham, between Weston and Honiton. It fronts onto the old A30 and is only 50 metres north of Heathpark Industrial Estate,

20/1726/FUL page 79

separated by the A30. It has recently been the base for a landscaping business which has expanded into larger premises at the rear where there is a yard and store/workshop. To the west there are five properties, the nearest being 1 and 2 Hamlet Cottages, and to the east there are two properties, Colesfield and then Roebuck Farm, where the old A30 terminates. Access into Honiton is via Hayne Lane. Although the site is in a relatively low-lying position, it is above the flood zones associated with the River Otter.

At the front of the site is a yard with fencing separating it from the parking area for 1 Hamlet Cottages. There is further fencing across the front of the site and a gate providing vehicular access. On the other side boundary there is a tall hedge screening the site from Colesfield. Beyond the yard is a modest workshop building in rendered masonry with a slate roof. The vehicular access continues alongside the building to a further yard area on the other side and onwards to the larger yard and workshop/storage building associated with the landscaping business.

ANALYSIS

This application seeks planning permission to convert the workshop to a one-bed dwelling. As well as the conversion of the building, the yard in front of the building and some land at the rear would become garden. The site plan was amended during the course of the application to include all of the front yard and to show the parking and garden areas.

The proposal involves minimal alterations externally and would use existing window and door openings with new fittings where necessary. Internally the space would be partitioned to create a double bedroom, a bathroom and a combined kitchen/dining/living room. The front door would be on the north side facing away from the road and onto a garden area. On the south side of the building there would parking spaces for three cars and a further garden area. Access from the road would be unaltered and would be shared with the business at the rear.

Background

It is understood that the commercial use of what was then a garden/orchard commenced around 20 years ago. Until 2009, the building in question was a less substantial and rundown structure, as can be seen on Google Streetview. In 2010, without planning permission, the building was improved or rebuilt becoming a more substantial structure with a pitched roof.

In 1996 the previous owner applied to replace the dilapidated building with a dwelling but was refused permission because it would have been "an intensification of sporadic development divorced from any town or village", as well as for drainage reasons.

The next application was in 2014 when it was proposed to demolish two single storey buildings and construct two two-storey dwellings. That application was withdrawn following advice that the proposal would not be supported owing to concerns about accessibility, loss of employment land and the effect on the character and appearance of the area.

20/1726/FUL page 80

A second attempt was made in 2015 with a different layout but the same concerns remained and the application was refused.

In 2016 permission was granted for a larger workshop building and yard to the north of the site. This proposal included the demolition of the smaller workshop to allow the access to be re-routed away from 1 Hamlet Cottages, but retained the land at the front of the site for receipt and handling of materials.

In 2018 an application for one dwelling was submitted which would have resulted in the loss of the small workshop and the yard at the front. This was refused because of its countryside location, accessibility concerns and its impact on the character and appearance of the area.

In 2019 an application was made to retain the small workshop building which was proposed for demolition in the 2016 application. This demolition was not a requirement of the 2016 permission and therefore consent was not needed to retain it. Furthermore, although the smaller workshop was constructed without permission, it was completed by 1 October 2010 according to the application and was therefore lawful by 2019. Nevertheless, the application was submitted and approved.

ANALYSIS

Having regard to this background and the location of the site in the countryside, the main issues to consider in the determination of this application are whether the location is appropriate for a new dwelling and whether the loss of business premises is acceptable. Although concerns have been raised previously about the impact of new development on the character and appearance of the area, as this proposal is for the conversion of an existing building, such considerations are secondary.

A further main issue is whether the proposal would provide acceptable living conditions having regard to the use of the land around the site and the means of access to it. This was not been a main issue before but previous schemes either replaced the business use or created greater separation.

Location

The site lies outside the Built-up Area Boundary for Honiton and is therefore in the countryside for planning policy purposes. The re-use of buildings in such locations is addressed in Policy D8 of the Local Plan which sets out the following requirements in criteria 1-5 and a-c:

1. The new use is sympathetic to, and will enhance the rural setting and character of the building and surrounding area and is in a location which will not substantively add to the need to travel by car or lead to a dispersal of activity or uses on such a scale as to prejudice village vitality.

A residential use would be compatible with the neighbouring residential uses. Visually there would be little change other than the change of use of the yard at the front of the site to garden. This would have a minor positive effect which, depending on its

20/1726/FUL page 81

treatment, would enhance the setting of the building and the character of the wider area.

Accessibility is considered in detail under criterion c) below.

2. The building is structurally sound and capable of conversion without the need for substantial extension, alteration or reconstruction and any alterations protect or enhance the character of the building and its setting;

The workshop is of masonry construction with no obvious defects. A structural survey confirms it is in sound condition and capable of conversion. The alterations proposed are very limited in extent and would conserve the character of the building and its setting. In this case no extensions are proposed and consequently the conversion would result in a very modest dwelling. With a floor area of 40 square metres, however, it would satisfy the nationally described space standard of 39 square metres for a 1- bed, 1-person, single storey dwelling.

3. The form, bulk and general design of the building and its proposed conversion are in keeping with its surroundings, local building styles and materials;

The materials and finishes used externally on the building match the nearest dwelling and would be retained in the conversion. As a result the proposed conversion would be compatible with its surroundings.

4. The proposed use would not harm the countryside by way of traffic, parking, storage, pollution or the erection of associated structures;

Given the small scale of the proposal, the character of the existing use, and the compatibility of the proposed use with neighbouring dwellings, there would be no harm to the countryside as a result of any of these impacts.

5. The proposal will not undermine the viability of an existing agricultural enterprise or require replacement buildings to fulfil a similar function.

There would be no impact on any agricultural business, but the issue of whether the proposal is likely to generate a need for a replacement building is still relevant to this proposal. To assist in making an assessment of the likelihood that a replacement building will be needed, an understanding of the applicant’s previous proposals involving either demolition or retention of the existing building is useful.

The applications in 2014 and 2015 proposed the total loss of the employment site, including the buildings. However, a new storage yard at the rear of the site had been created in advance of the 2015 application and this was regularised in 2016 when a replacement workshop was also granted permission. At that time the smaller workshop was no longer needed and was proposed for demolition so that the access could be re-routed away from 1 Hamlet Cottages. This argument was repeated in the 2018 application.

In advance of the current application to convert the small workshop, an application was made seeking to establish that there was no requirement to demolish it under the

20/1726/FUL page 82

2016 permission. In the supporting information dated October 2019 and in subsequent correspondence the building was described as:

 being required for commercial purposes  being necessary for workshop purposes owing to the expansion of the business  serving a vital function to the wider landscaping business  providing a facility for preparation and maintenance of equipment and machinery and construction of timber products

Less than a 10 months later (at the date of submission) the current application now describes the building as:

 disused and redundant due to differing requirements of the business

Two reasons have been put forward for this:

 a sudden drop in demand which has, in part, been intensified by Covid restrictions  the building is surplus to the storage needs of the business

As set out above, the applicant has presented a changing narrative whereby in 2016 and 2018 the building was surplus to requirements, then in 2019 it served a 'vital function' and now it is once again surplus to requirements. This is unlikely to be explained simply by any fluctuation in the fortunes or needs of the business.

Taking the 2019 narrative as an anomaly, it is very likely that the small workshop building is redundant. Indeed, this would be consistent with the view that was reached in 2018 when the loss of employment land did not form a reason for refusal. Consequently it is considered unlikely that the applicant would have any immediate need for a replacement building and hence this criterion is satisfied.

For residential proposals it must be established that: a) the building is no longer required for agricultural use or diversification purposes; and

The building is not an agricultural building nor does it serve an agricultural business that would benefit from diversification opportunities. b) that its conversion will enhance its setting - e.g. through removal of modern extensions and materials, outside storage, landscaping etc.

The main enhancement would be the removal of goods stored in yard in front of the building, to be replaced by parked cars and domestic paraphernalia. This is considered to be a minor enhancement, subject to appropriate landscaping. c) Development is located close to a range of accessible services and facilities to meet the everyday needs of residents

Previous applications for dwellings on this site have cited the distance from services and facilities as a reason for refusal. Since those decisions were taken there have

20/1726/FUL page 83

been some improvements in the availability of services and facilities in the locality. Within a walkable distance of the site there are the following amenities:  The Otter Inn  Heron Farm, a vineyard, cafe and farm shop  Combe Garden Centre, including a cafe  Combe Farm Shop  B! Health & Fitness, a gym  A bus stop served by the number 4 bus which connects the site to Honiton and Exeter

Slightly further afield are the amenities within and near to the Heathpark industrial estate, including DIY and food stores. Although it is unlikely that goods bought in these stores would be transported on foot back to the site, any car journeys would be short if the nearby bus service was not convenient.

The availability of these services and facilities close to the site places this location at the upper end of the scale of accessibility when compared to other rural buildings that would be considered under this policy. Although there may be a higher degree of car dependency than associated with a more urban location, the proposal is considered to satisfy this criterion for allowing the conversion of buildings in the countryside to residential use where reasonably well located.

In summary, there are a number of positive characteristics associated with the location such as its setting next to other residential development and its relatively good accessibility. Accepting that the building is redundant for the applicant's purposes, this proposal is considered to be in full accordance with Policy D8.

Loss of business premises

Strategy 32 of the Local Plan seeks to protect the availability of business premises. Where a loss would harm business and employment opportunities, it imposes a number tests that must be satisfied before other uses are considered.

As already discussed, it is accepted that the building is no longer needed by the applicant for business purposes. The supporting information for the 2018 application also explained that the yard at the front of the site was not needed for storage purposes and that argument is repeated in the current application. Although the 2016 application explained that the yard would be used for receiving bulk deliveries, it is understood that materials are now delivered by lorry directly to the rear yard and stored there. At the present time, therefore, the applicant has no need for the yard or building at the front of the site.

In relation to other potential users of the site it is claimed that the site is too small for most businesses to operate efficiently. However, in the absence of further evidence the site is considered to offer a good quality workshop building and a generous yard which may be of wider interest. Based on this potential its loss would harm business and employment opportunities. In such circumstances Strategy 32 offers four scenarios in which the loss might be justified. Of those four, there are two scenarios that are potentially relevant: one would permit the change if there is evidence that

20/1726/FUL page 84

marketing of the site has been unsuccessful; the other would permit the change if the continued use or a new use would significantly harm amenity.

