Committee: PLANNING AND HIGHWAYS REGULATORY COMMITTEE

Date: MONDAY, 26 TH JULY 2010

Venue: LANCASTER TOWN HALL

Time: 2.00 P.M.

A G E N D A

1 Apologies for Absence

2 Minutes of the Meeting held on 28th June 2010 (previously circulated)

3 Items of Urgent Business authorised by the Chairman

4 Declarations of Interest

Planning Applications for Decision

Community Safety Implications

In preparing the reports for this Agenda, regard has been paid to the implications of the proposed developments on Community Safety issues. Where it is considered the proposed development has particular implications for Community Safety, this issue is fully considered within the main body of the report on that specific application.

Category A Applications

Applications to be dealt with by the District Council without formal consultation with the County Council.

5 A5 10/00425/CU 85 Clarendon Road West, Harbour (Pages 1 - 4) Morecambe Ward

Change of use and conversion from 4 flats to 1 bed self contained flat on lower ground floor and 4 bed maisonette over ground, first and second floor for Mrs S Peters

6 A6 10/00433/CU 6A Lines Street, Morecambe Poulton (Pages 5 - 8) Ward

Change of use of former store at first floor to a self contained flat for Mr Steve Hughes

7 A7 10/00519/RENU Broadway Hotel, Marine Road Bare Ward (Pages 9 - East, Morecambe 15)

Application for extension of time on application 07/01236/FUL for demolition of hotel and erection of 47 one, two and three bed apartments for Norfolk Hotels and Leisure

8 A8 10/00293/FUL Field 1585, Sand Lane, Warton Warton (Pages 16 - Ward 21)

Demolition of disused agricultural buildings and redevelopment of the site to construct two 4 bedroomed residential houses with associated landscaping for Lune Valley 2001 Pension Scheme

9 A9 10/00480/OUT Luneside West Development Site, Castle (Pages 22 - Thetis Road, Lune Business Park, Ward 30) Lancaster

Application for extension of time on application 05/00103/OUT (Outline application for a mixed use development comprising 356 housing units,136305 sq ft of industrial/commercial usage including a neighbourhood centre, car parking and means of access) for Mr and Mrs Foy

10 A10 10/00319/FUL Luneside Engineering Workshop, Halton- (Pages 31 - Mill Lane, Halton with- 48) Aughton Ward

1) Development of ecological cohousing scheme including 28 houses, 6 flats, ancillary residential buildings and associated residential buildings and associated landscaping (including provision of a new riverside footpath); 2) Development of 6 terraced houses on former Lower Halton Mill (Manager’s House) site; 3) Change of use of existing Mill Building from B2 general industrial with ancillary B1 office and B8

storage to mixed use office and B8 storage to mixed use B1/B2/B8 managed workspace with refurbishment to include replacement roof and doors/windows, flue for biomass boiler and solar panels; 4) Change of use of the Boathouse to provide ancillary use for cohousing residents, changing facilities and training space for canoe clubs, and a space to host educational day visitors to the site, with refurbishment to include reroofing in reclaimed slate, replacement doors/windows and installation of a viewing platform. Note: Owing to restrictions imposed by application form, please note that: 1) building areas of mixed B1/B2/B8 have been listed under B2; 2) cohousing units have been listed as market housing for the purpose of indicating the number of units; for Jon Sear

11 A11 10/00230/FUL Ellel House, Chapel Lane, Galgate Ellel Ward (Pages 49 - 58)

Alterations and extension to create a two-storey 29 bed nursing home with 21 assisted living apartments for Mr J Ayrton

12 A12 10/00231/LB Ellel House, Chapel Lane, Galgate Ellel Ward (Pages 59 - 65)

Alterations and extension to create a two-storey 29 bed nursing home with 21 assisted living apartments for Mr J Ayrton

13 A13 10/00479/RCN 19 Downes Grove, Morecambe Westgate (Pages 66 - Ward 70)

Removal of condition 6 on approved application 05/00164/FUL relating to use of the garage for Mr J Taylor

Category D Applications

Applications for development by a District Council.

14 A14 10/00495/DPA The Dome, Marine Road Central, Poulton (Pages 71 - Morecambe Ward 75)

Conservation Area Consent for the demolition of The Dome and re- instatement of land for Lancaster City Council

15 A15 10/00546/DPA University of Cumbria, Bowerham John (Pages 76 - Road, Lancaster O'Gaunt 79) Ward

Provision of signed and marked cycle route with a short section of new cyclepath (St Oswald Street to Coulston Road and Wyrersdale Road) including additional street lighting and associated signs and markings for Lancaster City Council

16 A16 10/00465/DPA Town Hall, Dalton Square, Duke's (Pages 80 - Lancaster Ward 82)

Listed building application for repointing to all light wells for Lancaster City Council

17 A17 10/00585/DPA Town Hall, Dalton Square, Duke's (Pages 83 - Lancaster Ward 85)

Listed building application for new leadwork to existing rendered brickwork for Geoff Jackson

18 Delegated Planning Decisions (Pages 86 - 96)

ADMINISTRATIVE ARRANGEMENTS

(i) Membership

Councillors Eileen Blamire (Chairman), Joyce Pritchard (Vice-Chairman), Ken Brown, Keith Budden, Anne Chapman, Chris Coates, John Day, Roger Dennison, Sheila Denwood, Mike Greenall, Emily Heath, Helen Helme, Andrew Kay, Geoff Marsland, Robert Redfern, Peter Robinson, Bob Roe, Sylvia Rogerson, Roger Sherlock and Peter Williamson

(ii) Substitute Membership

Councillors Jon Barry, Abbott Bryning, John Gilbert, Janice Hanson, Tony Johnson, Ian McCulloch, Keith Sowden, Joyce Taylor, Malcolm Thomas and Paul Woodruff

(iii) Queries regarding this Agenda

Please contact Jane Glenton, Democratic Services, telephone (01524) 582068, or email [email protected]

(iv) Changes to Membership, substitutions or apologies

Please contact Members’ Secretary, telephone (01524) 582170, or email [email protected].

MARK CULLINAN, CHIEF EXECUTIVE, TOWN HALL, DALTON SQUARE, LANCASTER, LA1 1PJ

Published on Thursday, 15 th July 2010 Page 1 AgendaAgenda Item Item 5 Committee Date Application Number

A5 26 July 2010 10/00425/CU

Application Site Proposal

85 Clarendon Road West Change of use and conversion from 4 flats to 1 bed self contained flat on lower ground floor and 4 bed Morecambe maisonette over ground, first and second floor

Lancashire

LA3 1QY

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mrs S Peters Thomas Gill

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

29 June 2010 Called in for Committee Determination

Case Officer Mr Daniel Ratcliffe

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Refusal

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 This application was originally identified as one which could be dealt with under delegated powers. It has been placed on your committee's agenda at the request of Councillor Robinson, because the property concerned may be capable of being adapted to single family occupation.

1.2 The application site is located on the north side of Clarendon Road West, between it and East Street to the rear. The site is situated outside the West End Conservation Area. The property in question is a four-storey mid-terraced house, one of which is a lower ground floor. The building is currently split into four flats, one on each floor, three of which share the internal stairwell. The lower ground flat is accessed by a separate doorway to the front and is self contained. The building would appear to have been used as a House in Multiple Occupation (HMO) and the site history confirms this. There is a small yard area to the rear of the property beyond which off street parking is provided which can be accessed off East Street.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The application proposes to convert the three upper floors (ground, first and second) into one large four bedroomed maisonette; two of the bedrooms having en-suite bathroom facilities, whilst retaining the lower ground floor as a self contained flat. An internal staircase is proposed providing access for the maisonette at ground floor to lower ground floor and to the rear of the property. Access to the rear yard for bin storage and escape etc. is therefore provided for both units. The application does not propose any external works.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The only application dates back to 1989 and relates to the use of the property as a house in multiple occupation, including associated internal alterations. This application was approved.

Page 2 Application Number Proposal Decision 89/0201 Retention of house in multiple occupation and internal Approved alterations

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response Morecambe Town No objection Council Housing Policy No comments made

County Highways No objection

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 There have been no issues raised by neighbouring residents regarding this proposal.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 Lancaster District Core Strategy Policy SC4 : ‘Meeting the District’s Housing Requirements – sets out the principles that will ensure that housing needs are met. Whilst the thrust of this policy is towards housing land allocations, the policy refers to the determination of planning applications and states that the Council should seek to maximise the opportunities offered by the development of new dwellings to “redress imbalances in the local housing market” and “achieve housing that genuinely addresses local housing need”.

6.2 Lancaster District Local Plan: Saved Policy H21 refers to flat conversions. Specifically Appendix 2 of the plan sets out the space standards for acceptable forms of accommodation. Of relevance to this application paragraph 24 of Appendix 2 states that “The principal rooms of each flat should have an acceptable outlook. The provision of flats with living rooms whose only outlook is over rear yards or with no view at all is unlikely to be acceptable”. Also of relevance is Paragraph 29, which discusses basement flats, and states that “Basements are generally considered to be unacceptable for the creation of flats for permanent residential occupation as they have a poor outlook, inadequate natural daylighting and can be subject to flooding. There may of course be exceptions where the levels and amount of ground around the property make a basement suitable for conversion”.

6.3 West End Masterplan: The strategy for the renewal of the area is to encourage the provision of family accommodation rather than small flats, in order to secure a population with a long term commitment to the area. At the same time it envisages reducing rather than increasing the overall building density.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 There are two key issues here – the principle of the proposal and the standard of amenity that the proposed units would enjoy.

7.2 Paragraph 6.2 describes the relevance of the West End Masterplan to applications involving residential conversion in this locality. The four-bedroomed maisonette, arranged over three floors, could be attractive to families and would generally satisfy the intentions of the Masterplan. However, the self-contained single-bedroomed flat would not satisfy the provisions of the Masterplan. It would only seek to provide an additional one-bedroomed unit in a locality that still has a predominance of similar accommodation and it would therefore fail to contribute to the continuing ambitions to permit larger units of accommodation in the West End as a way of diversifying the type of housing available. The proposal therefore fails to accord to the West End Masterplan.

Page 3 7.3 In terms of amenity, both units satisfy the internal space standards required by the Lancaster District Local Plan (paragraph 6.1 above). There are areas of concern; the kitchen for the maisonette is very small given that it would provide spacious accommodation over three floors. Additionally the self- contained flat on the lower ground floor has its main rear access directly into a bedroom. However, neither of these problems warrants a refusal of permission.

7.4 Of greater concern is the general poor outlook from the only habitable main room of the self- contained unit. This would be at the front of the property, where the flat is below the ground level of Clarendon Road. The outlook and daylight to this flat would provide a low and unacceptable level of amenity and would be contrary to Lancaster District local Plan Policy H21 and Appendix 2.

7.5 Externally both units would have use of the rear yard area, which would accommodate refuse storage. However, this does not outweigh the issue of the principle of creating a one-bedroomed unit in this location, nor the amenity objection arising from the creation of that flat.

7.6 An option has been put to the applicant’s agent to amend the application so that it could provide two self-contained maisonettes, both of which could provide generous accommodation more likely to be attractive to families. At the time of compiling this report, no response had been received and any update on this will be verbally presented to the Committee.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 None.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 Whilst the general reduction in units from the current layout would be welcomed, the creation of the single-bedroom flat is contrary to the provisions of the Morecambe West End Masterplan. The poor outlook and daylight to the sole habitable room of this flat also contributes to a low standard of amenity for the occupant. In allowing this proposal, the Council would be failing to maximise the opportunity that redevelopment could provide in terms of providing a diverse mix of housing types in an area that still suffers from single bedroomed units of accommodation. Refusal of the application is therefore recommended.

Recommendation

That Planning Permission BE REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. The creation of a single-bedroomed flat on the lower ground floor would fail to accord to the principles of the West End Masterplan, and thus the renewal objectives for this area of Morecambe, which seeks to take advantage of development opportunities to remove the oversupply of single- bedroomed accommodation and provide a more stable and balanced community by providing family- sized units of accommodation. In addition the failure to maximise the opportunities offered by the development of new dwellings to redress this imbalance in the local housing market, and in particular to diversify the range of household types within Central Morecambe, are matters advocated by the commentary and text of Lancaster District Core Strategy Policy SC4, and therefore the proposal is contrary to this policy.

2. The self-contained flat on the lower ground floor would, by virtue of its subterranean setting, have a poor outlook and low levels of daylight to its sole main habitable room. Consequently the proposal would be contrary to Saved Policy H21 of the Lancaster District Local Plan, and Appendix 2 to which Policy H21 refers.

Page 4 Human Rights Act

This recommendation has been reached after consideration of the provisions of The Human Rights Act. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the issues arising do not appear to be of such magnitude to override the responsibility of the City Council to regulate land use for the benefit of the community as a whole, in accordance with national law.

Background Papers

None.

Page 5 AgendaAgenda Item Item 6 Committee Date Application Number

A6 26 July 2010 10/00433/CU

Application Site Proposal

6A Lines Street Change of use of former store at first floor to a self contained flat Morecambe

Lancashire

LA4 5ES

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr Steve Hughes Michael Harrison

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

6 July 2010 Committee Cycle

Case Officer Mr Andrew Holden

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Approval

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The previous application was originally identified as one which could be determined by the Head of Planning Services under delegated powers. However, it had been referred to Committee at the request of Councillor Archer, because of the possible impact of the development on one of the neighbouring businesses. As a consequence of the previous determination route, this resubmission has again been presented to committee for determination.

1.2 The property occupies part of an island site on the edge of the centre of Morecambe. The complex of buildings includes a mix of retail and industrial and residential uses. The building, the subject of this application has frontages to both Lines Street and Deansgate. The ground floor is occupied by an art studio/gallery on the Lines Street frontage and Central Printing Company (unrestricted B2 use) on the Deansgate frontage. The upper floor was a storage use. It has recently been renovated as part of a programme of improvements to the Morecambe Conservation Area.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The applicant wishes to convert part of the first floor to a flat. The accommodation would consist of a living room/kitchen, two bedrooms and a bathroom. As there is no open space available within the curtilage an internal bin store would be provided at the entrance, next to the stairway.

2.2 The current application differs from many of the earlier applications as it seeks to develop a residential unit that no longer involves the area directly above the printing works. Instead, the living accommodation would occupy the area above an art shop. The floor space over the Deansgate side of the building would continue to be used for storage purposes only. This internal arrangement is identical to the previous application, 10/00108/CU, however, the current application is supported by an acoustic report which has been the subject of assessment by Environmental Health Services.