The site has not been marketed and the reason given is that a condition on the 2019 permission limits the use of the building to use "for purposes ancillary to the existing paving and landscaping contractors' business operated from the site and for no other purpose." The use of the yard in front is not subject to the same restriction but it is considered unlikely that the building is marketable without the yard and therefore the use of the yard is likely to remain in step with the use of the building. The reason given for the condition was "To define the use in the interests of the appearance and character of the area and to safeguard the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties in accordance with the provisions of Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) of the adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013 - 2031."

The condition was imposed to define the use. In other words, it was considered necessary to ensure that the building could not be used for other business purposes falling within Use Class B1. Such uses, it was considered, would have unknown impacts on the appearance and character of the area and the amenities of the occupiers of neighbouring residential properties on both sides of the site. The newer building and yard at the rear of the site are not limited in such a way and therefore could potentially be occupied by any business operating within Use Classes B1 or B8 (now Use Classes E and B8). The differing approach between the two buildings may be explained by the closer proximity of the small workshop and yard to residential properties at 1 Hamlet Cottages and Colesfield.

The restrictive condition and the uncertainty about whether it would be relaxed to allow other business uses of the site means that marketing is likely to be a fruitless exercise. Furthermore, although the occupant of 1 Hamlet Cottages currently has connections to the site, that relationship cannot be guaranteed in perpetuity. Consequently either the existing use or a new business use could potentially lead to an unacceptable relationship with future occupants.

The circumstances described fall outside the two scenarios provided in Strategy 32: the site hasn’t been marketed but it is considered unmarketable; and another business use may not cause significant harm to amenity but residential use would remove any uncertainty about future impacts. The combination of these factors means that even if this application were to be refused, there is little prospect of any new business occupying the site. Consequently there would be no conflict with the main thrust of Strategy 32 which is to retain business premises in appropriate situations.

Living conditions

The proposal would provide a modest property of acceptable proportions with its main outlook to the north, away from the noisy A30. It would also enjoy ample parking as well as amenity areas at the front and back where there is space for bin and bicycle storage.

However, there would be little separation between the site and the landscaping business. The access would be shared and would run alongside the garden boundary and the western gable of the dwelling. A parking area for business vehicles would also

20/1726/FUL page 85

be retained adjacent to the northern area of garden and within a range of about 5-15 metres of the windows in the north elevation. The business operates several vans and trucks and also takes delivery of materials to the yard at the rear of the site. There are no restrictions on the operating hours of the business, nor is the use limited to the current business. Vehicle movements could take place at antisocial hours and give rise to noise and disturbance. There is also potential for headlights to partly illuminate the north elevation of the dwelling which has its main outlook facing the driveway.

In contrast to this setting, 1 Hamlet Cottages enjoys a greater degree of separation buffered by its own driveway and outbuildings. Although its garden also abuts the parking area, it benefits from space that is further removed from any of the business premises. It is also noted that the business use of the application site was established by the occupant without an express grant of planning permission about 20 years ago and therefore the relationship has not previously been subject to scrutiny by the Local Planning Authority. Consequently the relationship between the existing dwelling and the business does not justify the relationship with the new dwelling.

Activity in the workshop and yard at the rear takes place at a distance of 30m from any amenity space near the existing or proposed houses and therefore does not give rise to the same concerns. This does not address the impact of the access and parking area on the proposed dwelling, however.

The impacts associated with the shared access and van parking cannot reasonably be controlled by placing restrictions on the business in terms of hours of operation or in terms of where vehicles can be parked or materials loaded or unloaded. Nor would it be reasonable to limit the occupation of the dwelling to someone connected with the business because satisfactory living conditions should be provided for all dwellings and also because personal permissions for permanent forms of development should be avoided. Moreover, tying the dwelling to the business would create an encumbrance on the employment land which would limit its future potential.

The only potential for mitigation, therefore, is in the form of boundary screening. A robust fence or wall which is 2m in height would provide some protection from light and noise intrusion and resistance to damage from manoeuvring vehicles. Although supplementary planting within the boundaries could also be helpful, in this case it would result in a small garden dominated hedges which would restrict daylight and outlook.

Although the options for mitigation are very limited in this case, the scale of the business is such that it is unlikely to give rise to frequent vehicle movements. What vehicle movements do take place would be limited in number and mostly during normal business hours. The impact on the occupants of the dwelling is therefore likely to be limited. The proposal may not achieve the high standard of amenity which paragraph 127 of the NPPF seeks to ensure but the living conditions of future occupants of the dwelling are considered acceptable subject to good quality boundary treatment being provided.

Other matters

20/1726/FUL page 86

There is an existing access to the site which provides acceptable visibility for vehicles accessing the dwelling. However, the layout indicated would be likely to restrict the movement of larger vehicles and it is thought likely that a larger turning radius would be needed at the entrance and around the 90 degree bend by the corner of the proposed back garden. This is likely to result in a smaller garden than currently indicated and vehicles manoeuvring closer to the dwelling. This is unlikely to materially worsen the amenity impact but an appropriate boundary line will need to be drawn when the details of the boundary treatment are secured.

Foul drainage would be by means of a septic tank and soakaway at the rear of the site.

Soft landscaping of the hard surfaced yard at the front of the site would be necessary to achieve an enhancement to the setting of the building, as required by Policy D8. This can be secured by condition.

An ecology survey of the building has been undertaken and found no evidence of use by bats. There was, however, evidence of birds nesting in the roof and therefore mitigation is proposed in the form of new nesting features in suitable locations on the site. This can be secured by condition.

Owing to the use of the land for storage and business purposes the Environmental Health Officer has recommended a condition to ensure that the risk of land contamination is addressed during the development. Although there are several stages to the suggested condition, the preliminary risk assessment required in the first stage will ensure that any future actions are proportionate.

CONCLUSION

The proposal satisfies the requirements of Strategies 7 and 32 and Policy D8 of the Local Plan. There are, however, reservations about the quality of the living conditions of future occupants owing to the adverse impacts of van and lorry movements in very close proximity to the dwelling and its garden. Mitigation in the form of a robust boundary treatment would not be entirely effective but given the limited number of vehicle movements anticipated, it is considered sufficient in this case. When considering the wider benefits of the scheme, including re-use of the building, an improved relationship between the site and its neighbours and the moderately accessible location, the shortcomings associated with the proximity of the business are not considered to justify refusal.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE subject to the following conditions:

20/1726/FUL page 87

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans listed at the end of this decision notice. (Reason - For the avoidance of doubt.)

3. No development approved by this planning permission shall commence until a remediation strategy to deal with the risks associated with contamination of the site in respect of the development hereby permitted, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. This strategy will include the following components:

1. A preliminary risk assessment which has identified:

2. A site investigation scheme, based on (1) to provide information for a detailed assessment of the risk to all receptors that may be affected, including those off-site.

4. A verification plan providing details of the data that will be collected in order to demonstrate that the works set out in the remediation strategy in (3) are complete.

Any changes to these components require the written consent of the local planning authority. The scheme shall be implemented as approved.

5. In the event that unexpected contamination is found at any time during the approved development works that was not previously identified, the findings must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. A new investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of condition 1 & 2 and where remediation is necessary a new remediation scheme must be prepared in accordance with the requirements of condition 3. This must be subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification plan must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority in accordance with condition 4.

20/1726/FUL page 88

which will be subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of the measures identified in that scheme and when the remediation objectives have been achieved, reports that demonstrate the effectiveness of the monitoring and maintenance carried out must be produced, and submitted to the Local Planning Authority.

This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s Land Contamination Risk Management (LCRM).

(Reason - To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, are minimised and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with policy EN16 - Contaminated Land of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

4. No work to the exterior of the building shall take place until a landscaping scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; such a scheme to include the planting of trees, hedges, shrubs, herbaceous plants and areas to be grassed. The scheme shall also give details of any proposed walls, fences and other boundary treatment. The landscaping scheme shall be carried out in the first planting season after commencement of the development unless any alternative phasing of the landscaping is agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the landscaping shall be maintained for a period of 5 years. Any trees or other plants which die during this period shall be replaced during the next planting season with specimens of the same size and species unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - To ensure that the details are planned and considered at an early stage and to enhance the setting of the building in accordance with Policy D8 - Re-use of Rural Buildings Outside of Settlements of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

5. The dwelling hereby permitted shall not be occupied until a wall or acoustic fence not less than 2m in height has been constructed on the western and northern boundaries of the garden on the north side of the dwelling. The design and specification of the wall or fence shall first 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 mitigate the noise impacts of adjacent vehicular traffic in the interests of the amenity of the occupants of the dwelling in accordance with Policy D1 Design and Local Distinctiveness of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

6. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the Ecology Report prepared by HT Ecology dated July 2020. (Reason - To ensure that the wildlife impacts of the development are appropriately mitigated in accordance with Policy EN5 - Wildlife Habitats and Features of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

20/1726/FUL page 89

NOTE FOR APPLICANT

Plans relating to this application:

A.03 Proposed Site Plan 11.11.20

T.01 C Location Plan 11.11.20

A.01 Proposed Floor Plans 10.09.20

A.02 Proposed Elevation 10.09.20

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

20/1726/FUL page 90 Agenda Item 10 Ward Exmouth Brixington

Reference 20/1166/FUL

Applicant Miss J Rhodes

Location Bystock Court Old Bystock Drive Exmouth EX8 5EQ

Proposal Construction of new Daycare centre

RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions

Crown Copyright and database rights 2020 Ordnance Survey 100023746

page 91

Committee Date: 7th January 2021

Exmouth Brixington Target Date: (Exmouth) 20/1166/FUL 11.08.2020

Applicant: Miss J Rhodes

Location: Bystock Court Old Bystock Drive Exmouth

Proposal: Construction of new Daycare centre

RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This application is before committee as the applicant is the partner of a Member of the Council.

Planning permission is sought for the construction of a new day care facility within the grounds of Bystock Court, a Grade II Listed Building.

The proposed building is a single storey structure sited to the north of the extended main property. It has been designed to accommodate a range of care needs, including therapy/treatment rooms, fully accessible bathing facilities in addition to two large day rooms, kitchen and staff accommodation.