Page 6 2.3 The proposal is accompanied by a report from an acoustic consultant. This concludes that the sound insulation measures within the building pass the standards set out in the Building Regulations.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The current proposal is not the first for this development. Previous applications for flats have been refused because of concerns about the compatibility of residential use with the general industrial use on the ground floor of the Deansgate side of the building. This application has been submitted following additional acoustic investigation by the applicant and our Environmental Health.

Application Number Proposal Decision 03/00442/CU Change of use of first floor store to self-contained flat Refused 03/00730/CU Change of use of first floor store to offices Refused 07/00600/CU Change of use of first floor store into 2 self contained flats Withdrawn 08/00181/CU Change of use of first floor store into 1 self contained flat Refused 10/00108/CU Change of use of first floor store into 1 self contained flat Refused

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response Environmental Following verification of satisfactory standards of sound insulation during the Health operation of printing machinery, No objections to the development.

Morecambe Town This committee has no fundamental objection to this application, but feels that the Council future freedom of the nearby print premises in Deansgate should be protected. It is the understanding of the committee that this will be achieved by the terms of the agreement to be put in place under the terms of the Landlord and Tenant Act.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 To date 10 letters of support have been received form neighbouring residential occupiers, including the occupier of a residential flats within the same block above Browns furniture stating that the development is appropriate to the area and will add to the regeneration of the locality.

A single letter has been received the tenant of the ground floor art gallery/studio stating that she has been a tenant for over two years at the site and welcomes the additional conversion of the building to residential use. On-site discussion with the tenant confirmed that she has not had any issues with noise/disturbance from the adjacent printing operation.

Two letters have been received from the occupants of the neighbouring printing works. The first letter raised objections to the development questioning the validity and scope of the acoustic assessment. The question of future impact upon the ability to operate both the current printing works and any future open B2 industrial use was also raised. It acknowledged the audible assessment of the Environmental Health Services but questions the lack of a further acoustic study of the flat.

A further letter was received form the occupants of the printing works reviewing the previous objection. This was as a result of an on-site meeting with the applicant and Cllr Archer. At the meeting it was clarified that no access would be needed to the property to complete conversion works and that the applicant had no intention of applying for the development of a flat directly above the printing works. A legal covenant is to be drafted to safeguard the printing works form any conflict arising between the works and future flat occupants.

Concerns over the ability to use the works within the freedom allowed by the open B2, general industrial use were still raised (in particular hours of operation of the current printing use) with an Page 7 offer to withdraw the objection only on the basis that the local authority provides confirmation that the use of the property will not be affected in any way.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 National planning guidance is relevant in this case in the form of Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) Note 24 – ‘Planning and Noise’. The text below is an extract from the PPG.

Local planning authorities should consider carefully in each case whether proposals for new noise- sensitive development would be incompatible with existing activities. Such development should not normally be permitted in areas which are - or are expected to become- subject to unacceptably high levels of noise. When determining planning applications for development which will be exposed to an existing noise source, local planning authorities should consider both the likely level of noise exposure at the time of the application and any increase that may reasonably be expected in the foreseeable future, for example at an airport.

Annex 3 of the PPG gives guidance on the assessment of noise from different sources. Authorities will also wish to bear in mind that, while there will be sites where noise is significantly lower at night than during the day, other sites may be subjected to night-time noise, for example from traffic, at a level which is little below the daytime level. These sites warrant particular protection: noise-sensitive development should not normally be permitted where high levels of noise will continue throughout the night, especially during the hours when people are normally sleeping (23.00 to 07.00).

6.2 Policy SC1 of the Lancaster District Core Strategy encourages sustainable development, in locations where it is convenient to walk, cycle and travel by public transport.

The proposal has also to be considered in relation to "saved" policy H21 of the Lancaster District Local Plan (LDLP), which requires that flat conversions comply with the standards set out in appendix 2 of the Plan. As the site is in a Conservation Area, "saved" Policy E36 which refers to changes of use within them is relevant.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 In general the use of accommodation above shops in town centres for residential use is to be welcomed. They can provide low-cost accommodation in accessible locations which is particularly suitable for people of limited means who are dependant on public transport, and ensures that the upper floors of buildings are maintained to a satisfactory standard.

7.2 The internal layout of the accommodation meets the standards set out in Appendix 2 of the LDLP. The main bedroom provides more than the 10.2 sq.m minimum floor space required for a double bedroom. The outlook over Deansgate is a reasonably open one. The lack of any open space within the curtilage is a limitation but the architect has partly addressed this by providing an enclosed bin store adjoining the door to the flat, underneath the stairs. Arrangements of this kind have been accepted for flats above shops elsewhere in the centre of Morecambe.

7.3 The difficulty here is that part of the ground floor of the building is occupied not by a retailer, but by a general industrial (Class B2) use. Printing involves the use of noisy machinery, and the nature of the business means that from time to time printers have to work late in the evening to meet deadlines.

7.4 The robustness of the earlier acoustic report was questioned by Environmental Health Services in the planning application 10/00108/CU. Since the refusal of that application in March 2010 a meeting has been held where machinery at the printing works was allowed to operate and an audible assessment by Environmental Health was undertaken with all parties present. In addition, the submitted noise and vibration assessment has provided further clarification over the acoustic capacities of the floor and wall structure.

7.5 Following the assessment of the operation of the printing works and the acoustic qualities of the building, Environmental Health has withdrawn its objection to the scheme and considers that the amenities in the flat will not be affected by the open operation of the printing works. It is considered that the use is one which is appropriate to the locality and following the withdrawal of objection from Environmental Health in respect of the relationship of the site to the operational printing works the development is acceptable. Page 8 7.6 It should also be noted that if the printing workshop were to move, it would be possible for any other Class B2 user (such as a motorcycle repairer) to take over the premises, without any need for a further planning permission. However, it is considered that a practical approach to the future use of the property must be taken. The printing works occupies a relatively small site, it is located in the town centre close to other residential properties including one within the same block (above Brown’s Furniture) has no external parking or servicing areas and has the physical development constraints of a location within the Morecambe Conservation Area. Guidance contained within PPG 24 suggests that ‘…local planning authorities should consider both the likely level of noise exposure at the time of the application and any increase that may reasonably be expected in the foreseeable future…’. Environmental Health are satisfied that the printing works could operate without compromise to the nature and hours of operation of the basis of the current acoustic arrangements but no view could be given to other potential uses at the printing works.

7.6 However, it is considered reasonable to have assessed the application in a way which allows open use of the printing works as this is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future. It is also understood that this relationship is also protected via the Landlord and Tenant Act which in essence ensures that if a resident takes up a tenancy of a residential unit knowing its relationship to existing uses then no action can be raised against that existing use - clarification of the position has been provided by the applicant and is appended to this report.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 N/A.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 Taking account of the withdrawal of Environmental Health’s objection, the town centre location of the site and the ability of the printing works to openly operate without detriment to the amenities of future occupiers, the application should be supported subject to appropriate conditions.

Recommendation

That Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard three year time limit 2. Development to be built in accordance with the approved plans 3. Sealing of the floor and completion of the party wall between the proposal dwelling and the upper floor storage area shall be completed prior to occupation of the dwelling. 4. Refuse store to be provided and maintained prior to occupation. 5. Hours of construction

Human Rights Act

This recommendation has been reached after consideration of the provisions of The Human Rights Act. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the issues arising do not appear to be of such magnitude to override the responsibility of the City Council to regulate land use for the benefit of the community as a whole, in accordance with national law.

Background Papers

1. Copy of the interpretation of the Landlord and Tenant Act from the applicant’s solicitor.

Page 9 AgendaAgenda Item Item 7 Committee Date Application Number

A7 26 July 2010 10/00519/RENU

Application Site Proposal

Broadway Hotel Application for extension of time on application Marine Road East 07/01236/FUL for demolition of hotel and erection of Morecambe 47 one, two and three bed apartments Lancashire

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Norfolk Hotels And Leisure Mr Harry Tonge

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

20 August 2010 N/A

Case Officer Mr Andrew Drummond

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Approve subject to conditions and obligations

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The Broadway Hotel is situated in a prominent seafront position at the corner of Broadway and Marine Road East. The hotel occupies a flat site with a coach parking to the front on the eastern side and car parking wrapping round to the western edge to the rear, where a yard is accessed from a service road off Dallam Avenue.

1.2 The hotel is located adjacent to Strathmore Hotel, which commands a sea frontage, with detached and semi-detached houses located on Dallam Road, Broadway and Marine Road East to the south west, south and north. Morecambe High School is also accessed off Dallam Road.

A number of buses services run along Broadway and Marine Road East, with good pedestrian and cycle connections available off the promenade.

1.3 There are no designations affecting the site, though the promenade forms part of the Strategic Cycle Network.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The application seeks permission for an extension of time to redevelop the existing hotel into a new residential building comprising 47 apartments. 1, 2 and 3-bed apartments are proposed.

2.2 The proposal put forward is for a striking modern building of between 4 and 8 storeys in height. The walls would be finished in white render with a glazed tower at the Broadway corner.

A feature of the building would be a wind turbine on the roof. The flats would be laid out to take full advantage of the views over Morecambe Bay. Access would be provided by a series of enclosed decks at the rear.

It should be noted that the footprint of the scheme is markedly different from that of the existing building on the site. The main part of the Broadway Hotel is a large five storey building positioned at an angle, to face the road junction. On the Broadway frontage there is a single storey block which Page 10 now serves as a function room, though it was originally designed as a swimming pool. There is a gap site, used as a car park, on the Marine Road East frontage adjoining the Strathmore Hotel. The appearance of the hotel has suffered somewhat from the provision of a mobile phone base station on its roof.

As the site is within an area considered by the Environment Agency to be at risk from coastal flooding, a Flood Risk Assessment was previously undertaken that informed the design. The ground floor levels within the development have been specified to take account of its conclusions and the only part of the development considered to be at risk is the basement car park. Electrical services would be positioned above floor level within this area to minimise the risk of damage.

2.3 A total of 50 car parking spaces would be provided at basement level and a further 5 for visitors above ground. 6 of the basement spaces would be laid out to disabled accessible standard with further space provided for motorcycles. Cycle storage is proposed with each of the 44 standard car parking spaces.

Vehicular and pedestrian access is gained from Dallam Avenue.

2.4 The new building would be significantly taller and slimmer. It would be positioned closer towards Broadway and although it would make use of the whole of the street frontage it would retain an open area at the rear as a landscaped courtyard. This landscaped element of the scheme significantly improves the area to the rear.

3.0 Site History

3.1 A number of relevant applications relating to this site have previously been received by the Local Planning Authority. These include:

Application Number Proposal Decision 93/01087/OUT Outline application for demolition of function rooms and Approved erection of 18 luxury flats. 98/01017/OUT Outline application for demolition of function rooms and Approved erection of 18 luxury flats 07/01236/FUL Demolition of hotel and the erection of 47 one, two and Approved three bed apartments with on site parking

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory and internal consultees:

Consultees Response County Highways No objection in principle, though require conditions relating to adoptable highway details, cycle storage and car parking, and a planning contribution of £45,360 towards improvements to crossing facilities. Furthermore any existing vehicular crossings that would be made redundant by the development should be returned to standard footpath specification. Alterations to existing planting in the adjacent highway verge in Broadway will need the consent of the Highway Authority prior to commencing work.

County Planning Considers that the proposed development conforms to regional planning policy.

County NHES The Service requests that the recommendations included in section E1 of the bat report (submitted with the previous application) are included as a planning condition.

United Utilities No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations subsequently received will be reported verbally.

Environment No objections to the proposal but have the following recommendations: Agency
Access to the parking area should b e prevented during a flood event. Page 11 Furthermore the flood defences are dependent upon the operation of a water tight gate in the proposed bund wall at the entrance to the curtilage. The maintenance and operation of this gate and the restricting of access to the car park should be included in a management plan for the site in the event of a flood.
Use of SUDS
Use of sustainable forms of construction including recycling of materials
Energy efficient buildings

North Lancashire No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations Bat Group subsequently received will be reported verbally.

Police No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations subsequently received will be reported verbally.

Morecambe No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations Chamber of Trade subsequently received will be reported verbally.

Morecambe Town This application has been referred to a meeting of the full town council where the Council application was objected to.

Environmental No objection subject to the same conditions as before plus a condition relating to Health unforeseen contamination.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 One piece of correspondence was received by a neighbour citing the following objections:
The height of the proposed building is out of keeping on the streetscene
No consideration taken of the noise and pollution generated by the additional traffic on the existing service road
Loss of views, privacy and light
Provision of additional external parking spaces near residential properties

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 National Planning Policy Statements (PPS) and Guidance Notes (PPG)

PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) - provides generic advice for all new built development. Sites should be capable of optimising the full site boundary and should deliver an appropriate mix of uses, green and other public spaces, safe and accessible environments and visually pleasing architecture. The prudent use of natural resources and assets, and the encouragement of sustainable modes of transport are important components of this advice. This advice is echoed in PPG 13 - Transport. A high level of protection should be given to most valued townscapes and landscapes, wildlife habitats and natural resources, conserving and enhancing wildlife species and habitats and the promotion of biodiversity.

PPS3 (Housing) - illustrates the need for good quality residential development in sustainable locations which have good access to a range of services and facilities. The use of previously developed (brownfield) land is an explicit objective, as is the delivery of different types of affordable housing to meet local housing needs.

PPG13 (Transport) - encourages sustainable travel, ideally non-motorised forms of transport such as walking and cycling, but also other means like public transport. The use of the car should be minimised. This can be encouraged by the location, layout and design of new developments.

PPS25 (Development and Flood Risk) - recognises that though flooding cannot be wholly prevented, its impacts can be avoided and reduced through good planning and management. All forms of flooding and their impact on the natural and built environment are material planning considerations. Positive planning has an important role in helping deliver sustainable development and applying the Page 12 Government’s policy on flood risk management. It avoids, reduces and manages flood risk by taking full account in decisions on plans and applications of present and future flood risk, involving both the statistical probability of a flood occurring and the scale of its potential consequences, whether inland or on the coast, and the wider implications for flood risk of development located outside flood risk areas.

6.2 Regional Spatial Strategy - adopted September 2008

The Regional Spatial Strategy (and thus the policies contained therein) was formally revoked by the Government earlier this month.

6.3 Lancaster District Local Plan - adopted April 2004 (saved policies)

Policy H12 (Layout, Design and Use of Materials) - new housing developments will only be permitted which exhibit a high quality of design and local distinctiveness.