There is an identified need for additional care facilities within the Exmouth area, and policy support for the provision of new community facilities on sites that lie within or adjacent to Built-up Area Boundaries (which this site is). Whilst the current arrangements and day care within the main building offer a certain level of support, they are operating within the confines of a listed building. The proposed building would allow the provision of day care on the site to be expanded and offer additional facilities which are not currently provided.

The proposed position of the building will, however, require the removal of 4 trees, 2 of which are large and attractive Oaks. In assessing the proposal the balance between tree removal, impact on the setting of the listed building and the need for the proposed facilities has to be weighed carefully.

A number of alternative locations within the grounds were considered with the application site being identified as being the most appropriate in terms of the operation of the facility, setting of the listed building and landscape impact.

20/1166/FUL page 92

The loss of mature trees is regrettable, however it is considered that benefits arising from the proposed development and the limited impact on the setting of the heritage asset are sufficient to outweigh the harm, and subject to appropriate and additional planting, which can be achieved through conditions, the application is recommended for approval.

CONSULTATIONS

Local Consultations

Parish/Town Council Meeting 06.07.2020

No objection subject to the Listed Building Officer and Tree Officer reports.

Meeting 09.11.2020

No objection to the amended plans subject to the Listed Building Officer and Tree Officer's comments. Members understood from the applicant that they were happy to replant trees to compensate for any that have been lost.

It has subsequently been noted that page 2 of the Arboricultural report recommends that the proposal mitigates the loss of trees T1 -T4 by means of new plantings to the north and north-west of the new structure. The report suggest a total of 4 new field maple standards and 4 new oak standards to offer a 2:1 replanting radio.

Cllr M Chapman – Exmouth Brixington Ward

I have no objection to the day care centre plans . I have walked the site with the owner , and have seen the work carried out on Bystock house , grade 2 listed .I have also had a conversation with the owner on the tree’s on site and in the grounds ,these have been neglected for a great number of years , I’m pleased that the tree officers have been to look at them and work will be on going to keep them safe and healthy .the day care centre will be of benefit to all who need the support ,my hope for the future of this site is it will be a great community hub and help for all who need it .

Technical Consultations

Devon County Highway Authority The existing turning head in this section of Bystock court will be disrupted by the development of this proposed day care centre, however as the existing private roundabout of Bystock remains, traffic will still be able to leave the county highway network and turn off-carriageway before re-entering the carriageway in a forward facing motion.

I do not believe the development of this daycare centre will produce an unacceptable increase upon the trip generation of Bystock court and therefore the County Highway Authority has no objection to this planning application.

20/1166/FUL page 93

Recommendation:

THE HEAD OF PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION AND ENVIRONMENT, ON BEHALF OF DEVON COUNTY COUNCIL, AS LOCAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

Addendum 24/11/2020

The CHA has been made aware of amendments to this planning application, however remains satisfied that our stance remains the same.

Recommendation: THE HEAD OF PLANNING, TRANSPORTATION AND ENVIRONMENT, ON BEHALF OF DEVON COUNTY COUNCIL, AS LOCAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY, HAS NO OBJECTION TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

EDDC Trees I realise the importance of the development to the business of Bystock Court, however I am disappointed that in the first instance four trees, two of which are B cat trees are to be lost and second that there is no replanting offered to compensate for the loss

Further comments:

The amended set of plans do not appear to have taken into account my previous comments which still stand

Conservation CONSULTATION REPLY TO PLANNING WEST TEAM PLANNING APPLICATION AFFECTING LISTED BUILDING

ADDRESS: Bystock Court , Old Bystock Drive, Exmouth

GRADE: II APPLICATION NO: 20/1166/FUL

PROPOSAL: Construction of new Daycare centre

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF HISTORIC CHARACTER/ ARCHITECTURAL MERIT:

Bystock Court is a country house built in 1907 to a design by Wimperis and Best, with a multi-phase service wing, partly pre-dating the principal part of the building. The post-1914 additions to the north end are not of special interest.

The 1838 tithe map indicates that the house then stood within 172 acres of garden, orchard and woodland, as well as farmland, the full estate being considerably larger; this area was extended to 223 acres by the time of the 1905 sale. The land to the south and west of the house is now mainly built over, but extensive areas of woodland remain to the north, largely keeping the names they have had since the time of the 1889 OS map, or earlier. Major improvements were made to the gardens and pleasure grounds by John Bryce in the 1870s and 1880s, including the erection of a number of

20/1166/FUL page 94

garden structures, and the planting of specimen trees, a number of which remain. The most remarkable work of this phase was the construction in circa 1880 of a large 'rockery', to the west of the house by the German landscape gardener, F W Meyer, employed by Robert Veitch, the prominent Exeter nurseryman. The rockery, fed by a series of ponds which may have earlier origins as fishponds, was described in the contemporary gardening press as being of exceptional size, including a 12-foot cascade and a large cavern studded with stalactites and stalagmites. Now in a ruinous condition, elements of the original design may still be identified. An overgrown rectangular yew enclosure, located to the east of the ponds, dates from the early years of the C20. The pleasure grounds in general are now much overgrown and altered, and a number of new functional buildings have been erected. The former kitchen gardens, to the east of the house, have been built over. Of the three lodges built by Edward Divett in the C19 - one marking the eastern entrance to the estate, and two at the south entrance - the eastern lodge is listed, whilst one of those to the south was de-listed having been moved, and the other is thought to be considerably altered.

HOW WILL PROPOSED ALTERATIONS AFFECT HISTORIC CHARACTER OF BUILDING AND ITS SETTING:

This application relates to the construction of relatively large single storey building to provide complimentary care facilities for elderly people. This is expected to cater for residents from outside of Bystock Court and to work in conjunction with the main house, by providing additional facilities.

The new single storey building is to be located to the north of the existing listed building within a woodland setting. The new structure is separated from the existing buildings by an existing tarmac access road and the more recent extension to Bystock Court. The approach to the proposed site is screened from the existing building through planting and trees and a significant rise in level. As a result the site is not immediately obvious when approaching Bystock Court from the south and is not necessarily read in conjunction with the listed building, but the current character and setting is woodland.

There seem to be two areas of concern relating to the impact of the proposed new centre on the designated heritage assets. Firstly, the visual impact on the setting of Bystock Court and secondly, the impact on the contribution that the setting makes to the significance and understanding and interpretation of the heritage asset.

The Statement of Significance submitted with the application refers to the visual impact and concludes that the impact is minimal, see p3 & 4. Whilst it is appreciated that the use of materials is an important factor and the existence of other structures in this area, no proper justification is given for locating the centre in this area or whether other options were discussed or discounted. There is certainly merit in grouping a number of structures in one location as opposed to dispersed development across the site and this will help to minimise the impact on the setting of the listed building and the associated grounds.

However, there does not appear to be any assessment of the grounds or wider estate and how this contributes to the setting and significance of the principal building. These are referred to in the listing description and particular reference is given to the

20/1166/FUL page 95

'extensive areas of woodland remain to the north, largely keeping the names they have had since the time of the 1889 OS map, or earlier'. This needs further consideration and an assessment of the land and setting associated with Bystock Court needs to accompany any revised proposals. This will give a better understanding of the setting to enable an informed decision and to justify the proposed location.

Other areas of concern relate to the overall design of the new centre and include the size of the footprint, proximity to the listed building, too big, too wide?, its juxtaposition with the northern end of Bystock Court, setting aside the post-1914 additions being of less interest, but based on spatial (proximity) and context issues. If this is the right location, should it be set back further? What impact does this have on the woodland setting? Should the access be moved to the side? Where is the drop off point for visitors? These aspects need further consideration, but may well require amendment following the assessment of the setting, see above.

PROVISIONAL RECOMMENDATION - PROPOSAL UNACCEPTABLE

DATE: 31/07/20 INITIALS: KBH

Further comments: Conservation Area Status

It is noted that there have been several objections to this application and that this has again raised the question of a proposed Conservation Area.

Conservation Areas are areas of special architectural or historic interest whose character or appearance should be preserved or enhanced. There are now more than 8,000 throughout the country. They may vary in character, form and size, from a small group of buildings to a major part of a town, but all are worthy of protection as areas of special merit. Some buildings within conservation areas are usually 'listed', but not always. Each area is unique with its own 'sense of place', providing a variety of open spaces, buildings, trees, and features which give the area its special character.

Conservation Areas are defined in the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, and government advice can be found in the National Planning Policy Framework. Any new designation would normally be based on a detailed appraisal of an area to identify its special interest to support the designation. Such appraisal would help to identify what is positive and negative, and identifies opportunities for beneficial change or the need for additional protection and restraint. It is important to bear in mind that designation in itself will not protect an area from incremental change which can erode its character. The main control would be over substantial demolition of unlisted buildings, works to trees, limits on the display of advertisements and some restrictions on development which can be carried out without the need for planning permission.

Whilst the area around Bystock Court and Drive certainly possesses some local interest, and Bystock Court has recently been listed Grade II in 2012, it is considered that the surrounding area is unlikely to be of sufficient quality to merit designation. The original estate buildings have now been separated from the main building, both in

20/1166/FUL page 96

ownership and use and appear to have undergone a number of alterations and changes over the years. Although they are certainly an important part of the social and architectural history of Exmouth, the benefits of Conservation Area designation would be very limited and unfortunately in the current climate, there are no budgets for management or enhancement schemes.

It is also worth bearing in mind that the area is outside the built-up area boundary for Exmouth and that there are a considerable number of existing Tree Preservation Orders within the Bystock area which offer considerable protection.

The Exmouth Neighbourhood Plan has identified the area as being of local historic importance and specifically refers to Bystock Estate/Bystock Village.

Further comments:

Revised Heritage Assessment, amended layout and plans received 3rd November 2020:

The Heritage Statement is a vast improvement and now includes a proper assessment of the grounds and their significance. This has given a much better understanding of the setting to enable an informed decision and to justify the proposed location of the proposed Daycare Centre.

This has led to some changes to the actual design and again these are an improvement including moving it slightly further away from the Listed Building.

South elevation: the vertical rainscreen has been extended along the whole length creating a more 'screened' elevation;

West elevation: now set back further from the north end elevation of Bystock Court, minimising the impact on the listed building;

North elevation: again the vertical rainscreen has been extended along the whole length creating a more 'screened' elevation;

East elevation: again this elevation is now set back further from the north end elevation of Bystock Court, minimising the impact on the listed building;

Ground floor: although the internal layout has been amended the overall building does not appear to have been set back as shown in elevation?