Policy H19 (Site Layout and Amenities) – in Lancaster, Morecambe, Heysham and Carnforth, new residential development within existing housing areas will be permitted where there is no loss of open/green spaces, it does not adversely effect the amenities of nearby residents, it provides high standard of amenity, and it makes satisfactory provision for disposal of sewerage, waste water, servicing, access and car and cycle parking.

Policy T9 (Providing for Buses in New Developments) - seeks to locate development, which will significantly increase the demand for travel as close as possible to existing or proposed bus services (i.e. within a 5 minute walk or 400m).

Policy T17 (Travel Plans) - requirement to produce a Travel Plan for development likely to generate large numbers of daily journeys.

Policy T26 and T27 (Footpaths and Cycleways) - requirements to include cycle and pedestrian links for new schemes.

Policy R21 (Access for People with Disabilities) - requires disabled access provision.

6.4 Lancaster District Core Strategy - adopted July 2008

Policy SC1 (Sustainable Development) - development should be located in an area where it is convenient to walk, cycle or travel by public transport between homes, workplaces, shops and other facilities, must not result in unacceptable flood risk or drainage problems, does not have a significant adverse impact on a site of nature conservation or archaeological importance, uses energy efficient design and construction practices, incorporates renewable energy technologies, creates publicly accessible open space, and is compatible with the character of the surrounding landscape.

Policy SC2 (Urban Concentration) - 90% of new dwellings to be provided in the urban areas of Lancaster, Morecambe, Heysham and Carnforth.

Policy SC4 (Meeting the District's Housing Requirements) - the Council will aim to maximise the opportunities offered by the development of new dwellings to redress imbalances in the local housing market, achieve housing that genuinely addresses identified local housing need and secure units of affordable housing in perpetuity.

Policy SC5 (Achieving Quality in Design) - new development must reflect and enhance the positive characteristics of its surroundings, creating landmark buildings of genuine and lasting architectural merit.

Policy SC6 (Crime and Community Safety) - encourage high quality design, incorporating "secure by Design" principles, avoid car dominated environments, remove dereliction and eyesore sites, achieving greater use of pedestrian and cycle networks, parks and open spaces in particular the key greenspace systems

Policy SC8 (Recreation and Open Space) - new residential development will make appropriate provision for formal and informal sports provision in line with needs identified in the Open Space and Page 13 Recreation Study.

Policy ER2 (Regeneration Priority Areas) - Central Morecambe is identified as a Regeneration Priority Area. Through tourism, housing renewal and heritage led regeneration, central Morecambe will be re-invented as a visitor destination drawing on its natural and built heritage, and as an office and service centre with restored historic townscape and a revived housing market.

Policy ER6 (Developing Tourism) - the Council will promote and enhance tourism development in the District by creating a quality leisure offer in central Morecambe.

Policy ER7 (Renewable Energy) - to maximise the proportion of energy generated in the District from renewable sources where compatible with other sustainability objectives, including the use of energy efficient design, materials and construction methods.

Policy E1 (Environmental Capital) - development should protect and enhance nature conservation sites and greenspaces, minimise the use of land and non-renewable energy, properly manage environmental risks such as flooding, make places safer, protect habitats and the diversity of wildlife species, and conserve and enhance landscapes.

Policy E2 (Transportation Measures) - this policy seeks to reduce the need to travel by car whilst improving walking and cycling networks and providing better public transport services.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 Residential Use

If the proposal were to convert of the existing hotel to living accommodation it would be consistent with current policies. However, the building is of no special architectural interest, and at the rear it offers a very poor appearance as seen from the houses in Dallam Avenue. It is not difficult therefore to make a case for replacing the existing hotel with an apartment building with similar floorspace.

Unlike Central Morecambe and the West End the eastern end of the Promenade is not an area in obviously urgent need of regeneration. However, there would be no benefit to Morecambe in allowing a major building on a prominent site to become vacant and derelict. If it did, addressing the problems presented by it would probably be seen as a regeneration priority.

Taking this into account, it is considered that a good case can be made for the principle of new housing on the site provided that it is of appropriate quality. The striking and innovative design counts in its favour.

On the affordable housing issue, further to permission being granted on the 2007 application, the applicant negotiated an approach to deliver this (see 8.2 below).

7.2 Tourism

Bed occupancy at the Broadway Hotel has declined sharply over the last few years from 76% in 2001 to 50% in 2007. The owners of the business, who also operate the Headway Hotel, say that the Broadway is mainly dependant on income from coach parties. They consider that it is no longer viable without substantial modernisation which they are unable to justify. They therefore wish to redevelop the site.

The loss of a hotel in Morecambe is not encouraged, but given the location of Broadway Hotel it is suitable. Core Strategy policies relating to regeneration and tourism seek to create central Morecambe as a visitor destination, but the application site falls about 1km to the east of central Morecambe. Therefore the redevelopment of a hotel to residential use in this location is acceptable in policy terms.

7.3 Design

The scale of the development has to be considered in relation to its surroundings. The building is considerably higher than its neighbours. This is of particular importance immediately behind the Page 14 houses at the eastern end of Dallam Avenue, which at present look out towards the open car park between the Broadway and Strathmore hotels. The original submission proposed filling this gap with a six storey building, the windows of which would look out towards them nos. 1 and 3 Dallam Avenue. While the new building would be much more attractive at the rear than the existing hotel, this and the associated landscaping would provide only limited compensation.

The applicant modified the design by reducing the overall height of the building immediately behind nos. 1 and 3 Dallam Avenue (in the position currently occupied by the car park at the side of the Strathmore Hotel) to 3 to 5 storeys. A distance of 21 metres is provided between the back of the existing houses to the new building to protect the amenity of both sets of residents.

7.4 Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency

Since planning permission was granted in 2007, the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) was adopted in September 2008 requiring at least 10% of the development's predicted energy requirements to be provided from on site renewable energy sources (Policy RM18). Likewise, the Code for Sustainable Homes has been introduced. The Environment Agency recommends that this development provides energy efficient properties using sustainable forms of construction. Conditions relating to these 2 points should be incorporated into any decision if permission is granted for the extension of time (the former regarding renewable energy was a condition on the 2007 permission).

7.5 Transport

There were concerns on the previous application about the traffic issues associated with the development are understandable. The site adjoins Morecambe High School and the area at the end of Dallam Avenue is very busy at the beginning and end of the school day. However, the times associated with school traffic will not coincide exactly with those associated with people leaving for and returning from work. In addition, the amount of traffic associated with the proposed flats has to be set against what could be generated by the hotel, if it was operating at full capacity. In addition the site is well served by public transport and adjacent to the Strategic Cycle Network.

7.6 Other Matters

Although there have been new policy documents at the national, regional and local level since 2006, none of the new policies adversely affect the proposal to redevelop this brownfield site. This is reinforced by County Planning’s comments that the proposal is in conformity with the Regional Spatial Strategy (although the RSS has recently been abolished).

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 The 2007 application was granted planning permission subject to a number of conditions including one that stated:

"No development shall take place until the schemes in respect of the following matters have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority: (a) a scheme for the delivery of an affordable housing element in accordance with Policy H10 of the Lancaster District Local Plan; and (b) a scheme for the delivery of public transport improvements related to and required as a result of the development."

8.2 Subsequent to the issuing of the Decision Notice a scheme for affordable housing was agreed between the applican t and the Council, albeit this was never formalised by way of a s106 agreement. The agreed scheme was as follows:

Provision of 9 units (approximately 20%) on site on a shared ownership basis (7 2- bed and 2 1-bed flats)
Commuted payment for off site provision based on 33% of the open market value of 9 units (7 2-bed and 2 1-bed flats)
Off site provision of 3 and 4-bed family housing on a shared ownership basis (based on a commensurate number of bedrooms - 16 bedrooms)

8.3 This does not reflect the Counci l's current policy, or the housing needs in this part of Morecambe. An affordable housing contribution should be sought that delivers an appropriate amount, size, type Page 15 and tenure of units that meets the requirements of the adopted Core Strategy and the housing needs in this locality. A condition should be attached that requires the applicant to agree an affordable housing scheme with the Council that is line with the Council's adopted planning policy.

8.4 County Highways requested the sum of £45,360 towards off site highway improvement works. In particular they sought improvements to crossing facilities in and around Broadway and Marine Road East to assist pedestrians and cyclists. However, these works will be secured by condition (rather than a financial contribution) and delivered as part of a s278 agreement.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 A proposal of this kind, involving the loss of a major seafront hotel, can be expected to be controversial but for the reasons indicated a good case can be made for the principle of the development. The building is a striking and interesting one which could make a positive contribution to the appearance of the seafront.

It is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions listed below, which include conditions relating to Code for Sustainable Homes (at least level 3) and on-site renewable energy production (at least 10% of the predicted ongoing energy demand of the residential units).

Recommendation

That Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard 3 year timescale 2. Amended plans reducing the overall height of the building 3. Development to accord with plans 4. Materials to external elevations and roof to be agreed 5. Access balconies to rear to be obscure glazed 6. At least Code level 3 Sustainable Homes 7. At least 10% on site renewable energy production 8. Landscaping to be agreed 9. Parking to be provided and retained as such 10. Secure cycle parking to be provided 11. Off site highway improvements - improvements to pedestrian crossing facilities across Marine Road East and Broadway 12. Affordable housing scheme - details required in line with Core Strategy policy SC4 13. Refuse storage - details required 14. Construction hours - 08:00 to 18:00 Mondays to Saturdays 15. Demolition programme - details required 16. Scheme for dust control 17. Unforeseen contamination 18. Pile driving 19. Bat protection - measures set out in Bat Survey to be adhered to 20. Flood management plan - including no use of parking area and provision of a water tight gate

Human Rights Act

This recommendation has been reached after consideration of the provisions of The Human Rights Act. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the issues arising do not appear to be of such magnitude to override the responsibility of the City Council to regulate land use for the benefit of the community as a whole, in accordance with national law.

Background Papers

None.

Page 16 Agenda Item Committee Date AgendaApplication Item Number 8

A8 26 July 2010 10/00293/FUL

Application Site Proposal

Field 1585 Demolition of disused agricultural buildings and redevelopment of the site to construct two 4 Sand Lane bedroomed residential houses with associated landscaping Warton

Lancashire

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Lune Valley 2001 Pension Scheme Mr Chris Astley

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

24 June 2010 Committee Cycle

Case Officer Mr Andrew Holden

Departure NO

Summary of Recommendation Refusal

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 An earlier application on this site, 09/00322/FUL was to be presented to planning committee due to the concerns of local residents and a request from the local Councillor. However, the application was subsequently withdrawn before determination. Given the previous request for a determination by planning committee, this application has also been presented to committee for determination.

1.2 The site is located within the Arnside/Silverdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), on the north side of Sand Lane, at the western end of Warton. It is occupied by a pair of single storey vacant agricultural buildings. They are at present empty and unused with one last used for storing motor cars and components and enjoying the benefit of a lawful use for such storage (Ref: 95/01212/ELDC). The remainder of the site is overgrown, the original hard surface being covered in self seeded grasses. Two semi mature trees are located within the site which is bounded by substantial mixed hedgerows.

1.3 The site forms part of a small cluster of development on the north side of Sand Lane. The cluster is remote from the village and is surrounded by open pastureland. The cluster comprises the application site, to the east gardens attached to a house and bungalow, and beyond them is a motor vehicle repair garage. The group originates from a farm and its associated buildings.

1.4 On the opposite side of the road there is a row of semi-detached houses. The north and west is an area of open pastureland rising to the foot of Warton Crag.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The application is seeking to demolish the two buildings and build two detached dwellings, both four bedded dormer bungalows. A new central access is to be created splitting into two private drives one to serve each dwelling but creating a communal turning area. The bungalows are to have natural stone to the front walls with render to the remaining all under a natural slate roof. Upper floor Page 17 accommodation is contained within the roof space with dormer windows to front and rear. A pike gable is proposed to the front elevation to provide additional upper floor accommodation and a focus to the front elevation of the dwellings. The roof is dual pitched with gable walls and small bonnet hips. The dwellings do not enjoy garaging with all car parking to the front of the dwellings

2.2 The boundary hedgerows are to be removed and a new hedgerow plated to aid the provision of visibility splays. A sycamore tree to the rear of the site which enjoys protection is to remain and is to be supplemented with additional tree planting.

3.0 Site History

3.1 One of the buildings on the site has been used in the past for the storage of vehicles and components and has gained established use rights for the use of the building in 1996.

3.2 The previous 2009 planning application sought consent for the demolition of the buildings on site and the erection of new offices and stores with associated parking. The proposal sought to develop the land for an employment use but a late objection to the scheme from County Highways over the inability to develop appropriate sight lines resulting in the application being withdrawn before presentation to planning committee.

Application Number Proposal Decision 1/78/526 Outline application for erection of a detached bungalow Refused

1/78/1119 Change of use of derelict corrugated iron Dutch barn to Refused temporary storage for new cars 1/79/155 Temporary change of use of building for the storage of Approved motor cars and components. 95/01212/ELDC Certificate of lawful use for use of a building storage of Approved new and used motor vehicles and components 09/00322/FUL Demolition of buildings and erection of new office /stores Withdrawn with parking

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response County Highways Recommends provision of visibility splays of 2.4m x 45m to ensure adequate visibility along the site frontage. The applicant has shown the above visibility requirements on the site plan for this new application and on that basis there is no objection. They comment that it is not entirely clear however from the site and location plans that the visibility splays fall within land in the applicant's control.

If approved the following conditions and advice notes should be imposed; Provision of vehicle turning space; Provision of garages & car parking (for new housing developments, etc.); Protection of visibility splays; Advice Note - County must specify works to be undertaken

Environmental Views awaited on the new submission and in particular the Contaminated Land Study, Health Services previously no objections subject to conditions in respect of: -

• Hours of Construction • Radon Gas Protection • Unforeseen land contamination

AONB Office Views awaited on the new submission but had previously raised objections to the proposal, on the grounds that whilst development of the site is an improvement on what is there at present it will have a negative impact on the landscape of the AONB. Page 18 North Lancs Bat Views awaited, however the submitted bat survey considers the risk to bats to be low Group with no significant disturbance or loss of roost sites occurring as a result of demolition or development of the site. Provides an opportunity to develop additional roost sites.

Parish Council Councillors wished to support the comments submitted by residents of Sand Lane in that the building is considered to be too high for the position and in its present form an overdevelopment of the site .