Conclusion: no further objections, subject to the above.

Other Representations

A total of seven representations have been received, 5 raising objections, 1 in support and one neutral. The issues raised are summarised below:

Objections  The application site lies outside the Built-up Area Boundary in the local plan

20/1166/FUL page 97

 The site is in conflict with with the Exmouth Neighbourhood Plan  The building is not in keeping with the character of the historic nature of the area, and potential future conservation area  Potential to act as precedent for further development outside the built-up area  The scale and design is out keeping with neighbouring properties  Additional noise and disturbance  Potential use of the alternative access  Proposal will erode protection from development of “Bystock Village”  The development will not meet any specific Local Plan Policy  The proposal does not represent ‘minor development’ and will undermine the local and neighbourhood planning policies.  Removal of large trees is not justified

Support  The building is attractive and not visible from other local properties  Site was previously used as a plant area with large polytunnel  Minor works may be supported outside the Built-up Area Boundary  The use of the site will benefit the health and well-being of people with learning difficulties  There is a need to expand mental health services

Neutral  Support the provision of the facility  Consider the design awful in the context of the listed building  More sympathetic design of further planting to reduce impact of building

PLANNING HISTORY

Reference Description Decision Date

20/1167/LBC Construction of new day care Withdrawn 08.07.2020 centre 19/0590/LBC Internal and external Approved 24.06.2019 alterations to create 9 no. assisted living units. External works to include: 1no. new external door on front elevation. Internal works to include: creation of new internal party walls and alteration to staircase

POLICIES

Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031 Policies

20/1166/FUL page 98

Strategy 3 (Sustainable Development) Strategy 7 (Development in the Countryside) Strategy 22 (Development at Exmouth) Strategy 36 (Accessible and Adaptable Homes and Care/Extra Care Homes)

D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) D2 (Landscape Requirements) D3 (Trees and Development Sites)

EN5 (Wildlife Habitats and Features) EN8 (Significance of Heritage Assets and their setting) EN9 (Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset) EN22 (Surface Run-Off Implications of New Development)

RC5 (Community Buildings) RC6 (Local Community Facilities)

TC2 (Accessibility of New Development) TC7 (Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access) TC9 (Parking Provision in New Development)

Government Planning Documents NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework 2019) National Planning Practice Guidance

Exmouth Neighbourhood Plan Policies

EN1 CF1

Site Location and Description

The application site comprises a piece of land within the curtilage of Bystock Court, a large Grade II Listed Country House set within spacious landscaped grounds. The site accessed from Old Bystock Drive, by a long driveway leading to the main house. It is located on the northern fringe of Exmouth around 3.5km from the town centre.

At the present time Bystock Court is occupied partly as a private dwelling, together with a day care facility.

The proposed location is within an area of the grounds which has been generally cleared from vegetation, although there are many trees in the vicinity, with part of the site occupying the position of former buildings.

Proposed Development

Planning permission is sought for the construction of a day care centre on the northern side and within the grounds of Bystock Court. The proposed building is a single shallow pitched roof structure located to the north of the main extended house. The building has an irregular plan form, with external angled timber supports to the

20/1166/FUL page 99

overhanging roof of the east elevation and parts of the south and north-west elevations.

Internally the accommodation comprises 2 large day rooms, with therapy rooms, bathroom and supporting staff and kitchen facilities.

ANALYSIS

The main issues to be considered in the determination of this application related to the policy context and principle of the development; design and impact on the character and appearance of the area; heritage impact; and any impact on trees; highway safety; residential amenity; and ecology.

Policy Context and Principle of the Proposed Development

Exmouth Neighbourhood Plan 2018-2031 has been adopted and the policies within it are a material consideration in the determination of this application.

The presumption in favour of sustainable development lies at the heart of the planning process with planning law requires that applications for planning permission be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

Paragraph 91 of the NPPF states that planning policies and decisions should aim to achieve healthy, inclusive and safe places which, amongst other criteria, would 'enable and support healthy lifestyles, especially where this would address identified local health and well-being needs’

Paragraph 92 of the NPPF states that planning policies and decisions should plan positively for the provision and use of shared spaces, community facilities, including meeting places, and other local services and to take into account and support the delivery of local strategies to improve health, social and cultural well-being for all sections of the community.

When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset Paragraph 193 requires great weight to be given to the assets conservation.

The application site lies outside the Built-up Area Boundary (BUAB) of Exmouth, and therefore in planning terms is located in the countryside where Strategy 7 (Development in the Countryside) states that development in the countryside will only be permitted where it is in accordance with a specific Local or Neighbourhood Plan

20/1166/FUL page 100

policy that explicitly permits such development and where it would not hard the distinctive landscape, amenity and environmental qualities within which it is located.

Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) requires development to respect the key characteristics and special qualities of the area and to ensure that the scale, massing, density, height, fenestration and materials of buildings relate well to their context.

Policy RC5 (Community Buildings) states that new community facilities and buildings will be accommodate on sites that lie within or adjacent to Built-up Area Boundaries. The site being at located adjacent to the BUAB.

There is an objective within the Neighbourhood Plan to enhance and develop Health and Wellbeing services in Exmouth to serve the needs of the whole community, and that all existing healthcare facilities/buildings are retained and used to their full potential to provide integrated health, social care, wellbeing and health promotion for the Exmouth community of all ages.

Policy CF1 states that development that contributes to enhancement of health and well-being facilities within Exmouth will be supported.

Whilst the application site lies outside the BUAB for Exmouth, it is adjacent to it and the proposed new facility will be providing an enhanced service to that existing on the site. The new building would enable a wider range of facilities to be offered, and allow more residents to be able to access the services, which at the present time are constrained by the layout and limitations of the existing building. In this respect it is considered that the benefits of the improved facilities for the users of the service and the community benefits offered would, in terms of principle, accord with the provisions of Local Plan Policy RC5 and Neighbourhood Plan, and those of the NPPF.

Design and Impact on the Character and Appearance of the Area

The design of the proposed building is somewhat unusual, with the external wooden supports, it is of a high quality and should meets its aim of helping to assimilate the building into its setting. The building has a relatively large footprint, although the simple shallow pitched roof form is considered to help to reduce its visual impact.

The siting adjacent to other existing structures and on the site of a former building has been arrived at following the consideration of alternative positions within the curtilage of the main house, and represents a balance between the functional needs of the facility and the impact on the listed building. It is located away from the main facades of the building and adjacent to the more modern extensions on the northern part of the building.

Whilst, inevitably, the new building will be visible, its design and position are considered to be acceptable within its context. There are no public views of the building, being contained well within the private grounds of the building and it is considered that any impact will be limited and localised.

Heritage Impact

20/1166/FUL page 101

Bystock Court is a Grade II Listed Building identified within the listing description as being a country house constructed in the early part of the 20th Century. Large extensions have been added to the north of the main house, adjacent to the application site.

When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, paragraph 193 of the NPPF requires that great weight should be given to the assets conservation, irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance.

Further development within the grounds of Bystock Court has the potential to affect the setting of this heritage asset, and special regard has therefore to be had in assessing the impact of the proposal as part of the heritage consideration of the application.

With this in mind the siting and design of the day care centre is fundamental to the success of the application. The scale of the development is considered to be proportionate to this setting, and the chosen location is such that its visual impact is minimised. There would be limited vantage points from which the new building would be viewed in conjunction with the listed building and the proposed development will inevitably have some impact on the woodland within which it is proposed and therefore the setting of the listed building. However the design is relatively modest, and the use of traditional materials, albeit incorporating modern design principles is not considered to have a detrimental impact on the setting of the main building.

Overall the proposals, whilst recognising that they will have some impact to the listed building’s setting are considered to result in ‘less than substantial harm’ in terms of NPPF paragraph 196, and that subject to ensuring appropriate detailing, screening and lighting the proposals will not have a negative impact on the historic heritage setting.

However, under the above paragraph this harm to a designated heritage asset also has to be balanced against the public benefits of the proposal. The public benefits here relate to the provision of additional purpose-built community day care facilities which are understood to be much needed within the area. The centre will support the local population and allow the expansion of the existing care provided on the site by offering a wider range of services within appropriate accommodation.

The benefits to the local community and economy are considered to weigh heavily in support of the proposal and subject to appropriate landscaping and detailing it is concluded that the public benefits of the proposed facilities outweigh the limited harm to the buildings setting, which results in a less than substantial impact to its significance.

Trees

There are many trees within the Bystock Estate, with a tree preservation order covering some of the larger trees to the front of the house. The order does not extend to the application site or the majority of the estate.

20/1166/FUL page 102

Four trees would need to be felled as a result of the proposed development, including 2 large Oak trees (one a Turkey Oak) and the application is accompanied by an arboricultural report detailing the works required to accommodate the building.

Whilst the comments received from the Councils Arboricultural Officer are appreciated, the supporting information makes it clear that new planting is proposed to provide some compensation for the loss of existing trees. The Arboricultural Report recommends the mitigation of the loss of trees T1 through T4 by means of new plantings to the north and north-west of the new building. It is suggested that these comprises four new Field Maple standards and four new Oak Standards.

The loss of any trees is regrettable, particularly established specimens, however it is considered that the wider community benefits provided by the proposed development would, in this instance justify the loss of the trees and that subject to appropriate new planting to mitigate for this loss the proposed development is acceptable from an arboricultural perspective.

Highway Safety

The proposal will result in an increase in vehicular movements due to the additional visitors being able to be accommodated within the facility, although the nature of the traffic is likely to be similar, with many of the visitors being brought to the centre in shared transport. With this in mind the proposal has been considered by the Highways Authority who do not consider that additional traffic arising from the proposal will be such that any detriment to highway safety would arise.

There is a relatively large parking area to the front of the main building and sufficient parking on site to accommodate any additional parking demand arising.

Residential Amenity

The nearest properties which are not associated with Bystock Court are at the entrance to the grounds and within Bystock Drive to the east of the site. These are some distance from the application site and screened by the substantial planting within the grounds. There may be some additional traffic movements, as mentioned above, which have the potential to created noise and disturbance, however it is not considered that this would so significant to result in any material loss of residential amenity.

Ecology

Bystock Court is set within extensive landscaped grounds, with significant areas of established woodland which support a wide variety of wildlife. A preliminary ecological appraisal for the site was undertaken which, in addition to nesting birds identified potential roosting sites for bats. In addition the site is also located within an East Devon Great Crested Newt Consultation Zone, and a nest characteristic of dormice was located.