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 To date, 15 letters have been received from neighbouring residential occupiers, the comments are as follows: -

• General support for residential rather than industrial; • Houses are inappropriate and should be bungalows. The overall height of the development as submitted is too high; • Overbearing and dominant in relation to the properties on the other side of Sand Lane, should be design to reflect the neighbouring bungalow; • Loss of privacy from two storey dwellings; • Poor sight lines and highway visibility onto Sand Lane; • Large four bed dwellings with only two parking spaces per dwelling could lead to additional parking on Sand Lane to the detriment of highway safety; • Visual impact of large properties within the Warton Crag AONB; • Possible glare source form the proposed lighting to the front of the dwellings.

Further letter received in respect of the revised scheme expresses similar concerns over the development as previously raised, in particular the dwellings are still considered to be too tall for the area.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 Lancaster District Local Plan

Saved Policy H8 identifies that outside village settlements housing will only be permitted that is essential to the needs of agriculture, forestry or use appropriate to the rural area, the development shall be sited to minimise impact, be consistent to meeting the essential employment needs and be appropriate in terms of design and materials.

6.2 Saved Policy H12 requires housing development to exhibit a high standard of design which uses materials and features which are appropriate to, and retain the distinctive local identity of their surroundings.

6.3 Saved Policy E3 requires that development in or adjacent to AONBs should not adversely affect their character or harm the landscape quality, and that any development permitted must be of an appropriate scale and use materials appropriate to the area.

6.4 Saved Policy E4 (Countryside Area) relates to new development within the countryside area stating that development will only be permitted where it is in scale and in keeping with the character of the landscape and is appropriate in terms of scale, siting, design and materials. It also seeks to ensure that development proposals will not have an adverse impact on nature conservation and to make satisfactory arrangements for parking and access.

6.5 SPG 12 Residential Design Guide – states that parking spaces should be provided within the cartilage of dwellings and where possible at least one parking spaces per dwelling should be provided behind the building line.

6.6 Lancaster Core Strategy

Policy SC1 Sustainable Development seeks to ensure that new development proposals are sustainable in terms of both location and design. This policy, albeit a generic overriding policy, states that sites should be previously developed and accessible to public transport, employment, Page 19 leisure, education and community facilities.

6.7 Policy SC3 Rural Communities identifies a number of rural communities (8 villages in total) within the District where a 10% allocation of housing is accommodated to meet local needs. Warton is not one of those villages identified as having a full range of services (it has no doctor's surgery), but it is a substantial community.

6.8 Policy SC5 Achieving Quality in Design seeks to ensure that development proposals achieve the Core Strategy vision and that new development will be of a quality that enhances the character of the area, results in an improved appearance where conditions are unsatisfactory and compliments and enhances public realm.

6.9 Policy E1 (Environmental Capital) seeks to improve the districts environment, including protecting and enhancing landscapes of national importance.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The application as originally submitted sought to develop two large four-bedroom dormer bungalows. The dwellings are built across the whole width of each plot with only a pedestrian access around each side of the dwelling and no integral car parking areas. The ridge height of the building was to be 8.15m above ground level.

7.2 The application has been the subject of numerous letters all of which are supportive of the approach to develop the site for residential use rather than industrial but again all of which consider that the dwellings are too tall and introduce issues of massing, overlooking and landscape impact. Many letters suggest that ‘true’ bungalows would be appropriate in this location reflecting the neighbouring dwelling. The Parish Council also support the principle of residential development but again consider the development to be too high for the position and in its present form an overdevelopment of the site.

7.3 In an attempt of respond to comments from neighbour and parish consultations the applicant has revised the design of the bungalows maintaining the footprint of the buildings but lowering the overall height to 6.9m. Generally, the external appearance has remained unchanged with only minor revisions to window design. The applicant considers that the overall height of the buildings reflect that of the neighbouring bungalow as the floor levels to the application site are much lower than that of the neighbouring site.

7.4 The applicant has also been requested to provide a policy justification for developing dwellings in this out-of-village location. A statement has been provided which does not provide any policy commentary but indicates that the application has been developed following the earlier submission, a need to develop less onerous sight lines, neighbour and councillor support for residential use and encouragement by the previous case officer that development of ‘two low key dwellings’ could be pursued. The site is vacant and partially dilapidated beyond the point of viable renovation. The option to develop commercially is not available and residential is seen as an appropriate sustainable route.

7.5 The site has a number of planning aspects which require consideration, the site is considered to lie outside of the village of Warton; part of the site enjoys the benefit of a lawful use for the storage of cars and components in one of the two buildings on-site; the site is located in a prominent position within the AONB; and the site is overlooked from a number of elevated positions.

7.6 Location of the Development Site

7.7 The application site is considered to lie outside of the village of Warton, as indicated earlier in the report the site formed part of a cluster of development deriving from the original agricultural unit known as Corfe Farm. The site itself comprises vacant agricultural buildings and land with one building having the benefit of lawful use as car storage and motor components. Land and buildings to the north of Sand Lane are separated from the village by open pasture. The site is located within the designated Countryside Area and the AONB as defined in the Lancaster District Local Plan.

7.8 Saved Policy H8 identifies that outside village settlements housing will only be permitted that is essential to the needs of agriculture, forestry or use appropriate to the rural area, the development Page 20 shall be sited to minimise impact, be consistent to meeting the essential employment needs and be appropriate in terms of design and materials. No such justification has been provided by the applicant who is seeking development of open market housing on the site. As such the development is not considered to be essential development and contrary to saved policy H8 of the Lancaster District Local Plan and Policy SC1 of the Lancaster Core Strategy

7.9 The site has a visible frontage to Sand Lane but is also visible from elevated positions on Crag Road and the popular visitor destination of Warton Crag. The demolition of two low level single storey, cement fibre roofed buildings and the introduction of two large non-essential dwellings would significantly change the nature of this site from one which has little visual impact upon the wider Arnside and Silverdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty to one which is considered to be visually intrusive and out of keeping with the character of the landscape, adversely affecting character and landscape quality. The development is also considered to be contrary to saved polices E3 and E4 of the Lancaster District Local Plan and Policy E1 of the Lancaster Core Strategy

7.10 Design of the dwellings

7.11 The site has been developed very intensively; the buildings occupy almost the full width of the plot with only narrow spacing between plots and boundaries. The internal accommodation provides for no car parking behind the building line, in contravention of guidance within SPG 12 which directs where possible that at least one parking space should be maintained behind the building line. The lack of provision results in all car parking being in front of the dwellings. To the detriment of the visual appearance of the street scene. This arrangement is further compounded by the full width development of the plot which will encourage much of associated domestic paraphernalia (trailers, caravans etc) to be sited in front of the dwellings, again to the detriment of the visual amenity of the area. The development is considered to be over-intensive for the plot and contrary to saved policies H12, E3, E4 of the Lancaster District Local Plan, policies SC5 and E1 of the Lancaster Core Strategy and guidance contained within SPG 12 – Residential Design Guide.

7.12 The scheme seeks to develop a single point of access onto Sand Lane removing hedgerows across the front of the site and replanting them to respect the need to maintain sight line in either direction as required by County Highways. However, the applicant has not indicated that there is any control over land outside the application site to ensure the full provision of the indicated sight lines. It is considered that the visibility can be provided to the east towards the centre of Warton as the stone boundary wall to the neighbouring dwelling is set back and views across a grass verge will be maintained. However, to the west the land is part of a separately owned field with a mature, tall hedgerow growing immediately to the rear of the kerb line. It would appear that the sight line cannot be provided on this side of the new access and is as a consequence visibility is severely limited on the side of the junction which will have vehicles travelling towards the application site on the carriageway immediately adjacent. The applicant has been made aware of these concerns but has not provided evidence to indicate that the splay can be provide and maintained, as a consequence it is considered that the submission as detailed will be detrimental to highway safety and should be resisted.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 None.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 It is considered that the proposal seeking to develop non-essential dwelling in a rural location to the detriment of visual amenity, landscape character and highway safety and should be resisted for the reasons set out below.

Recommendation

That Planning Permission BE REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. The application site is located within the Arnside and Silverdale Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and the Countryside Area on the edge of the village of Warton, both designated within the Lancaster District Local Plan. The development is not considered to be essential to the needs of agriculture and Page 21 such would introduce large scale residential development in a location previously made over to low key agricultural and commercial development. In the opinion of the local planning authority the development of two non-essential dwellings in this location would be detrimental to the character of the Arnside and Silverdale Area of Natural Beauty and the Countryside Area. As such the proposal is considered to be contrary to saved policies H8, E3 and E4 of the Lancaster District Local Plan and policies SC1, SC5 and E1 of the Lancaster Core Strategy.

2. The extensive scale/footprint and design of the dwellings and in particular the lack of parking provision within the footprint of the dwelling will result in the parking of vehicles within the front garden area of the property and the inability to locate other domestic items away from the frontage of the properties. The resulting frontage parking and potential domestic storage is considered to be detrimental to the amenities of neighbouring residents, the appearance of the street scene and the wider Arnside and Silverdale AONB. As such the development is contrary to saved policies H12, E3, E4 of the Lancaster District Local Plan, policies SC5 and E1 of the Lancaster Core Strategy and guidance contained within SPG 12 – Residential Design Guide.

3. The proposal seeks to develop a new shared vehicle access directly onto Sand Lane. The road is one of the main distributor roads linking the Silverdale peninsula with Warton and the wider highway network. Sand Lane is restricted by on-street parking associated with the neighbouring dwellings and has a single footpath to its southern side. In the opinion of the local planning authority the development of the site in the manner proposed would result in the creation of a new vehicle access with wholly substandard sight lines to the west on emerging from the site. As a consequence visibility is severely limited on the side of the junction which will have vehicles travelling towards the application site on the carriageway immediately adjacent. As such, the development is considered to be detrimental to highway safety.

Human Rights Act

This recommendation has been reached after consideration of the provisions of The Human Rights Act. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the issues arising do not appear to be of such magnitude to override the responsibility of the City Council to regulate land use for the benefit of the community as a whole, in accordance with national law.

Background Papers

None.

Page 22 Agenda Item Committee Date AgendaApplication Item Number 9

A9 26 July 2010 10/00480/OUT

Application Site Proposal

Luneside West Development Site Application for extension of time on application Thetis Road 05/00103/OUT (Outline application for a mixed use Lune Business Park development comprising 356 housing units,136305 sq Lancaster ft of industrial/commercial usage including a neighbourhood centre, car parking and means of access)

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr And Mrs Foy Mr Gary Williams

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

12 August 2010 N/A

Case Officer Mr Andrew Drummond

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Approve subject to conditions and obligations

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The 10.7ha application site is located to the southern bank of the River Lune about 1 mile west of the centre of Lancaster. It faces onto the Salt Ayre Sports Complex and the restored landfill beyond on the opposite side of the river.

The site is flat and roughly triangular in shape. It is accessed from New Quay Road, which runs along the north edge of the site. The southern angled boundary abuts the Marsh housing area and Lancaster Cricket Club, though further west it falls adjacent to the existing Lune Industrial Estate. The applicant has outline planning permission for commercial uses on land to the west of the application site.

1.2 The site has an industrial past, and was once served by a rail branch line from Lancaster station. It formed the central part of the former Lune Mills complex, which stretched from what is now known as the Lune Industrial Estate in the west to Luneside East adjacent to the Carlisle Bridge to the east. It incorporates an extensive range of industrial buildings, which continued in use until the Forbo- Kingfisher business (the manufacturing of linoleum) finally ceased in 2001. The site now contains a variety of industrial buildings and an extensive area of vacant land resulting from past demolition. Most of the buildings remaining on the site are currently awaiting demolition for health and safety reasons.

1.3 The application site is identified under Policy EC5 of the Lancaster Local Plan as forming part of the existing Luneside Employment Area. The site’s north facing frontage borders on the River Lune County Biological Heritage Site and also the Strategic Cycle Network that passes along New Quay Road.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The application seeks permission for an extension of time to redevelop comprehensively redevelop this derelict site to accommodate a mixed-use scheme incorporating some 356 housing units, 3,696 Page 23 sq m of B1 office, 4,249 sq m of B1 light industrial floorspace, 4,199 sq m of B2/B8 general industrial/storage and distribution floorspace and 517 sq m of retail space within a neighbourhood centre.

The application proposes the removal of all existing buildings on the site and the remediation of local 'hotspots' of contamination from past industrial uses, and replaced with the mixed use scheme described below.

The development will provide approximately 356 dwellings on approximately 6.07 ha of land. These will be in a mixture of dwelling types including apartments and a range of housing types and sizes. 20% of the dwellings provided will be affordable to meet local needs, secured by way of a Unilateral Undertaking. The precise mix and location of the social rented housing will be determined at a later stage, having regard to an up-to-date survey of need and in consultation with the Council. The affordable housing will be integrated into the overall residential development.

The development will provide for approximately 4.6 ha of business development in the south and south-western part of the site. This part of the site will also include a neighbourhood centre of 575 sq m which could contain a local convenience store and other community facilities. There will also be 3,696 sq m of B1 offices in two storeys, some of which will face onto the River Lune. Further back into the site there will be 4,249 sq m of B1 light industrial accommodation and 4,199 sq m of B2/B8 general industrial use/storage and distribution buildings.

2.2 Although the 2005 application was only supported by an outline schematic layout, the applicant argued that the proposed scheme has been designed to be sympathetic to the immediate surroundings and in keeping with the character and appearance of the town. The river frontage of the proposed layout has been designed to respect the height and character of the river front buildings and developments presently facing onto the River Lune. The river frontage gradually rises in height heading west to east starting at two storeys adjacent to the existing houses and rising to five storeys at the corner point of the site. Back from the immediate frontage facing New Quay Road, the development reduces in height to two and a half storeys along the boundary with the Marsh Estate, to relate more to the existing housing in the Estate. The development along the river frontage consists of apartments and town houses, the character of the development changing further into the site to terraced, detached and semi-detached housing. There will be a landscaped belt on the western boundary of the residential area, separating it from the commercial area and new planting to help screen the existing houses on New Quay Road.

2.3 The site layout suggests the possibility of creating a future footpath link to the Marsh Estate at the point where the existing drain crosses the south boundary, although it is not clear how this would be achieved given the existing conditions beyond the site boundary. The link in westerly direction continues through to the neighbourhood centre, and a bus stop and bus turning roundabout within the industrial site. Similarly this would also allow the new residents on the estate a short and convenient route to existing local community facilities such as the primary school, shops, and community centre.

The main internal road layout, servicing the industrial development will be constructed to facilitate and promote bus movements through the site. The possibility of enhancing the existing bus service (no 7), and / or the provision of a new service to serve the estate and the employment space are suggested. A figure of £400,000 (spread over 5 years) was secured by way of a Unilateral Undertaking to assist in funding a new bus service into the area. This bus service would benefit the occupiers of the new development and visitors / employees in the existing businesses at the end of St Georges Quay who do not presently have a bus service at all. Assuming the new service used the riverside route to the town centre, there are existing residents along the new route who may also benefit.