As a result further survey work has been undertaken in respect of the identified protected species. The results of the survey work and appropriate monitoring and protection measures have been identified within the submitted information, and subject

20/1166/FUL page 103

the findings of these being adhered to there is the potential for the proposed development to result in a net bio-diversity gain. It is considered that subject to appropriate conditions to ensure the protection and mitigation measures identified in the various reports, the proposal will be acceptable from an ecological perspective.

CONCLUSIONS

There is an identified need for additional care facilities within the Exmouth area, and proposed building would allow the provision of day care on the site to be expanded and offer additional facilities which are not currently provided.

The loss of mature trees is regrettable, however it is considered that benefits arising from the proposed development and the limited impact on the setting of the heritage asset are sufficient to outweigh this harm, and subject to appropriate and additional planting, and other conditions to ensure that the development can be undertaken without detriment the application is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE subject to the following conditions:

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans listed at the end of this decision notice. (Reason - For the avoidance of doubt.)

3. Prior to commencement of any works on site (including demolition), tree protection details, to include the protection of hedges and shrubs, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Planning Authority. These shall adhere to the principles embodied in BS 5837:2012 and shall indicate exactly how and when the trees will be protected during the site works. Provision shall also be made for supervision of tree protection by a suitably qualified and experienced arboricultural consultant and details shall be included within the tree protection statement. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the agreed details.

In any event, the following restrictions shall be strictly observed:

(a) No burning shall take place in a position where flames could extend to within 5m of any part of any tree to be retained. (b) No trenches for services or foul/surface water drainage shall be dug within the crown spreads of any retained trees (or within half the height of the trees, whichever is the greater) unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. All such installations shall be in accordance with the advice given in Volume 4: National Joint Utilities Group (NJUG) Guidelines For The Planning, Installation And Maintenance Of Utility Apparatus In Proximity To Trees (Issue 2) 2007.

20/1166/FUL page 104

(c) No changes in ground levels or excavations shall take place within the crown spreads of retained trees (or within half the height of the trees, whichever is the greater) unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - A pre-commencement condition is required to ensure retention and protection of trees on the site during and after construction. The condition is required in interests of amenity and to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the area in accordance with Policies D1 - Design and Local Distinctiveness and D3 - Trees and Development Sites of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

4. Full details of the method of construction of hard surfaces in the vicinity of trees to be retained shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of any works on site (including demolition). The method shall adhere to the principles embodied in BS 5837:2012 and AAIS Arboricultural Practice Note 1 (1996) and involvement of an arboricultural consultant and engineer is recommended. The development shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the agreed details. (Reason - A pre-commencement condition is required to ensure retention and protection of trees on the site during and after construction. The condition is required in the interests of amenity and to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the area in accordance with Policies D1 - Design and Local Distinctiveness and D3 - Trees and Development Sites of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

5. A Construction and Environment Management Plan must be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to any works commencing on site, and must be implemented and remain in place throughout the development. The CEMP shall include at least the following matters: Air Quality, Dust, Water Quality, Lighting, Noise and Vibration, Pollution Prevention and Control, and Monitoring Arrangements. Construction working hours shall be 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday and 8am to 1pm on Saturdays, with no working on Sundays or Bank Holidays. There shall be no burning on site. There shall be no high frequency audible reversing alarms used on the site. (Reason: A pre-commencement condition is required to ensure that the details are agreed before the start of works to protect the amenities of existing and future residents in the vicinity of the site from noise, air, water and light pollution in accordance with Policies D1 - Design and Local Distinctiveness and EN14 - Control of Pollution of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

6. Before development above foundation level is commenced, a schedule of materials and finishes, and, where so required by the Local Planning Authority, samples of such materials and finishes, to be used for the external walls and roofs of the proposed development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. (Reason - To ensure that the materials are sympathetic to the character and appearance of the area in accordance with Policy D1 - Design and Local Distinctiveness of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

20/1166/FUL page 105

7. No development above foundation level shall take place until a landscaping scheme has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority; such a scheme to include the planting of trees, hedges, shrubs, herbaceous plants and areas to be grassed. The scheme shall also give details of any proposed walls, fences and other boundary treatment. The landscaping scheme shall be carried out in the first planting season after commencement of the development unless any alternative phasing of the landscaping is agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority and the landscaping shall be maintained for a period of 5 years. Any trees or other plants which die during this period shall be replaced during the next planting season with specimens of the same size and species unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason - To ensure that the details are planned and considered at an early stage in the interests of amenity and to preserve and enhance the character and appearance of the area in accordance with Policies D1 - Design and Local Distinctiveness and D2 - Landscape Requirements of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

8. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the Arboricultural Appraisal dated 9 March 2020 prepared by Advanced Arboriculture, including the replanting of replacement trees as identified within the report in the planting season following completion of the development, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason: In the interests of nature conservation and to comply with Policy EN5 (Wildlife Habitats and Features) of the East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031

9. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the mitigation and enhancement measures set out in the Preliminary Ecological Appraisal & Phase 2 Bat Emergence Survey report dated June 2020 prepared by Devon & Cornwall Ecology unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason: In the interests of nature conservation and to comply with Policy EN5 (Wildlife Habitats and Features) of the East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031

10. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the mitigation and enhancement measures set out in the Dormouse Survey Report dated June 2020 prepared by GE Consulting, and Addendum letter dated 3 December 2020 unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason: In the interests of nature conservation and to comply with Policy EN5 (Wildlife Habitats and Features) of the East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031

11. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the details set out in the Non-licenced Great Crested Newt Method Statement report dated June 2020 prepared by Devon & Cornwall Ecology unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Reason: In the interests of nature conservation and to comply with Policy EN5 (Wildlife Habitats and Features) of the East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031

20/1166/FUL page 106

NOTE FOR APPLICANT

Plans relating to this application:

7904-LP Rev D Location Plan 16.06.20

7904-100 REV C Combined Plans 03.11.20

7904-101 REV B Combined Plans 03.11.20

7904-110 REV C Proposed Combined 03.11.20 Plans

7904-111 REV C Proposed Elevation 03.11.20

7904-112 REV A Proposed Elevation 03.11.20

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

20/1166/FUL page 107 Agenda Item 11 Ward Axminster

Reference 20/1633/FUL

Applicant Mr & Mrs J Bostock

Location Rose Farm Wyke Axminster EX13 8TN

Proposal Erection of agricultural barn.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal

page 108

Committee Date: 7th January 2021

Axminster Target Date: (Axminster) 20/1633/FUL 22.10.2020

Applicant: Mr & Mrs J Bostock

Location: Rose Farm, Wyke, Axminster, EX13 8TN

Proposal: Erection of agricultural barn.

RECOMMENDATION: Refusal

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application is to be considered at the Planning Committee as the officer recommendation conflicts with the view of a Ward Member.

The proposal is for a large portal framed building for agricultural purposes, namely the storage of vehicles and equipment, haylage and bedding. The site is in the countryside within the hamlet of Wyke and is outside of any AONB area. It is located near a public highway, a short distance to the west/northwest of two Grade II listed buildings, Rose Farm and Rose Cottage (both of which are dwellings). Despite partial screening by vegetation, a fence and outbuildings, existing buildings and equipment within the site are partially visible in both close and distant views from public viewpoints.

Very limited information has been provided about the agricultural operations taking place or intended to take place on the land and how the equipment to be stored relates to this and it is unclear why existing buildings cannot continue to be used to store some of the equipment listed in the application details. On the basis of the information submitted it is therefore not considered that a genuine agricultural need exists for the proposed building.

The conservation officer advises that the building would harm the rural setting of the two listed buildings, which contributes to their significance, noting that this has already been diminished by changes on the land in the vicinity of the application site over time.

Axminster Town Council and two Ward Members object to the proposal on the basis of lack of justification, impact on listed buildings and concerns about flood risk. Other objectors raise similar concerns. Some representations of support have been received stating that similar development in the locality sets a precedent and citing a need to store equipment securely, community benefits

20/1633/FUL page 109

associated with the equipment storage and that haylage is produced on the applicant’s land.

Given the visibility of the proposed building, its scale, the impact on the setting of listed buildings and the lack of agricultural justification for it the recommendation is that the application be refused.

CONSULTATIONS

Local Consultations

Parish/Town Council 15/9/20 AXMINSTER TOWN COUNCIL OPPOSES THIS APPLICATION ON THE GROUNDS THAT THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE A CLEAR AGRICULTURAL NEED FOR SUCH A LARGE BUILDING. THE VIEWS OF THE CONSERVATION OFFICER SHOULD BE SOUGHT REGARDING ANY IMPACT THE PROPOSED BUILDING WOULD HAVE ON THE SETTING OF THE ADJACENT LISTED PROPERTIES.

10/11/20 AXMINSTER TOWN COUNCIL HAS NOT CHANGED ITS VIEWS IN THE LIGHT OF THIS ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND REMAINS OPPOSED TO THIS PROPOSAL.

Axminster - Cllr Andrew Moulding 21/9/20 I can certainly see that there is a need for vehicles, implements and machinery to be stored away, to improve the appearance of the farm setting.

In days gone be by, a full agricultural appraisal would have been called for in order to ascertain that there is an agricultural need.

On balance, I do not consider that the proposed barn would damage this rural setting.

15/11/20 I confirm my original recommendation - that this application should be approved I therefore recommend that the application should be approved.

Axminster - Cllr Ian Hall 28/9/20 I recommend refusal as there is not a strong justification for need. Is it possible that we can have a site visit?

7/11/20 We need a site visit please

13/11/20 I object, subject to a site visit.

20/1633/FUL page 110

Axminster - Cllr Sarah Jackson 25/9/20 Having given this application due and proper consideration, I am currently minded to object to the plans as the barn seems out of keeping with the surrounding buildings, not least the listed building nearby, and appears overly large for the need put forward. The plans submitted do not convince me as to the genuine agricultural need cited nor have the underlying issues with flooding in the area been addressed to my satisfaction. I would, of course, defer to Officer's reports on that point, and look forward to reading their recommendations in due course. I will, of course, keep an open mind in that regard.

09/12/20 The officer's report both confirms and validates my concerns. My position, therefore, remains unchanged and I recommend refusal of this application.

Technical Consultations Conservation 19/10/20

CONSULTATION REPLY TO PLANNING EAST TEAM PLANNING APPLICATION AFFECTING LISTED BUILDING

ADDRESS: Rose Farm, Wyke, Axminster

GRADE: II APPLICATION NO: 20/1633/FUL

PROPOSAL: Erection of agricultural barn.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF HISTORIC CHARACTER/ ARCHITECTURAL MERIT:

There are two listed buildings in the immediate vicinity of the proposal. Together they form a small informal group at the junction of Wyke Lane and Abbey Gate Lane. The surrounding land is countryside with a number of farms, some listed eg Wyke Farm, in the nearby locality. There is a concentration of mature hedgerow and trees around this grouping and forming field boundaries.

Rose Farm is listed Grade II Rose Cottage is listed Grade II

Their significance is derived from their age (dating from C17 & C18), vernacular character and appearance and their rural setting and the use of traditional materials.

HOW WILL PROPOSED ALTERATIONS AFFECT HISTORIC CHARACTER OF BUILDING AND ITS SETTING:

This application relates to the construction of a large rectangular portal framed building, measuring 18m long x 9m wide with a low-pitched roof, approximately 6m high. Constructed in concrete block, beneath treated vertical Yorkshire boarding and a low pitched black corrugated roof sheeting containing translucent roof lights. The

20/1633/FUL page 111

structure is intended to provide undercover storage for the applicant's machinery, haylage and bedding.

The structure is to be located behind a very domestic close boarded fence adjacent to the lane which currently screens a collection of timber sheds, loose boxes, stabling and farm machinery stored in the open and served off an existing access onto Abbey Gate Lane. The proposed building is to be added to this group.

Looking at the historic photographs from 1947 to the present day, it appears that there have always been some structures on this area of land. In addition, the historic OS map dating from 1951 confirms this. However, the number of buildings and extent of the landuse as stabling, sheds, loose boxes, machinery etc appears to have grown considerably. Such incremental change can often result in a detrimental impact on the surrounding land and this case the setting of the listed buildings. The rural green agricultural setting noted on historic maps has been continually eroded to the extent where it has severely diminished this setting. The introduction of this large agricultural barn will further erode the character and appearance of the area and will have an impact on the setting of both properties. In particular views from the east from Wyke Lane coming towards Rose Farm, where the structure will be prominent in the landscape and when approaching from the north past Rose Cottage which frames the lane (Wyke Lane) with the mature trees opposite and opens out into the junction of the two lanes.

It is considered that the barn will result in some harm to the setting of the listed buildings.

PROVISIONAL RECOMMENDATION - PROPOSAL UNACCEPTABLE

13/11/20 Amended plans received 30th October 2020:

The amended plans and additional information has not altered my previous comments.

It is still considered that the barn will result in some harm to the setting of the listed buildings.

PROVISIONAL RECOMMENDATION - PROPOSAL UNACCEPTABLE

Clarification 2/12/20 In accordance with the NPPF para 193 . When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation (and the more important the asset, the greater the weight should be). This is irrespective of whether any potential harm amounts to substantial harm, total loss or less than substantial harm to its significance. In this instance it is considered that the proposed large rectangular barn is likely to result in less than substantial harm to the significance of the designated heritage assets. However, this does not equate to a less than substantial objection. Great

20/1633/FUL page 112

weight must be given to an asset’s conservation. This should therefore be weighed against any public benefits or other benefits that outweigh this harm.

Other Representations

Objections have been received from 2 parties raising the concerns listed below (concerns which do not relate to the proposed development or planning considerations are not listed):

- Adverse impact on residential amenity; - The site is overpopulated; - Impact on traffic flows and highway safety - Impact on the natural environment; - Harm to the setting of listed buildings in terms of the scale, design and materials of the proposal; - Poor design, location, excessive scale and harm to the landscape; - Flood risk without sustainability benefits which outweigh this; - Lack of agricultural justification for the development (no agricultural activity on the land, the larger equipment proposed to be stored is used off the applicants land holding and could in any case be stored outside, the smaller equipment could be stored in existing buildings; - Lack of parking provision; - Inadequate information on topography and proposed changes to ground levels; - Light pollution from lights affixed to the building; - A waste management plan has not been provided; - Inappropriate to the economic, social and wellbeing of the area.

With regard to procedural matters it is also stated that the application form was incorrectly completed with regard to (i) development having already commenced (ii) the presence of flood risk areas and a main watercourse. It is also stated that a flood risk and drainage impact assessment should have been provided with the application.

Support has been received from 2 parties who make the following points (points raised which are not relevant to planning or the proposal are not listed):

- The agricultural equipment to be stored is often used to help neighbouring land owners, benefiting the local community; - Precedent has been set by similar buildings in the locality; - The agricultural machinery needs to be stored securely; - Haylage produced on the applicant’s land is sold.

PLANNING HISTORY

The most relevant planning history is included within the table below:

Reference Description Decision Date

85/P0399 Change Of Use To Mini Skip Hire Depot. Approve 16/4/1985

20/1633/FUL page 113

91/P1072 Scrap Metal Sorting Area & Mini Skip Approve 27/9/1991 Storage

92/P1512 Renewal Of Temporary Planning Approve 16/10/1992 Permission For Mini Skip Business

94/P1626 Renewal Of Temporary Planning Approve 19/10/1994 Permission For Mini-Skip Business

03/P2527 Conversion Of Attached Barn For Approve 10/11/2003 Residential Use (Listed building consent)

03/P2528 Conversion Of Attached Barn For Approve 10/11/2003 Residential Use

06/2984/FUL Erection of three stables and feed room Approve 18/12/2006

08/1228/FUL Conversion of adjoining barn into Approve 23/6/2008 additional accommodation

08/1230/LBC Conversion of adjoining barn into Approve 23/6/2008 additional accommodation

POLICIES

Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031 Policies TC2 (Accessibility of New Development)

TC7 (Adequacy of Road Network and Site Access)

Strategy 7 (Development in the Countryside)

Strategy 46 (Landscape Conservation and Enhancement and AONBs)

D7 (Agricultural Buildings and Development)

D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness)

EN8 (Significance of Heritage Assets and their setting)

EN9 (Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset)

No draft neighbourhood plan for Axminster is currently available

Government Planning Documents NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework 2019) National Planning Practice Guidance

20/1633/FUL page 114

Site Location and Description

The site lies to the south of the town of Axminster on the western side of the hamlet of Wyke Green, which is located in the countryside, outside of the East Devon AONB. The development site is a partly levelled area to the southwest of an existing stable and outbuilding, within an existing yard which has some hard surfacing. Another stable lies a short distance away to the North West and another outbuilding lies to the east of the site, close to the dwelling known as Rose Farm (the applicant’s dwelling). At the time of the site visit the stables appeared to be in use for equestrian purposes and vehicles, paraphernalia and items of plant were stored/parked within and around the yard area.

Rose Farm and another nearby dwelling, Rose Cottage, are both grade II listed and lie a short distance away to the east/southeast. Both listed dwellings are located near the junction of Wyke Lane and Abbey Gate Lane. The surrounding land is countryside and there a number of farms in the locality, with listed buildings being present at some of them e.g. Wyke Farm.

The development site is located near the bottom of a shallow valley and is on the edge of (but outside of) flood zones 2 and 3.

Proposal

The proposal would involve a small amount of additional ground excavation (some has already taken place) to create a level area and the erection of an agricultural building, as shown on the submitted plans. The building would have concrete block and timber boarded walls and a corrugated sheet roof, with integral translucent rooflights. It would be open fronted on its northeast side and have an opening on its western side. Since the application was first submitted the proposed building has been reduced in scale, through reducing its height by 1 metre.

Supporting information provided by the applicant indicates that the extent of the surrounding land owned by the applicant is 17 acres and that the applicant has user rights relating to an additional 7 acres. It is stated that the building is required for the efficient running of the holding, namely for the storage of the following: Agricultural machinery and trailers including 2 no. tractors, JCB digger, mule vehicle (i.e. a utility vehicle), hedge cutter, grass harrow and topper, chipper, crop sprayer, roller and trailer. It is also proposed that the building would be used to store haylage and bedding. It is stated that machinery is currently stored in the open, that indoor storage would prevent further deterioration and that there are no other suitable buildings on the holding or nearby which could meet the reasonable need for undercover storage.

ANALYSIS

The main issues for consideration are the principle of development, impact upon the area, impact upon heritage assets, flood risk and highway safety.

Principle

20/1633/FUL page 115

The proposal is for a building for agricultural use. LP Policy D7 states “New agricultural buildings and/or buildings intended for intensive agricultural activities that could give rise to adverse amenity, landscape, environmental or other impacts will be permitted where there is a genuine agricultural need for the development” and it goes on to list specific criteria which must also be met, including that it must be established that there are no other suitable buildings on the holding or in the vicinity which could meet the reasonable need.

The submitted information indicates that the applicant owns 17 acres of land (with user rights to another 7 acres nearby), however whilst the surrounding land appears to be agricultural pasture, very limited information is provided within the application to describe any agricultural activity undertaken on that land. In addition to the storage of machinery, submitted information refers to the need to store haylage and bedding within the proposed building, however it is not stated whether this is produced on the applicant’s land or brought in, and if the latter, what agricultural operation the haylage and bedding relates to.

It is accepted that even where agricultural land is not being used to raise a crop or livestock its lawful use may nevertheless be agricultural (i.e. in planning terms, given that this is one of the default planning land uses) and that maintenance activities may be required on it, however it is considered that the range of equipment that would be required solely for maintenance would be limited and proportionate to the scale and nature of the land holding. In relation to this, from the limited information provided and given the relatively small scale of the applicant’s landholding, it is difficult to understand why two tractors and a utility vehicle are required for agricultural purposes. It is also noted from the observations made during the site visit and from the applicant’s submitted photographs that some of the equipment proposed to be stored in the proposed building, namely the utility vehicle, crop sprayer and one of the tractors, are currently (or have previously been) stored under cover in existing buildings at the site. The application does not provide any explanation as to why this cannot continue. Taking all the above points into account, it is considered that on the basis of the information submitted there are other buildings on the holding could meet at least some of the stated need for undercover storage and that there is not a genuine residual agricultural need for a storage building at the scale proposed.