There will be a separate access to the industrial area from St Georges Quay and 2 new proposed accesses to the residential area. One of the new proposed accesses off New Quay Road into the residential area will follow the line of the existing easement over the main drain running across the site from south to north. In the wider context, a further contribution of £175,000 towards the Intelligent Transport System was also secured by way of the Unilateral Undertaking.

2.4 It is proposed to include substantial new planting and other landscaping in the interface between the site and existing housing areas to the south and to enhance the appearance of the riverside public Page 24 open space and other public amenity areas with local planting to add character to the housing areas. Buffer planting is also proposed along the western boundary of the site. This will provide a screen between the adjacent land uses and the site. Native species will be used in this planting, with the use of quick growing species to assist in early impact. The screen planting will be designed to retain natural surveillance of the area and avoid opportunities for crime.

The development will meet the Council's open space standards and will incorporate a number of areas of public open space. These will be articulated at reserved matters stage, but are likely to include local areas of play for the 0 to 5 age range.

3.0 Site History

3.1 A number of relevant applications relating to this site have previously been received by the Local Planning Authority. These include:

Application Number Proposal Decision 05/00103/OUT Outline application for a mixed use development Appeal allowed following comprising 356 housing units,136305 sq ft of Public Inquiry industrial/commercial usage including a neighbourhood centre, car parking and means of access 07/01535/REM Reserved matters application for the erection of 354 Approved residential units (178 one and two bed apartments, 176 three and four bed houses) and associated parking and open space

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory and internal consultees:

Consultees Response County Highways No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations received will be reported verbally.

County Planning No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations received will be reported verbally.

County Archaeology The site is one of known archaeological interest, containing a number of non- designated heritage assets identified as being of local and potentially national significance. Therefore a condition should be attached to any permission granted that secures the implementation of a programme of archaeological work prior to any work occurring on site.

County Ecology No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations received will be reported verbally.

Natural England No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations received will be reported verbally.

The Wildlife Trust No observations.

RSPB No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations received will be reported verbally.

Environment While the site is now defended, it is the responsibility of the applicant to demonstrate Agency that the residual flood risk is taken into account as part of the Reserved Matters application. The siting and design of the proposed development should take account of the relevant guidance and advice within Planning Policy Statement 25. The Agency Page 25 did not object to the original application but sought conditions relating to land contamination, oil interceptors (on car parking areas), surface water regulation system (promote the use of SUDS) and piling. Their requirements are reiterated in relation to this application. They also encourage the development of energy efficient buildings.

United Utilities No objection to the proposal provided that surface water is not allowed to discharge to foul/combined sewer. The developer should seek opportunities to reduce the overall level of flood risk in the area and beyond, through the layout and form of the development and appropriate application of sustainable drainage techniques. The developer should formulate a Surface Water Management Plan using sustainable drainage systems and demonstrate how they intend to manage surface water. This site must be drained on a separate system, with only foul drainage connected into the foul sewer. A public sewer crosses this site and we will not permit building over it. We will require an access strip width of 7m metres, 3.5 metres either side of the centre line of the sewer. All fuel and chemical storage tanks must have adequate bund walls without outlets.

Police No objection to this application, but would recommend that Secured by Design should be a consideration on all aspects of design.

Fire Safety No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations received will be reported verbally.

Lancaster Port No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations Commission received will be reported verbally.

Duchy of Lancaster No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations received will be reported verbally.

Lancaster Civic No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations Society received will be reported verbally.

Environmental No objection subject to conditions relating to land contamination and the other Health conditions attached to planning permission (05/00103/OUT). There is some concern that the air quality assessment that accompanied the original application is now 5 years old and does not utilise the current guidance for monitoring and modelling air quality. This is heightened by the continuing 'exceedence' of the annual objective for nitrogen dioxide within the Lancaster Air Quality Management Area. However, the advice from the Planning Officer (which was based on the conclusions of the Planning Inspector) suggests that the changes are not substantial enough to require a new air quality assessment to be undertaken in connection with this application and, in view of this advice, the Environmental Health team has no objection to the extension of time.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 One piece of correspondence was received by a neighbour citing the following objections:

Pollution and contamination arising from site preparation
Noise and pollution arising from additional traffic generated by the development
Public safety given the speed that vehicles travel along New Quay Road and the condition of the highway
Overlooking into existing residential properties
Lack of community facilities to serve an additional 356 units
The proposal is unsympathetic to the historic and architectural setting
Lack of public consultation

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 National Planning Policy Statements (PPS) and Guidance Notes (PPG) Page 26

PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) - provides generic advice for all new built development. Sites should be capable of optimising the full site boundary and should deliver an appropriate mix of uses, green and other public spaces, safe and accessible environments and visually pleasing architecture. The prudent use of natural resources and assets, and the encouragement of sustainable modes of transport are important components of this advice. This advice is echoed in PPG 13 - Transport. A high level of protection should be given to most valued townscapes and landscapes, wildlife habitats and natural resources, conserving and enhancing wildlife species and habitats and the promotion of biodiversity.

PPS3 (Housing) - illustrates the need for good quality residential development in sustainable locations which have good access to a range of services and facilities. The use of previously developed (brownfield) land is an explicit objective, as is the delivery of different types of affordable housing to meet local housing needs.

PPG13 (Transport) - encourages sustainable travel, ideally non-motorised forms of transport such as walking and cycling, but also other means like public transport. The use of the car should be minimised. This can be encouraged by the location, layout and design of new developments.

PPS25 (Development and Flood Risk) - recognises that though flooding cannot be wholly prevented, its impacts can be avoided and reduced through good planning and management. All forms of flooding and their impact on the natural and built environment are material planning considerations. Positive planning has an important role in helping deliver sustainable development and applying the Government’s policy on flood risk management. It avoids, reduces and manages flood risk by taking full account in decisions on plans and applications of present and future flood risk, involving both the statistical probability of a flood occurring and the scale of its potential consequences, whether inland or on the coast, and the wider implications for flood risk of development located outside flood risk areas.

6.2 Regional Spatial Strategy - adopted September 2008

The Regional Spatial Strategy (and thus the policies contained therein) was formally revoked by the Government earlier this month.

6.3 Lancaster District Local Plan - adopted April 2004 (saved policies)

Policy H12 (Layout, Design and Use of Materials) - new housing developments will only be permitted which exhibit a high quality of design and local distinctiveness.

Policy H19 (Site Layout and Amenities) – in Lancaster, Morecambe, Heysham and Carnforth, new residential development within existing housing areas will be permitted where there is no loss of open/green spaces, it does not adversely effect the amenities of nearby residents, it provides high standard of amenity, and it makes satisfactory provision for disposal of sewerage, waste water, servicing, access and car and cycle parking.

Policy EC5 (Existing Employment Areas) - Luneside is allocated as an employment site suitable for B1 and B2 uses.

(Partially saved) Policy E11 (Development affecting Flood Plains - requires measures for dealing with development in areas at risk of flooding without adverse environmental impacts.

Policies E16 and E17 (Protected Sites and Sites of Conservation Importance) - the need to protect important locally and nationally designated sites of conservation interest including Lune Estuary SPA/SSSI and River Lune Biological Heritage Site

Policy T9 (Providing for Buses in New Developments) - seeks to locate development, which will significantly increase the demand for travel as close as possible to existing or proposed bus services (i.e. within a 5 minute walk or 400m).

Policy T17 (Travel Plans) - requirement to produce a Travel Plan for development likely to generate large numbers of daily journeys.

Page 27 Policy T26 and T27 (Footpaths and Cycleways) - requirements to include cycle and pedestrian links for new schemes.

Policy R11 (Open Space and Children’s Play Areas in New Housing Development) - open space and play provision within new housing schemes

Policy R21 (Access for People with Disabilities) - requires disabled access provision.

6.4 Lancaster District Core Strategy - adopted July 2008

Policy SC1 (Sustainable Development) - development should be located in an area where it is convenient to walk, cycle or travel by public transport between homes, workplaces, shops and other facilities, must not result in unacceptable flood risk or drainage problems, does not have a significant adverse impact on a site of nature conservation or archaeological importance, uses energy efficient design and construction practices, incorporates renewable energy technologies, creates publicly accessible open space, and is compatible with the character of the surrounding landscape.

Policy SC2 (Urban Concentration) - 90% of new dwellings to be provided in the urban areas of Lancaster, Morecambe, Heysham and Carnforth.

Policy SC4 (Meeting the District's Housing Requirements) - the Council will aim to maximise the opportunities offered by the development of new dwellings to redress imbalances in the local housing market, achieve housing that genuinely addresses identified local housing need and secure units of affordable housing in perpetuity.

Policy SC5 (Achieving Quality in Design) - new development must reflect and enhance the positive characteristics of its surroundings, creating landmark buildings of genuine and lasting architectural merit.

Policy SC6 (Crime and Community Safety) - encourage high quality design, incorporating "secure by Design" principles, avoid car dominated environments, remove dereliction and eyesore sites, achieving greater use of pedestrian and cycle networks, parks and open spaces in particular the key greenspace systems

Policy SC7 (Development and the Risk of Flooding) - Development must not expose workplaces, homes and public areas to unacceptable levels of flooding.

Policy SC8 (Recreation and Open Space) - new residential development will make appropriate provision for formal and informal sports provision in line with needs identified in the Open Space and Recreation Study.

Policy ER2 (Regeneration Priority Areas) - Luneside to be regenerated into a mixed-use waterfront following remediation and provision of flood defences. In the longer term a river crossing is sought to provide access, cycle pedestrian and public transport links. Measures to manage heavy goods vehicle movements should be investigated and implemented.

Policy ER3 (Employment Land Allocations) - to promote regeneration by ensuring that the right amount of employment land is provided in the right place to meet needs generated by existing businesses, new businesses and inward investment.

Policy ER7 (Renewable Energy) - to maximise the proportion of energy generated in the District from renewable sources where compatible with other sustainability objectives, including the use of energy efficient design, materials and construction methods.

Policy E1 (Environmental Capital) - development should protect and enhance nature conservation sites and greenspaces, minimise the use of land and non-renewable energy, properly manage environmental risks such as flooding, make places safer, protect habitats and the diversity of wildlife species, conserve and enhance landscapes, and be directed to previously developed land where dereliction can be cleared and contamination remediated.

Policy E2 (Transportation Measures) - this policy seeks to reduce the need to travel by car whilst improving walking and cycling networks and providing better public transport services. Page 28

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 Residential Use

The principle of residential use on this site was established in the Secretary of State's decision of 15 May 2007 when planning permission was granted for a mixed use development.

However, housing needs have changed since 2007 when planning permission was granted. That said, 20% social rented dwellings, especially of a size and type that would accommodate families (i.e. houses of at least 2 bedrooms) would go some way to meeting the local housing need in this area of Lancaster. Therefore the revised s106 agreement (see 8.2 below) should incorporate this level of contribution. If at the time of submitting a Reserved Matters application the developer questions the scheme's viability based on the 20% provision of social rented family accommodation, their appraisal can be tested against the recent Affordable Housing Viability Study which was commissioned by the Council for the District. The applicant would be required to provide robust evidence to show why this level of contribution is unviable.

7.2 Transport and Air Quality

Issues surrounding the development proposal's impact on the local highway network and the city centre's Air Quality Management Area were addressed at length during the Public Inquiry on the 2005 application. The proposal remains unchanged, and therefore the same conclusion is drawn that the development would not have a significantly adverse impact on these 2 elements.

7.3 Contamination and Flooding

As set out above in Section 4, statutory and internal consultees still have concerns regarding these 2 issues. The site' industrial past has led to its contamination, and therefore it is essential that prior to the construction of any buildings on the site, an agreed remediation strategy is implemented. Furthermore it is important to ensure that contaminants do not get carried from the site into water courses, including ground water (from piling) and the River Lune (from surface water run-off). Though the flood defences long this section of the River Lune are now complete, the Environment Agency make it clear that it is the responsibility of the applicant to demonstrate that the residual flood risk is taken into account in the siting and design of the proposed development. The management of surface water is crucial in meeting the objectives of the various bodies consulted on this application.

7.4 Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency

Since planning permission was granted in 2007, the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) was adopted in September 2008 requiring at least 10% of the development's predicted energy requirements to be provided from on site renewable energy sources (Policy RM18). Likewise, the Code for Sustainable Homes has been introduced. The Environment Agency recommends that this scheme develops energy efficient buildings. Conditions relating to these 2 points should be incorporated into any decision if permission is granted for the extension of time.

7.5 Other Matters

Although there have been new policy documents at the national, regional and local level since 2006, none of the new policies adversely affect the proposal to redevelop this brownfield site.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 An unilateral undertaking was previously entered into requiring a developer to provide:

1. 20% provision of affordable housing, all of which is to be available for social renting; 2. Not to occupy more than 20% of the dwellings until 10,000 sq m of B1/B2 buildings are constructed (including the installation of windows and roofs); 3. Public transport contribution of £400,000 for a bus to service the site for 5 years; 4. Transport contribution of £175,000 towards the Intelligent Transport System; Page 29 5. Contribution of £22,000 for 2 Quality bus stops to be provide within 400m of the site prior to occupation of the first unit; and 6. Contribution of £12,707 for Air Quality Monitoring Equipment prior to the occupation of the first unit.

8.2 A revised s106 agreement is required to tie-in the above obligations, which are still relevant, to this new application. However, it would be more appropriate to group the transport related contributions into one "Transport Improvement" contribution totalling £597,000 that could be spent on one or more measures to enhance sustainable transport links in the area. The wording of the s106 agreement could reflect this flexibility to ensure a scheme of works and services are provided that adequately serve the development in the short and longer term.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 Subject to the signing and completion of a revised s106 agreement, it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the conditions listed below, which include conditions relating to Code for Sustainable Homes (at least level 3) and on-site renewable energy production (at least 10% of the predicted ongoing energy demand of the residential units).

Recommendation

That Outline Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the signing of a Section 106 Agreement covering:

1. 20% provision of affordable housing, all of which is to be available for social renting; 2. Not to occupy more than 20% of the dwellings until 10,000 sq m of B1/B2 buildings are constructed (including the installation of windows and roofs); 3. Public transport contribution of £400,000 for a bus to service the site for 5 years; 4. Transport contribution of £175,000 towards the Intelligent Transport System; 5. Contribution of £22,000 for 2 Quality bus stops to be provide within 400m of the site prior to occupation of the first unit; and 6. Contribution of £12,707 for Air Quality Monitoring Equipment prior to the occupation of the first unit.