Character and appearance of the area and heritage interests

The area in and around the hamlet of Wyke has a rural agricultural character with and contains few dwellings or other buildings. Whilst the application site and its immediate surroundings (including existing buildings) are partly screened from public views by a roadside hedge, fence and existing outbuildings (one of which flanks the public highway) the upper parts of outbuildings, machinery and paraphernalia present within the site are visible from public highways, both at close range (above the hedge and through the access opening) and in approach views from different directions and it is considered that the upper part of the proposed building would similarly be visible.

The two listed buildings in the immediate vicinity of the site abut the public highway. As the Conservation Officer notes, these two buildings form a small informal group at the junction of Wyke Lane and Abbey Gate Lane and there is a concentration of mature hedgerow and trees around this grouping and forming field boundaries. Despite the

20/1633/FUL page 116

vegetation present, the listed buildings are clearly visible from the highway both at close range and in approach views from different directions, and from some viewpoints one or other of the listed buildings is viewed in the context of the application site.

Were it not for the proximity of the listed buildings, the visual impact of the proposed building would be considered acceptable, given that the site is not in the AONB, the simple agricultural appearance of the building, that it would be located close to existing buildings (and would be read as part of an existing group) and that it would be partly screened from view. Given the site’s proximity to 2 listed buildings, however, special regard must be had to the impact of the proposal on them, including their setting. It is noted that the significance of the listed buildings is derived from their age, vernacular character, appearance, use of traditional materials and their rural setting. Taking account of the conservation officer’s comments it is considered that the proposed building would alter the rural setting of these buildings, which has already been diminished by the development and land use to the west/northwest of them. Notwithstanding that the proposed building would be partially screened it would nevertheless be visible from public viewpoints particularly during the winter months when tree and hedge vegetation is thinner. It would be noticeably larger than the existing buildings at the site, both in terms of its height and footprint and it is considered that it would represent a significant addition to the quantum of built development at the site, resulting in less than substantial harm to the setting of the listed buildings nearby.

In light of the less than substantial harm, and in the absence of any public benefits from the proposal, the impacts upon the listed buildings is harmful and as such contrary to Policy EN9 and the guidance in the NPPF.

Flooding and Drainage

In response to an objector’s comment it has been ascertained that there is no main river within 20 m of the site. The site abuts, but is not within, flood zones 2 and 3 no flood risk assessment was required to be submitted with the application and it is not considered likely that the proposed development would be at risk of flooding or that it would increase flood risk elsewhere.

In response to an objector’s point that a drainage impact assessment should have been provided the Local Planning Authority’s adopted validation checklist does not require that a Sustainable Drainage Strategy to be provided in applications of the type and scale proposed. It is considered that there is adequate space within the site to ensure that clean roof run off water can be drained within the site.

Access, Parking and Highway Safety

The proposal is for a building for agricultural use and given that the land holding can already be used for agricultural purposes it is not considered that the erection of a building would significantly increase vehicle movements in and out of the site or that it would increase traffic on the local highway network.

Other issues

20/1633/FUL page 117

As the barn is proposed to be used for storage in relation to agriculture it is considered unlikely that it would have any undue impacts in relation to impact on residential amenity or nuisance. The nature of the site where the proposed building would be erected is such that the erection of the building would be unlikely to have an impact on biodiversity.

CONCLUSION

On the basis of the information submitted it is not considered that a genuine agricultural need for the proposed building has been demonstrated and and it is therefore not considered to be acceptable in principle. The proposed building would also result in less than substantial harm to the setting of two listed buildings and in this case it is not considered that this harm is outweighed by public benefits, such that on balance, the proposal is not considered to represent sustainable development.

RECOMMENDATION

REFUSE for the following reasons:

1. The proposed agricultural building, due to its large scale and location, would fail to preserve or enhance the rural setting of the adjacent listed dwellings. In the absence of sufficient evidence to demonstrate a genuine agricultural need for the proposed building, including evidence that no other suitable building(s) on the holding could meet all or part of any genuine agricultural need, it is considered that there is no public benefit that outweighs the identified harm and that the harm is therefore unjustified. The proposal therefore conflicts with the requirements of policies D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness), D7 (Agricultural Buildings and Development), EN9 (Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset) of the Adopted New East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031, National Planning Practice Guidance and the National Planning Policy Framework.

NOTE FOR APPLICANT

Informative: In accordance with the aims of Article 35 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 East Devon District Council seeks to work positively with applicants to try and ensure that all relevant planning concerns have been appropriately resolved; however, in this case the development is considered to be fundamentally unacceptable such that the Council's concerns could not be overcome through negotiation.

Plans relating to this application:

1309.8A Proposed Combined Plans 30.10.20

1309.6A Proposed Combined Plans 26.10.20

1309.7A Proposed Combined Plans 26.10.20

20/1633/FUL page 118

Location Plan 03.08.20

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

20/1633/FUL page 119 Agenda Item 12 Ward Dunkeswell And Otterhead

Reference 20/2293/FUL

Applicant Mr and Mrs Martyn Summers

Location Kains Park Farm Awliscombe Honiton EX14 3NN

Proposal Proposed extension and conversion of existing outbuilding to form studio / games room.

RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions

page 120

Committee Date: 7th January 2021

Dunkeswell And Target Date: Otterhead 20/2293/FUL 15.12.2020 (Awliscombe)

Applicant: Mr and Mrs Martyn Summers

Location: Kains Park Farm Awliscombe

Proposal: Proposed extension and conversion of existing outbuilding to form studio / games room.

RECOMMENDATION: Approval with conditions

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This application is before the Planning Committee because one of the applicants is an employee of the Council.

The development proposed is for the conversion of an existing outbuilding adjoining the eastern elevation of the existing farmhouse into a studio / games room and the construction of a small extension adjacent to the eastern elevation of the dwellinghouse.

No objections to the proposal were received.

The property is distant from other dwellings and the proposal will have no effect on neighbouring properties.

The proposal will not conflict with Policies D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) and D8 (Reuse of Agricultural Buildings) of the East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031).

A bat and bird survey report was submitted with the application indicating the presence of bat roosts and recommending mitigating measures.

Subject to adherence to the recommendations of the report, the proposal is supported.

CONSULTATIONS

20/2293/FUL page 121

Local Consultations

Parish/Town Council The Parish Council have no objections and fully support

Dunkeswell And Otterhead - Cllr David Key I have no objection to this application and support.

Other Representations A member of the public pointed out that one of the areas on the Block Plan was incorrectly numbered. (An amended Block Plan has been submitted).

PLANNING HISTORY

Reference Description Decision Date

92/P0732 Conversion To New Annexe Of Approval with 09.06.1992 Adjoining Outbuilding. conditions

07/1903/COU Change of use of buildings to Approval 08.11.2007 storage of agricultural retrospective machinery (conditions)

16/2551/FUL Expansion of existing storage Approval with 11.01.2017 and distribution site including conditions revisions to planning permission 07/1903/COU to allow storage of caravans, boats, trailers, machinery and vehicles ; caravan wash bay; 25no storage containers for self store use; and associated works including re-cladding of existing storage building.

20/1907/AGR Agricultural access track Agr 05.10.2020 Notification approval

20/2082/FUL Erection of agricultural Approval with 03.12.2020 building, construction of yard conditions area and associated works.

POLICIES

20/2293/FUL page 122

Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031 Policies D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) D8 (Re-use of Rural Buildings Outside of Settlements)

Government Planning Documents NPPF (National Planning Policy Framework 2019, updated) National Planning Practice Guidance

Site Location and Description

Kains Park Farm is located outside the AONB and the Built Up Area Boundary of Honiton, approximately 2 miles northwest of the town centre and 500 metres north of Weston. The farm comprises 39 acres of owned land and a further 11 acres of rented land nearby. Historically, the farm operated as a dairy unit, and diversified into agricultural contracting and haulage. After milk production ceased the farm diversified into storage, starting initially with farm machinery and then expanding into other forms of storage. Farming activities are now limited to growing and selling grass for grazing and cutting.

The farm buildings include a courtyard complex consisting of the farmhouse forming two arms of the southwest corner and various outbuildings forming the other sides of the square. The outbuilding that is the subject of this application abuts the eastern elevation of the farmhouse and extends along the southern side of the square. To the north is a covered drive-through and then further outbuildings.

Other farm buildings are located to the east and north of the courtyard complex and include the storage facilities. Vehicle access is from Weston Lane to the south and the driveway forks to the west and to the east of the courtyard complex to give access to the domestic parking area and the agricultural / storage facilities respectively.

Proposed Development

The applicant seeks permission for the conversion of an existing single storey outbuilding attached to the east elevation of the main dwellinghouse to be converted into ancillary use (studio / games room), and for a single storey extension to the outbuilding alongside the eastern wall of the dwellinghouse.

ANALYSIS

In this instance the main issues with the proposal focus on the policy position in respect of the proposed use of the outbuilding, the design of the alterations, and mitigation of the impact on protected wildlife, specifically bats in this case.

Policy

The conversion of an adjoining outbuilding to ancillary use would not be contrary to Policy D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness) or Policy D8 (Re-use of Rural Buildings Outside of Settlements) of the East Devon Local Plan. Its form, bulk and general design will be in keeping with its surroundings, its use would not require additional

20/2293/FUL page 123

travel by car or lead to dispersal of activity or uses on such a scale as to prejudice village vitality, the building is structurally sound or capable of being made so with little alteration to its character, the proposed use would not harm the countryside, and the proposal will not undermine the viability of an existing agricultural enterprise.

The roof of the outbuilding is in a poor state and, in renovating the structure, it is proposed to repurpose it as a studio / games room.

The proposal is to remove the existing loft floor, replace the existing slate roof with a new slate roof at the same level, undertake minor exterior repairs, to install new, wider exterior openings to the south elevation and to add a single storey extension onto the east elevation of the dwellinghouse to accommodate a ground floor ablution facility. The finishes will reflect the existing materials, with the addition of an element of larch cladding.

It is noted that the ecology report refers to the outbuilding as a barn but the applicant's Statement of Clarification states that the structure has always been used in connection with the farmhouse rather than being an agricultural building, although it has been used for pressing apples to make cider at some stage in the past. The western part of the building contains a utility area and is used for accessing the back door of the dwellinghouse. Photos included in the ecology report indicate miscellaneous storage in the rest of the building.

Residential amenity

The closest residence to the dwellinghouse appears to be more than 250 metres away in any direction and the proposal is unlikely to be discernible to them, having no detrimental impact on residential amenity.

Wildlife

The application was accompanied by the results of a combined bat and bird survey. No signs of bird-life were found at the outbuilding, but evidence of the presence of and use by bats was noted. Subsequent bat emergence surveys undertaken in July and August 2020 and, during the second survey a serotine bat was noted emerging from the building, while a brown long-eared bat was observed flying and roosting in the building.

The survey report has recommended mitigation measures which will be conditioned in any permission.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE 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 and shall be carried out as approved.

20/2293/FUL page 124

(Reason - To comply with section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans listed at the end of this decision notice. (Reason - For the avoidance of doubt.)

3. 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 of the existing building. (Reason - To ensure that the materials are sympathetic to the character and appearance of the existing building in accordance with Policy D1 - Design and Local Distinctiveness of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

4. The building hereby permitted shall be used only in conjunction with, and ancillary to, the use of Kains Park farmhouse as a single dwelling house and shall not be used as a separate dwelling or for any commercial, industrial or business purpose. (Reason - The building is unsuitable for independent residential occupation due to its relationship with adjacent dwellings and/or it is in an unsustainable/inaccessible location where a separate unit of accommodation would not be adequately served by a range of service and facilities and a commercial use could cause undue noise to adjoining occupiers in accordance with the requirements of Policy D1 - Design and Local Distinctiveness and Strategy 3 - Sustainable Development of the Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031.)

5. The recommendations and mitigation measures found in 4.1 Bats of the Protected Species Survey report by Richard Green Ecology Ltd dated October 2020 shall be implemented prior to, during and after the implementation of the proposed development, to the satisfaction of Council. (Reason: To comply with the provisions of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (as amended) and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended), as well as Policy EN5 of the Local Plan).

NOTE FOR APPLICANT

Informative: Confirmation - No CIL Liability

This Informative confirms that this development is not liable to a CIL charge.

Any queries regarding CIL, please telephone 01395 571585 or email [email protected].

Informative: In accordance with the aims of Article 35 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 East Devon District

20/2293/FUL page 125

Council works proactively with applicants to resolve all relevant planning concerns; however, in this case the application was deemed acceptable as submitted.

Plans relating to this application:

1152/20/03 A Proposed Floor Plans 20.10.20

1152/20/04 A1 Proposed Combined 20.10.20 Plans

1152/20/LP A Location Plan 20.10.20

1152/20/BP B Block Plan 04.12.20 (amended)

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

20/2293/FUL page 126 Agenda Item 13 Ward Trinity

Reference 20/2310/FUL

Applicant Ian and Sue Thomas

Location Ware Barn Ware Lyme Regis DT7 3RH

Proposal Construction of proposed greenhouse

RECOMMENDATION: Approval - standard time limit

page 127

Committee Date: 7th January 2021

Trinity Target Date: (Uplyme) 20/2310/FUL 22.12.2020

Applicant: Ian and Sue Thomas

Location: Ware Barn Ware

Proposal: Construction of proposed greenhouse

RECOMMENDATION: Approval - standard time limit

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This application is before Members as the applicant is a Member of the Council.

Planning permission is sought for the construction of a greenhouse situated within the domestic curtilage of a dwelling house known as Ware Barn. The application site is located to the west of the Grade II listed Ware Farm Manor and within the East Devon Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and the Coastal Preservation Area.

The proposed design and scale of the greenhouse are sympathetic and in keeping within the character of the area. Its location and relationship with surrounding properties does not cause harm to the adjacent Grade II listed building.

The application is, in all other respects including design and potential impact on the neighbouring properties and the character of the area, considered to be acceptable. As such, recommendation of approval is made.

CONSULTATIONS

Local Consultations

Parish/Town Council

The Parish Council Planning Committee support the application.

Technical Consultations

Conservation This proposed greenhouse is within the setting and context of the grade II listed manor house as well as the grade II listed curtilage buildings. It has a prominent and high

20/2310/FUL page 128

ridge height as well as an overall large base area. It is a considered style and quality that responds the aesthetic. There is concern that will create a precedent and encourage a cumulative effect and clutter the rural and open setting that forms part of the significance of these heritage assets.

In conclusion, despite this being of notable size and height, it is a light weight structure by virtue of the framework and glazing. Recommendation - support.

Other Representations

No third party representations have been received.

PLANNING HISTORY

Reference Description Decision Date

11/2812/LBC Internal alterations to garage to Approval 08.03.2012 form pantry with conditions

08/2623/VAR Variation of Condition 2 on Approval 24.11.2008 permission 02/P1228 to allow with use of barn for holiday accommodation ancillary conditions accommodation to Ware Barn or occasional training facility.

08/1695/AGR Erection of building for storage Approval 11.07.2008

of equipment and machinery. with

conditions

07/1361/VAR Variation of condition 2 on planning permission 02/p1228 Approval 03.07.2007 to allow for holiday with accommodation and/or conditions ancillary occupation to the main

house.

20/2310/FUL page 129

02/P1228/FUL Conversion and change of use Approval 19.11.2002 of barns to one unit of holiday with accommodation. conditions

02/P1456/LBC Conversion and change of use of barns to one unit of holiday Approval 19.11.2002 accommodation. with conditions 99/P1197/FUL Conversion of barn to two Approval 20.10.1999 holiday units. with conditions 99/P1198/LBC Conversion of barn to two Approval 20.10.1999 holiday units. with conditions 97/P0292/FUL Renovation of barn to provide Approval 10.04.1997 holiday accommodation. with conditions Approval 10.04.1997 97/P0293/LBC Renovation of barn. with

conditions

96/P0460/LBC Demolition of implement shed Approval – 09.05.1996 and lean-to shed. standard time limit

08.03.1996 96/P0133/LBC Alteration/conversion of farm building to form Bunkhouse Approval Barn. with conditions 91/P1785/FUL Conversion of farm buildings to 05.02.1992 form Bunkhouse Refusal Appeal allowed Barn/educational study centre (with conditions with warden’s accommodation. 19.08.1992)

91/P0626/FUL Bunkhouse Barn/educational study centre with warden’s 25.06.1991 accommodation. Withdrawn

90/P0905/FUL Conversion of barns to form 29.08.1990 three dwellings. Refusal

20/2310/FUL page 130

POLICIES

Adopted East Devon Local Plan 2013-2031 Policies

Uplyme Neighbourhood Plan (Made)

Strategy 44 (Undeveloped Coast and Coastal Preservation Area)

Strategy 46 (Landscape Conservation and Enhancement and AONBs)

EN9 (Development Affecting a Designated Heritage Asset)

D1 (Design and Local Distinctiveness)

Strategy 7 (Development in the Countryside)

Strategy 47 (Nature Conservation and Geology)

National Planning Policy National Planning Policy Framework

Site Location and Description

Ware Barn is a detached residential dwelling located approximately 800 yards from Lyme Regis on the East Devon and Dorset border. The dwelling benefits from a good sized garden and is bound by residential dwellings varying in size and architectural style across differing periods from traditional farmhouse to modern dwellings. Alongside Ware Barn Cottage, the dwelling forms a group of buildings known as Ware Barns owned by the applicant.

The application site is situated to the west of the Grade II listed building known as Ware Farm Manor within the open countryside and the East Devon Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). The area is located on the hillside overlooking Lyme Bay to the south and is characterised by open fields to the north, west and south.

The building is not considered to be curtilage listed.

Proposed Development

Planning permission is sought for the construction of a Victorian style greenhouse to the well-established garden situated within the domestic curtilage of Ware Barn. The proposed greenhouse would be located to the south-east of the host dwelling house. It is proposed to measure 6.3 metres in length, 3.5 metres in width and will have a total height of 3.7 metres. The proposed materials are to be brick and glass with dwarf style walls.

ANALYSIS

The principal issues for consideration in the determination of the application are:

20/2310/FUL page 131

- Design and impact on the character and appearance of the surrounding area - Impact on the Special Area of Conservation - Impact on residential amenity - Impact on the Grade II listed building

Impact to Character of the Area

The proposed greenhouse is to be constructed in glass and brick with metal steel frame. There is no objection in principle to the proposal which will improve the overall use of the existing garden. Given its design, appearance and scale, it will visually remain domestic and the use of proposed materials also reduces its impact upon the character of the area. Hence, the proposal is not regarded to undermine the landscape quality of AONB and the Coastal Preservation Area. The application is therefore considered to be compliant with Strategy 7, 44 and 46, and Policy D1 of the East Devon Local Plan.

Special Area of Conservation

The development site is located close to the undercliff which provides the Sidmouth to West Bay Special Area of Conservation. However, given the scale and nature of the proposal, it is considered that there would not be a significant impact on the Special Area of Conservation. The proposal is therefore compliant with Strategy 47 of the East Devon Local Plan.

Residential Amenity

Given the size and distance of neighbourhood properties of the proposed greenhouse, it would not result in any detrimental impact on the amenities of the occupiers of any neighbouring properties in terms of overshadowing or visual impact. The proposal is therefore considered to be compliant with Policy D1 of the East Devon Local Plan.

Impact to the Grade II Listed Building

In a view of the design, materials and the respective relationship with surrounding properties, it is considered that there is no harm to the overall character, appearance, setting and significance of the Grade II listed building (of Ware Farmhouse adjacent to the east) due to the location and orientation of the proposed greenhouse. This is supported by the comments from the conservation officer. The proposal is therefore considered to be compliant with Policy EN9 of the East Devon Local Plan.

RECOMMENDATION

APPROVE

20/2310/FUL page 132

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans listed at the end of this decision notice. (Reason - For the avoidance of doubt.)

NOTE FOR APPLICANT

Informative: Confirmation - No CIL Liability

This Informative confirms that this development is not liable to a CIL charge.

Any queries regarding CIL, please telephone 01395 571585 or email [email protected].

Informative:

In accordance with the aims of Article 35 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure) (England) Order 2015 East Devon District Council works proactively with applicants to resolve all relevant planning concerns; however, in this case the application was deemed acceptable as submitted.

Plans relating to this application:

Amended Location Plan 30.10.20

Proposed Block Plan 23.10.20

Proposed Combined 23.10.20 Plans

List of Background Papers Application file, consultations and policy documents referred to in the report.

20/2310/FUL page 133