And subject to the following planning conditions:

1. Outline permission - all reserved matters required (except access) 2. Phasing plan required, including triggers for provision of open space, the neighbourhood centre, affordable housing and the construction of the industrial/commercial uses 3. At least Code level 3 4. At least 10% on site renewable energy production 5. Adoptable highway details required 6. Protection of visibility splays 7. Provision of car parking and garages, 8. Servicing and turning areas - details required 9. Wheel cleaning facilities during construction 10. Provision of permeable pedestrian and cycle links between the site and adjacent commercial and residential areas 11. Travel Plan - details required 12. Affordable housing scheme - detail required (including numbers, types and location, arrangements for maintaining their affordability in perpetuity, and occupancy criteria) 13. Protected species - bats 14. Programme of archaeological work and recording prior to any work occurring on site 15. Notwithstanding the plans details of surfacing materials required 16. Means of enclosure of the site and plot boundaries - details required 17. Landscaping scheme required 18. Retention of trees and hedgerows 19. Tree protection measures 20. Layout and future maintenance of public open space - details required 21. Provision of equipped children's play facilities on site - provided before first occupation of any dwelling 22. Finished floor levels - details required 23. Separate drainage system 24. Provision of interceptor - car parks Page 30 25. Use of SUDS - surface water discharge from the site should be attenuated to existing site levels or less 26. Construction hours - 08:00 to 18:00 Mondays to Saturdays 27. Scheme for dust control 28. Noise assessment 29. Standard contaminated land condition 30. Contaminated land - importation of soil, materials and hardcore 31. Contaminated land - prevention of new contamination 32. Bunding of tanks 33. Pile driving

Human Rights Act

This recommendation has been reached after consideration o f the provisions of The Human Rights Act. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the issues arising do not appear to be of such magnitude to override the responsibility of the City Council to regulate land use for the benefit of the community as a whole, in accordance with national law.

Background Papers

None

Page 31 AgendaAgenda Item Item 10 Committee Date Application Number

A10 26 July 2010 10/00319/FUL

Application Site Proposal

Luneside Engineering Workshop 1) Development of ecological cohousing scheme including 28 houses, 6 flats, ancillary residential Mill Lane buildings and associated landscaping (including provision of a new riverside footpath) Halton 2) Development of 6 terraced houses on former Lancaster Lower Halton Mill (Managers House) site;

3) Change of use of existing Mill Building from B2 general industrial with ancillary B1 office and B8 storage to mixed use B1/B2/B8 managed workspace, with refurbishment to include replacement roof and doors/windows, flue for biomass boiler and solar panels;

4) Change of use of the Boathouse to provide ancillary use for cohousing residents, changing facilities and training space for canoe clubs, and a space to host educational day visitors to the site; with refurbishment to include reroofing in reclaimed slate, replacement doors / windows and installation of a viewing platform.

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr Jon Sear

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

1 July 2010 Increasing application numbers

Case Officer Mrs Jennifer Rehman

Departure None

Approval, subject to the submission and agreement of Summary of Recommendation a signed Unilateral Undertaking.

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The proposal relates to a 2.5 hectare linear site located between Mill Lane and the River Lune in Halton, approximately 3 miles east of the centre of Lancaster. The site lies on the right bank between Forge Bank Weir and Lower Halton Weir, bound by farmland to the east; ‘The Forge’ and ‘Out of the Woods’ commercial buildings to the north with farmland beyond; the River Lune to the south; and a mixture of recently developed residential dwellings to the west, mainly three-story, plus two commercial buildings now completed and occupied to the north west of the site.

1.2 At present there are five existing buildings on the site, including the existing stone Mill Building which dates back to the early 20 th century, together with large areas of hardstanding, an unmade track which provides access to Forge Bank Weir, and important groups of trees, including a locally important woodland at the eastern end of the site which is protected by a Tree Preservation Order Page 32 (TPO). The south banks of the site are generally covered with overgrown self-seeded vegetation, although there are some areas where stone outcrops are exposed.

1.3 The site topography changes quite dramatically from the western end of the site where it is relatively flat to the eastern side of the site when the levels rise approximately 8.5m between the southern and northern boundaries. As a consequence of the site contours there are a number of large retaining walls plus two public rights of way passing through this part of the Halton Mills development site; one running along the higher northern part of the site and one running along the southern boundary adjacent to the River Lune.

1.4 Halton Mills, as the area is now known, is accessed off Low Road adjacent to Town End Farm, which has recently been converted, opposite the village playing fields and allotments. It is approximately 1km up a 30m hill to the village amenities and services on High Road but closer to the community centre on Low Road. Access to the site itself is via the internal road system, which has now, in part, been constructed to adoptable standards. The remaining parts of the Halton Mills site linger in a state of flux, with the site subdivided into a number of plots with various land owners. Some parts of the site have been developed but regretfully most of the site has been left undeveloped or incomplete for some considerable time.

1.5 In terms of land allocation, the site lies within the settlement of Halton within designated countryside area. The site sits very close to the western periphery of the Forest of Bowland Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and approximately 300m to Halton Conservation Area. The River Lune which borders the site is a Biological Heritage Site with designated informal recreation areas and green corridors running along side the river banks (Millennium Cycle Way). The site lies within Floodzone 3.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The application is for a mixed use development of the former Luneside Engineering site. The application is made by Lancaster Cohousing, a non-profit company, formed by local residents seeking to develop an ecological cohousing community that will be both socially and environmentally sustainable and will act as a national beacon of good practice.

2.2 The application is broken down into four principle parts:

1. Demolition of a existing buildings and the development of an ecological cohousing scheme including 28 houses, 6 flats, ancillary residential buildings and associated landscaping (including provision of a new riverside footpath). This consists of 5 rows of terraced properties and one pair of semi-detached properties comprising a mix of six 1-bedroom flats, 12 two-bedroom dwellings and 16 three-bedroom dwellings. There are four principal terraces fronting the River Lune, with a smaller row of three and the pair of semi-detached dwellings located behind these on higher land supported by large gabion retaining walls. All of these dwellings will have the benefit of conventional accommodation (kitchen/dining space, living rooms, bathrooms and bedrooms) but have below-conventional standards of private amenity areas (gardens). These dwellings are generally two-storey, with the exception of Terrace F, under tiled roofs with a rendered finish and timber boarded plinths. The fenestration is simple but heavily glazed particularly on the southern elevations.

In addition to the dwellings, the scheme includes a Common House. This is located between terraces A and B. This building is a large multi-functional and flexible space with a footprint of approximately 120m 2. This building will provide a large dining area, kitchen and seating area. The building has a large monopitched sedum roof with roof lights, finished in a mix of render and timber boarding with strong glazed elements to the fenestration. An external covered seating area is proposed to the south, extending the full width of the new Common House, with a community garden to the front of this building facing the River Lune. To the northern elevation, the new Common House will be linked to the existing single story workshops which will be converted to provide family guest accommodation, communal laundry/drying facilities, children’s play room, cycle storage, workshops for cohousing residents and a food store. There is also a charging and parking facility for electric mobility vehicles. The glazed link structure forms part of the main pedestrian street which will run from the western end of the site (adjacent to the Mill Building) to the far eastern end of the site. Within this link structure there will be communal post boxes and resident notice boards. Page 33 There is extensive hard and soft landscaping proposed to form part of the cohousing scheme. This will be discussed later in the report.

2. Development of six 3-bedroom terraced houses on the former Lower Halton Mill (Manager’s House) site; these are excluded from the cohousing community and front the main internal road within the Halton Mills site. These dwellings have one designated parking space per dwelling plus two visitor spaces between them. They are of the same scale, design and finish to the dwellings which form part of the cohousing community but have significantly larger south-facing gardens.

3. Change of use and refurbishment of the existing Mill Building (B2) to mixed use B1/B2/B8 managed workspace. The existing Mill Building will be divided over two floors to provide 1410m 2 internal floor space for commercial/employment uses. This space will be divided into 16 shared facilities, workshops, offices and studio units ranging between 23.8m 2 and 91m 2. The ground floor will consist mainly of the workshops with the offices at first floor. The conversion also incorporates an internal full height courtyard providing informal seating, together with a reception area, meeting rooms, WC’s and cycle storage. The ground floor to this building will also house the biomass boiler which will serve the rest of the cohousing scheme. Alterations to the building to facilitate this conversion involve the replacement of most of the roof with composite insulated steel sheets, replacement windows, minor alterations to a couple of existing openings (window to doors), installation of PV and solar thermal panels and the installation of the biomass flue.

4. Change of use of the ‘Boathouse’ to provide an ancillary area for cohousing residents, changing facilities and training space for canoe clubs, and a space to host educational day visitors to the site; with refurbishment to include re-roofing in reclaimed slate, the replacement of the glass block wall to the north elevation with a traditional window opening, the insertion of a door to the west gable elevation and the construction and installation of a viewing platform over the River Lune.

2.3 In addition to the above elements of the scheme, the proposal also involves a public footpath diversion to the west of the site to allow for the construction of the 6 market houses being proposed (Terrace G). The footpath will simply be diverted along the proposed pavement in front of these dwellings until it meets the original line of path in front of the Mill Building and along the river bank. An additional footpath is proposed as part of this scheme to link to the footpath approved and as part of the Barratt’s permission on the adjacent site.

2.4 The proposal involves some extensive engineering works particularly at the eastern end of the site in order to develop the site at the density proposed and to respond to the existing site contours. Stone gabion walls will form the retaining walls utilising existing materials from the site where possible. Extensive landscaping is also proposed including formation of shared gardens and terraces, coppice woodland, orchard, grassed/shrub planting and allotment gardens.

2.5 The proposal provides hard landscaping and parking provision for all elements of the scheme. There is 15 parking spaces provided for the Mill Building (including mobility spaces), five visitor spaces for the cohousing development, 11 spaces for the cohousing residents, 4 additional mobility spaces and cycle storage for up to 122 cycle spaces scattered across the site both internally and externally. A Residential Travel Plan has also been submitted with the application to justify the reduced level of parking associated with the level of development proposed.

2.6 To support the application a number of supplementary documents have been provided, including a Flood Risk Assessment, Arboricultural Report, Ecological Surveys, Landscape Design & Ecological Enhancement Statement, Open Space Assessment, Development Cost Appraisal, Sustainability Statements, Design & Access Statement, Visual Structural Survey Report, Noise Assessment and Residential Travel Plan.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The Halton Mills site has a very complex planning history however the most relevant relate to the outline planning applications which have been approved for the Lune Engineering premises. The most relevant proposals are listed in the box below: Page 34

Application Number Proposal Decision 01/01128/OUT Outline application for demolition of existing buildings, Permitted erection of industrial units (Classes B1 and B2) and live/work units (Classes C3 and B1), construction of new access, improve road and landscaping 04/00322/FUL Application for the removal of conditions 16, 17 and 18 of Refused and allowed at application no 01/01128/OUTwhich would result in Appeal. changes to the occupation of the buildings on a live/work basis. 04/00528/FUL Variation of condition no.9 on planning application Permitted 01/01128/OUT to permit alternative access arrangements to site 05/00153/OUT Renewal of outline permission for demolition of existing Permitted buildings, erection of industrial units (classes B1 and B2) and live/work units (classes C3 and B1), construction of new access, improve road and landscaping 05/00376/CU Change of use of land to car parking and conversion of Permitted (implemented) disused workshop into offices at freestanding stone known as ‘The Forge’ building (former workshop) 05/00562/REM Erection of two new B1/B2 commercial units Permitted (implemented)

07/00945/CU Amendment to Application no. 05/00562 to allow the use Permitted of the premises for B8 (storage and distribution use) in (implemented) addition to B1/B2 uses 08/00840/REM Reserved matters application for demolition of existing Not determined. buildings, erection of industrial units (B1 and B2) and live/work units (C1 and B1) and construction of new access, improved roads and landscaping

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response County Highways No objections. The following conditions should be imposed:

1. No part of the development hereby approved shall commence until a scheme for the construction of the new footway in front of the terraced property units 30 - 35 has been submitted to, and approved by, the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Highway Authority. 2. Provision of Car Parking 3. Provision of Cycle Storage 4. Implementation of Travel Plan

Advice Notes are required relating to Section 38 Agreements, No obstruction of a right of way and general advice stating that footpaths 1 and 2 cross the site.

Parish Council No objections. The Parish Council are fully supportive of the proposal.

The Parish Council welcomes the lower dwelling heights and reduced density and considers this scheme a significant improvement on the previous applications granted on this site. The re-introduction of employment through the development of the old mill is also most welcome, together with the carbon reduction measures.

County Ecology No objections. The development has the potential to affect the River Lune Biological Heritage Site as such the following conditions are recommended:

Page 35 • The bat mitigation proposals given in section 7.0 of the ecology report will be implemented in full. • Tree felling, vegetation clearance works, demolition work or other works that may affect nesting birds will be avoided between March and July inclusive, unless the absence of nesting birds has been confirmed by inspection. • If the presence of protected species (e.g. bats, otters, badgers, breeding birds) is suspected at any time during construction then works will cease and Natural England/the ecological consultant will be contacted for advice. • No site clearance, site preparation or development work shall take place until details of bird nesting opportunities to be incorporated into the design of the development have been submitted for approval. The approved details will be implemented in full. • No site clearance, site preparation or development work shall take place until a habitat creation/enhancement and management plan has been submitted and approved by Lancaster City Council in consultation with specialist advisors. The approved management plan shall be implemented in full. The plan shall cover, but not be limited to, creation and management of hedgerows, meadows and riverside planting areas. • No site clearance, site preparation or development work shall take place until a woodland habitat management plan (for the BHS woodland) has been submitted and approved by Lancaster City Council in consultation with specialist advisors. The plan shall be informed by a detailed ecological assessment of the existing woodland (part of the BHS). The approved management plan shall be implemented in full. • All trees being retained within or adjacent to the application area will be adequately protected during and after construction. Existing guidelines (i.e. BS5837: 2005 Trees in relation to construction – Recommendations ) on working in proximity to trees should be adhered to. • Himalayan Balsam ( Impatiens glandulifera ) shall be eradicated from the site and working methods shall be adopted to prevent the spread of this species.

The Lune River No objections provided land contamination issues and ecological/biodiversity matters Trust are protected, enhanced and managed.

United Utilities No objections subject to generic advice and the following planning conditions:

• Surface water to discharge into the River (subject to EA) • Foul flows to be restricted to 80litre/head/per day derived from the Code for Sustainable homes.

Environmental No objections in principle but some concerns regarding the B2 use and associated Health Service noise concerns for residents. Notwithstanding this the following conditions have been requested:

• Hours of Construction (0800-1800 Mon-Fri, 0800-1400 Sat, no works on Sundays and Bank Holidays) • Scheme for dust control arising from demolition • Commercial Noise Break-out conditions • Scheme for odour control from cooking and industrial activities? • Hours of use restricted to 0800-1800Monday to Saturday (Mill Building) • Site deliveries 0800-1800 hours Monday – Saturday • Precise details of the biomass boiler (size, chimney height and fuel storage)

The Councils Contaminated Land Officer is satisfied with the investigations carried out and requests the standard contaminated land conditions be imposed (EH13 – EH17).

Environment No objections subject to the following conditions: Agency • Development to be carried out in accordance with the submitted FRA • A Strategy for surface water drainage to be agreed in line with the principles of Page 36 SUDS, including attenuating surface water discharges to greenfield rates as indicated in the submitted FRA. • Prior to commencement a method statement for the removal and/or long-term management/eradication of Japanese Knotweed and Himalayan Balsam.

The EA previously requested a condition for a Contaminated Land Site Investigation and Remediation. A full risk assessment has now been submitted. At the time of compiling this report, the EA have not yet commented on this documentation. Comments shall be verbally presented at the committee meeting.

Lancashire No objections . Advises that the applicants should work towards secured by design Constabulary and recommends a number of design solutions regarding security and defining private and public space. A copy has been forwarded to the agent for consideration.

A landscaping condition requiring details of surface treatment should help achieve the distinction between public and private space and a condition relating to external lighting to ensure and safe and secure environment.

County Archaeology No objections subject to a recording condition.

County Strategic No objections. The site is located on brownfield land and will contribute towards Planning housing provision for the district. It also complies with EM18 of the RSS (now abolished) regarding the requirement for all residential development over 10 dwellings or more to secure 10% of their predicted energy requirements from renewable, low carbon sources. The commercial elements of the scheme are not of strategic importance. Issues of affordable housing to be considered by the LPA.

Lancashire Fire & No objections. Recommendations made in respect of building regulations. No Rescue Service planning issues.

Tree Protection No objections. The proposed tree losses are minimal and are unlikely to have any Officer long term detrimental affect on the amenity of the site. The following conditions have been requested:

• Implementation of Tree Protection Plan; • A detailed Landscape & Maintenance scheme to be submitted; • A detailed Arboricultural Method Statement for all works within the vicinity of trees and where there is minor encroachment into root protection areas to be submitted.

North Lancashire No comments . Bat Group Natural England No objections subject to a Habitat Creation and Enhancement Management Plan being conditioned.

Ramblers No comments to the proposals. The Ramblers Association have indicated that they Association have met with the developer to discuss the changes to the footpaths in this location and at the time had no objections to the diversion or the plans.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 At the time of compiling this report 3 letters of concern/objection have been received. The reasons for opposition are as follows:

• The village does not need more housing • There are vacant houses/flats on this site that should be utilised first before building more • There has already been disastrous building work on the site – the area has been destroyed and looks like a waste ground • Concerns that the boathouse development will increase canoeing on the stretch of river Page 37 between the two weirs which could lead to a loss of bird species • Increase in the use of off-lead dog walking along the river which could be harmful to riparian wildlife.

In addition to the letters of objection received there is also support for the development. To date, 30 letters of support has been received. The following comments have been made:

• Great example of how homes can be built with minimum impact on the environment. Not only because the homes themselves are efficient, but the managed workspaces will provide opportunities for residents (and others) to work close to home. • This development has the potential to become an example of best practice and bring positive publicity to Lancaster and Halton • Innovative approach to tackling social housing and building sustainable communities • The proposal will enhance a rather derelict and untidy riverside area • The proposal would be a key contributor to the local economy • Less traffic and highway issues associated with the development due to its ‘green’ ethos. • The development will enhance existing recreational activities such as dog walking and canoeing • Sends out a strong message for tackling climate change

Two further letters of support have been received from The Halton Lune Hydro Company and The Steering Group of Transition City Lancaster and District.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 The following policies are considered relevant to the proposal:

Lancaster District Core Strategy (LDCS): Policy SC1 (Sustainable Development) seeks to ensure new development proposals are sustainable in terms of both location and design. This policy, albeit a generic overriding policy, states that sites should be previously developed and accessible to public transport, employment, leisure, education and community facilities.

Policy SC3 (Rural Communities) seeks to build healthy sustainable communities by empowering rural communities to develop local vision and identity, identify and need local needs and manage change in the rural economy and landscape. Development should protect, conserve and enhance rural landscapes and the distinctive characteristics of rural settlements.

Policy SC4 (Meeting the Districts Housing Requirements) seeks to manage and control the release of housing sites within the district in order to deliver and meet the housing requirements identified in the RSS.

Policy SC5 (Achieving Quality in Design) seeks to ensure that new development contributes to the positive characteristics of its surroundings and the quality of life of the District by improving the quality of development and promoting good urban design. This policy supports regional and national agendas for raising the profile of good design in spatial planning.

Policy SC6 (Crime and Community) seeks to build sustainable communities by using spatial planning to reduce crime and the fear of crime. In particular, “secure by design” principles should be incorporated into new development.

Policy SC7 (Development & Flood Risk) seeks to built sustainable communities by ensuring that new homes, workplaces and public areas are not exposed to unacceptable levels of flood risk. This policy requires new development proposals to be assessed in accordance with national planning policy PPS25.

Policy ER7 (Renewable Energy) seeks to promote and ensure the integration of renewable energy within new development, subject to acceptable impacts on townscape, landscape and residential amenity.

Policy E1 (Environmental Capital) – its purpose to improve the District’s environment by: Page 38 • protecting and enhancing nature conservation sites and landscapes of national importance, Listed buildings, conservation areas and archaeological sites • minimise the use of land and non-renewable energy • resist development which would have a detrimental effect on environmental quality and properly manage environmental risks such as flooding, • ensuring that development in the city of Lancaster and other historic areas conserves and enhances their sense of place • protect and where possible enhance habitats and the diversity of wildlife species, and conserve and enhance landscape

Policy E2 (Transportation Measures) – development should be focused in sustainable locations and should improve walking and cycle networks.

6.2 Saved policies of the Lancaster District Local Plan (LDLP) :

Policy EC7 (Halton Mills Employment Opportunity Site) identifies this site as one of the most important employment sites in the rural area and states that employment should remain the dominant use. The policy states that proposals for comprehensive employment based mixed-use development including housing and informal recreation will be permitted where it provides expansion for business activity; its removes al problems of dereliction and contamination from the site and would result in a net environmental improvement over the whole site.

Policy H12 (Standards for New dwellings) states that proposals for new housing development will only be permitted which exhibit a high standard of design, layout and landscaping, and which use materials appropriate to, and retain the distinctive local identity of, their surroundings.

Policy H13 (Sustainable Living) – housing development will only be permitted where the council is satisfied that full regard has been taken of energy efficiency, waste reduction and recycling considerations. This policy previously indicated density targets of no less than 30 dwellings per hectare. Government abolished density targets in early June this year.

Policy H21 (Flat development) – proposals for flats must comply with the flats standards set out in appendix 2.

Policy E4 (Countryside Area) – Within the countryside development will only be permitted where it is in scale and keeping with the character and natural beauty of the landscape, is appropriate to its surroundings in terms of siting, scale, design, materials, external appearance and landscaping, would not result in a significant adverse effect on nature conservation or geological interests, and makes satisfactory arrangements for access, servicing, cycle and car parking.

Policy E17 (Sites of County Conservation Importance) development likely to destroy a country biological/geological heritage site will not be permitted unless the need for development demonstrably outweighs the need to protect the site. Where development is permitted appropriate habitat and enhancement measures will be required.

Policy E20 (Re-use of Rural Buildings) states that there is an increasing recognition of the importance of such buildings in providing affordable employment premises in the rural area. The Council’s policy promotes employment use over residential use, but where employment use is unsuitable the conversion of rural buildings for residential purposes may be permitted provided that the proposed development would not result in a major reconstruction, the destruction of important architectural or historic features or the loss of traditional architectural character.

Partially Saved Policy E30 (Green Corridors) seeks to protect and enhance Green Corridors through new planting and landscaping.

Policies E35 (Conservation Areas and their Surroundings) This policy states that development proposals which would adversely affect important views into and across a conservation area or lead to unacceptable erosion of its historic form and layout, open space and townscape setting will not be permitted.

Policy T26 (New Development) states that where development proposals include or lie close to the Page 39 strategic cycle network, the city council will negotiate with developers to improve the networks.

Policy T27 (Development affecting Public Rights of Way) states that development proposals that would adversely affect the route or characteristics of an existing or proposed right of way will only be permitted where a satisfactory diversion can be provided in advance of development. Where new development is close to public rights of way, the City Council will require developers to provide safe and convenient pedestrian and cycle links.

Supplementary Planning Guidance 12 (SPG 12) sets out the Councils design and amenity standards for new residential development.

6.3 In addition to the above local planning policies the following National Planning Policy Statements (PPS) and Planning Policy Guidance (PPG) Notes are relevant:

PPS1 (Sustainable Development), PPS3 (Housing), PPS4 (Planning for Sustainable Economic Development), PPS5 (Planning for the Historic Environment), PPS7 (Development in Rural Areas), PPS9 (Biodiversity and Geological Conservation), PPS22 (Renewable Energy), PPS25 (Development and Flood Risk), PPG24 (Planning & Noise).

6.4 Please note that the Regional Spatial Strategy (and thus the policies contained therein) were formally revoked by the Government earlier this month.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 What is Co-housing?

7.2 Cohousing is a type of ‘intentional community’ which aims to expand the meaning of ‘home’ and ‘community’ in the context of modern housing developments. In more specific and practical terms ‘cohousing’ is a housing development that balances the advantages of home ownership with the benefits of shared common facilities and provides a stronger sense of community with ones neighbours. These co-operative neighbourhoods are designed specifically to encourage both social contact and individual space, and are designed, organised and managed by the residents themselves. Unlike other forms of intentional communities, cohousing offers a new approach to housing rather than a new way of life, and was pioneered in Scandinavia and the United States. Whilst cohousing schemes may vary in scale, ownership structures and design the common characteristics of cohousing developments are as follows:

• Participatory Process : residents organise and participate in the planning and design process of the housing development. • Intentional Neighbourhood Design : the physical design encourages a strong sense of community • Extensive Common Facilities : common spaces and facilities used to supplement private living areas/spaces. • Resident Associations : the residents manage the decisions and the future running and upkeep of the community. This is done so in a very democratic and non-hierarchal manner. The communities intend to be built on trust, respect, friendship and understanding rather than rules and regulations.

Lancaster Cohousing was established by a group of local people committed to initiating and living in a deep ecological cohousing project. The group was registered in April 2006 and since then have worked on finding and securing a site for development. As of March 2010, 22 households have committed to the project, not only in terms of participating in the design process, but also financially committing to the proposal and their vision for their cohousing community.

Page 40 7.3 Cohousing development is not aimed at a specific group of people; it is designed for a range of people; single people, families and elderly alike, on a range of incomes. This is demonstrated in this scheme by the mix of housing offered and the commitment to build to ‘Lifetime Homes’ standards. The social atmosphere and intentional interaction is purposefully designed into the scheme. The Common House for example provides communal dining for residents and childcare. Other common features of the Common House include meetings, gatherings and collecting mail. Post boxes for each dwelling will be located in the glazed link between the common house and adjacent outbuildings. Similar functions are proposed for the boathouse.

7.4 The pedestrian street, which runs through the centre of the site, open communal space and gardens, small private amenity areas an peripheral car parking are all familiar design features in cohousing schemes; as is the close proximity of dwellings to one another.

7.5 Most cohousing developments are primarily residential, although home working and informal trading of skills within the community is common place. In this case Lancaster CoHousing intends to retain and convert the existing Mill Building within the site to provide flexible workspace in the form of workshops and offices. This will be owned by the group but leased to a separate management company, which will be controlled by cohousing residents.

7.6 Planning Considerations & Analysis

The principle issue for Members to consider in determining this application, is the appropriateness of the scheme in land use terms given the employment land allocation in the Local Plan. Other important issues relate to environmental considerations, flood risk, highway implications, design and residential amenity.

7.7 Employment Land Allocation The Lancaster District Local Plan requires that the development of the Halton Mills site be for a mixed commercial and residential use within the existing developed footprint of the site and that the development should be comprehensive. The policy also requires that any development incorporates provision for improvements to the site access, the removal of dereliction and contamination and that employment should remain as the dominant use of the site as a whole.

7.8 The original Halton Mills’ Consortium proposals were relatively comprehensive and comprised a good mix of employment land and residential development. Over time however, a successive number of planning proposals on individual plots within the Halton Mills site have resulted in very complicated ownership and land use proposals, resulting is a disproportionate element of housing being provided on the site. This has previously been a concern to Officer, Members and to the Parish Council.

7.9 The submitted application includes a significant proportion of residential development, but of this residential development there are only six standard market houses proposed. The remaining units form part of the cohousing scheme. The current scheme compares favourably to other previous proposals, in that the cohousing group have committed to retaining the original Mill Building which will be converted to provide 16 workshops/offices creating potential jobs for around 32 people. Six of the units will be available for residents of the cohousing scheme at reduced rents and the remaining units will be available for rent for local businesses and possible businesses located outside the district. It is anticipated that because of the unique nature of the development and its setting, that the cohousing group could quite easily create an ‘eco-business hub’ as part of scheme; attracting a cluster of environmentally-sustainable businesses to the site. This would tie in with the proposed use of the boathouse, which is intended to provide a base for educational visits and workshops for other cohousing groups, government departments and other interested parties who wish to visit the site.

7.10 This would be the first cohousing scheme in Lancashire and would set a benchmark and raise standards for delivering sustainable development in the District. The cohousing concept is unique and goes far beyond the principles of live-work development which has previously been approved on this site. The mix of residential and employment development proposed as part of the scheme is welcomed together with the wider environmental benefits. In this regard, the proposal is considered compliant with the above policy and whilst it does not form a comprehensive proposal for the entire site, it offers a significant boost to the development potential of Halton Mills. The derelict state of the site has been a long-term concern for the Parish Council and local residents. The proposal will not Page 41 only tidy this part of the site up, it will improve public access and provide homes and jobs for local people. If Members are minded to support the scheme, it is hoped that the development of the site, which is envisaged for later in the year with an anticipated move in date of Autumn 2011 (advertised on Lancaster Cohousing website), will encourage adjacent landowners to develop their sites and complete the wider proposals for this area.

7.11 Housing Halton is identified within the Core Strategy as one of the 8 rural settlements within the District allocated to provide 10% of the District’s housing supply. Despite the considerations addressed above in respect of the employment land allocation, there are no objections from a housing supply perspective. The site is within the settlement of Halton with good access to local amenities and public transport. In fact the site could not be more perfectly located for the cohousing group; especially given its proximity to Halton Bridge and the Millennium Cycle Way. With regards to previous consents, there are fewer residential units proposed when compared with the previous outline for live-work units and as such an element of housing on the site has already been established.

7.12 The development proposed is on a scale at which policies within the Lancaster District Local Plan would require a component of affordable housing to be provided. However, given the unique circumstances of this cohousing scheme, there is no scope to provide affordable housing on site. The applicant’s Development Cost Appraisal has been analysed, and demonstrates the financial difficulties the group (as a non-for-profit organisation). In particular the appraisal highlights that the scheme would be in deficit in the region of £840,000. Any additional costs incurred by affordable housing contributions would clearly put the viability of the scheme at risk. This exemplar proposal is not something Officers believe should be resisted on the grounds of no affordable housing provision.

7.13 Environmental Considerations

Because of the nature of the proposal, the environmental considerations are sub-divided into three sections, namely:

1. Sustainable Design 2. Travel/Cycle Opportunities 3. Biodiversity/Ecology

7.14 Sustainable Design Lancaster Cohousing intends to build a community with deep ecological values and to be at the cutting edge of sustainable design and living. The proposal intends to be a zero-carbon development on existing brownfield land with the new buildings designed to meet internationally respected standards and Codes 5 and 6 of the Code for Sustainable Homes.

It should be noted that the project is one of 22 in the UK to be awarded ‘Low Carbon Community’ status by the Department of Energy and Climate Change and has won a £500,000 Low Carbon Community Challenge (LCCC) grant to refurbish the mill building, install new solar panels, and develop a develop a community owned hydro-electric scheme.

This project complies with almost every aspect of Policy SC1 (Sustainable Development). Not only does it propose advanced technical sustainability, it is low impact housing which offers high levels of social interaction and organisation. It is the only proposal of this kind considered by the Council which gives insight into what a truly sustainable community this could be.

The layout and design of the proposal is a response to the specific site considerations, primarily the dramatic linear nature and topography of the plot. The scale, form, design, orientation and use of materials and renewable technologies on all aspects of the scheme, but principally the new dwellings and Common House, have been carefully considered in the participatory design process in order for the scheme to meet the rigorous sustainability standards and to achieve the key principles of cohousing design. In doing this the proposal takes a modern approach to developing the site, whist avoiding typical suburban characteristics (such as dominant road frontages with parking). The development is less formal; a modern interpretation of a village neighbourhood built with the principles of environmental, social and economic sustainability at its core.

In addition to policy SC1, the proposal also supports Policy ER7 (Renewable Energy), Page 42 acknowledging that micro-renewable and energy efficiency are an important aspect in the design and construction of the development; especially for this zero-carbon development. Reports in respect of both Passivhaus and the Code for Sustainable Home standards have been provided with the application and demonstrate that the development can achieve a near zero-carbon development. It should be noted that the Code for Sustainable Homes goes beyond the use of materials, construction and use of renewable; it considers other matters such as surface water run-off, drainage, pollution, health and wellbeing and ecology.

Furthermore, it is proposed that the primary source of electricity for this development will be the proposed hydro scheme at Forge Bank Weir. This proposal is subject to a separate application by a third party organisation set up by the Parish Council. The hydro electricity will be supplemented by roof top PV. It is also anticipated that 29 units along the pedestrian street will use the proposed biomass heating system (to be located in the Mill Building), with only terraces E, F and G heated by gas with one boiler per terrace.

The scheme equally proposes to source sustainable materials, recycle where possible and build in an environmental conscious manner, not to mention manage the cohousing site once completed in an equally sustainable way. There is no doubt that this development meets the sustainable objectives of local and national policy. It is a very exciting and innovative scheme which will be of significant interest to the district and the country.

7.15 Travel/Cycle Opportunities The Lancaster Cohousing Project not only builds sustainable buildings, but supports more environmentally friendly ways of travel. The project endeavours to create a car-free environment within the cohousing area of the scheme. This will be achieved by limiting car ownership in the first instance and implementing and managing a Residents Travel Plan. The Travel Plan seeks to reduce the need to travel; encourage car sharing, bus use and cycling. There will also be regular advertising and promotion of cycle use, particularly given the proximi ty to the Millennium Cycle Way. The amount of car parking is below the normal standards for the level of residential development proposed and is based on one car parking space per three households. Given the unusual style of development and the submission of a Residents Travel Plan which proposes a shared ownership approach to car use, the level of parking proposed is considered adequate. It is clear that cycle use is obviously key to the success of the development with the cycle facilities proposed well in excess of those normally expected. In addition to the residential element of the scheme, the cohousing group also propose to develop a ‘green’ business hub in the Mill Building. The workspaces will be low carbon run on 100% renewables where possible with recycling facilities and cycle storage. Tenants will also have the opportunity to access the proposed car share scheme. In this regard the environmental benefits associated with the proposal are considered exceptional and certainly compliant with both local and national policy in respect of sustainable travel.

7.16 Biodiversity/Ecology The proposal has been considered in accordance with local planning policies E17 of the Local Plan, Policy E1 of the Core Strategy and national Planning Policy Statement 9 (Biodiversity and Geological Conservation). In order to meet the requirements of the above policies, the development must demonstrate that the development would not have an adverse impact on biodiversity and that where impacts are identified mitigation and compensation for the harm or loss must be commensurate. Proposals should enhance the quality and quality of biodiversity and habitat connectively. County Ecology have identified that there would be no undue impacts to the ecology of the area despite some clear changes to the ecological environment as a consequence of the development, such as increased recreational activity, increased built development and increased artificial illumination. Landscaping zones have been identified in the proposal, ranging from grassed slopes, coppice, orchard and native woodlands. Given the proximity to the Biological Heritage Site, County Ecology have requested a number of conditions (listed earlier in the report) which should be imposed to prevent damage to biodiversity and to ensure ecological enhancement and landscaping is carried out in an appropriate manner. Natural England also seek the imposition of a condition requiring a Habitat Creation, Management and Enhancement report to be submitted and agreed prior to development commencing. It should be noted, that the far eastern end of the site will not be developed and will simply be landscaped to provide allotment gardens, which in them selves do not require consent, and native planting in order to support the wildlife in this area. The redevelopment of this brownfield site, which at present is occupied by a number of derelict buildings and hardstanding, would together with the implementation of the proposed landscaping and appropriate woodland and wildlife management, contribute positively to biodiversity in this area. Page 43 7.17 Flood Risk & Drainage In accordance with PPS25 (Development and Flood Risk) a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) has been submitted with the proposal to demonstrate that the proposal, in particular the housing, can be achieved in the knowledge that the development is not at risk of flooding or causes flooding elsewhere. The site lies within Floodzone 3, where the flood risk from rivers and the sea is classified as “high” and as a consequence where ‘more vulnerable’ uses, such as housing, is generally prohibited.

7.18 In order for the residential development to be considered acceptable and to receive maximum credits for the Code for Sustainable Homes, the development needs to be located in Floodzone 1 (low probability of flooding). To achieve this the development has to be carefully designed and engineered to be safe from flooding to a level at least the design of 0.1% Annual Exceedence Probability (AEP) event, which is effectively 12.05m Above Ordnance Datum (AOD) for the upstream extent of the site dropping to 11.55m AOD at the downstream end of the site. The FRA therefore recommends minimum floor levels to be constructed no more than 12.26mAOD at the upper limit of the site and 11.71mAOD at the lower end of the site (near Lower Halton Weir). This design allows for 600mm freeboard above the modelled 1% plus climate change flood level. The FRA also recommends no garden sheds to be sited in the lower part of the site. This can be achieved by condition. The Environment Agency has been consulted and raises no objections to the proposed development, provided the development is carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the submitted FRA. The boathouse remains in floodzone 3, however the use of the boathouse for educational visits, training and changing for the canoe clubs and ancillary space for residents can be regarded as a less vulnerable uses and does not raise significant concerns from a flood risk point of view. The ancillary accommodation will not be used for sleeping – simple a space for activities to be carried out (play/office space). By way of mitigation, the proposed viewing platform is intended to be constructed above finished floor level (in case of emergency access) with keyholders of the building subscribed to the EA warning systems.

7.19 In terms of drainage, although the site is considered “brownfield” the design philosophy of the development is to produce an environmental sustainable housing solution and as such the development has been designed to restrict run-off to greenfield rates. As a consequence of the hardstanding proposed to construct the site and the nature of the site (topography and linear form) it is likely that attenuation of surface water will be required. This will be provided is large oversized pipes which run the length of the pedestrian street. A flow restricting value will be located at the point of discharge into the River Lune to comply with Greenfield run-off rates.

7.20 The submitted Civil & Structural Design Statement sates that there will be separate foul and surface water drainage systems within the curtilage of the site. Foul drainage will be connected from the houses to a new pumping station for level connection into the existing rising main at the western end of the site. An application for connection to the UU sewer has been made and accepted for foul water only, subject to a limit of 9000 litres per day. Notwithstanding this, sewage discharges will be exceptionally low due to the 80 litres/person/day Code for Sustainable Homes requirement, which will be met through water saving measures. United Utilities have raised no objections to the development.

7.21 In addition to the above, the proposed landscaping, sedum roof common house and grass track all help to reduce and manage surface water run-off. Subject to conditions for the precise details of surface water drainage and the implementation of the FRA the development is considered acceptable from a planning point of view.

Page 44 7.22 Highway Implications The development of this site will inevitably result in the generation of increased traffic flows on Low Road. Some traffic will inevitably use the Caton Bridge and Denny Beck Lane. However any increase in traffic will be relatively small in relation to that already generated by the existing village and what could have been generated by the implementation of previous schemes on the site. The proposal is of much smaller scale and significantly more eco-conscious, with one of the key principles of the development aimed at reducing the need to travel by private car. Adequate parking has been provided for the proposed Mill Building, with 15 allocated spaces for 16 workshops, bearing in mind six of these workshops are intended to be available for cohousing residents. The road around the Mill Building has been adapted to ensure adequate space for service vehicles. County Highways have raised no objections to this internal road layout.

Parking for the cohousing dwellings has been discussed at paragraph 7.15. To clarify the level of parking proposed for the cohousing and the 6 market houses has been accepted by County Highways with the developing raising raises no highway safety concerns. There are also no concerns about the means of access off Low Road or the internal road layout indicated on the proposed site plans.

The development as a whole would normally fall above the threshold for a developer contribution to transport, however County Highways are satisfied that in this instance a contribution would not be required. They consider the scheme a “one-off” style of development which promotes alternative modes of transport and backs this aspiration up with a robust Travel Plan.

7.23 Design & Amenity The riverside location, the site topography and the ecological values of the scheme have determined the scale, layout and design of the scheme. In this regard consideration has been paid to the impact of the development on this setting of this important riverside location, its impact on adjoining land uses and buildings and its proximity to the AONB and the Conservation Area. These polices generally seek to ensure development is in keeping and in scale with the character and appearance of the area and its setting. The proposed development is of a lower density to that previously approved on the site and generally no higher than two-story. This allows the development to sit comfortably on this sloping site and prevents the proposed dwellings appearing overbearing and out of proportion with surrounding buildings and the rural setting, especially when viewed from over the river. It also means that the existing Mill Building remains a dominant architectural and historic feature on the site. The proposed materials are simple and the detailing not overly complicated, reflecting neighbouring developments. Their modern design with large areas of glazing and balconies makes the most of the riverside location and would not have an inappropriate impact on the visual amenities of the area. There are no conservation or design objections to the proposal from Officers.

7.24 The design of the common house is equally innovative. Its design, form and appearance create a focal point within the site and additionally helps break up the built form of rows of terraces fronting the River Lune. Alterations to the Mill Building and the Boat House are considered acceptable from a planning point of view, provided precise details are conditioned. The renovation to the Mill Building will be an enhancement to the site and will retain part of the sites heritage as a former industrial site dating back to the 18 th Century.

Page 45 7.25 Policy H12, H21 and SPG12 relate to new standards of residential development. These policies provide a set of criteria which are aimed to ensure new development is of an acceptable quality and provides an appropriate level of accommodation and residential amenity. Although the design embodies most of the aims of SPG 12 there are some key areas where the desired outcomes for general needs housing and cohousing differ significantly. The principle parameters include minimum separation standards, minimum amenity space standards (gardens) and room sizes all of which are designed to protect occupiers from overlooking and loss of privacy. The development proposed has been designed in line with best practice from cohousing developments around the world, and in particular the two projects in the UK; Springhill, Stroud and Laughton Lodge, Lewes. The proposed scheme provides each ‘cohousing’ dwelling with 2m deep south facing terraces or balconies as their only areas for private space. This limited private space is compensated with considerable informal open space within the site. Subject to the submission and agreement of a signed Unilateral Undertaking to ensure that the cohousing dwellings will only be occupied by Members of the Lancaster Co-housing Residents Association, the design and amenity standards proposed can be considered acceptable from a planning point of view due to the exceptional circumstances of this case and the overall concept of cohousing.

The design and layout of the proposed six dwellings (non co-housing) are considered acceptable and compliant with the above policies. The occupation of these dwellings does not need to form part of the Unilateral Undertaking.

7.26 Other Matters

Public Rights of Way The proposal respects the existing rights of way across the site and allows for the enhancement of the northern bank of the Lune. There is a minor diversion to the northern footpath which needs to be relocated to accommodate 6 of the proposed dwellinghouses (non cohousing dwellings). This raises no significant issues. The Rambles Association have raised no objections to this.

7.27 Contamination Issues A full and comprehensive risk assessment for land contamination has been undertaken and considered as part of the submitted proposal. This has been accepted by the Council’s Contaminated Land Officer subject to the standard contaminated land conditions. A response from the Environment Agency regarding the updated report is due to be submitted before committee meeting.

7.28 Noise Issues One of the fundamental concerns associated with mixed use schemes is the relationship to one another. Where commercial operations are proposed, such as B1, B2 and B8 uses, close to residential properties there are likely to be some concerns in respect of noise and disturbance. In this case, there are three commercial elements. Two of these three units are outside the applicant’s ownership, namely ‘The Forge’ and ‘Out of the Woods’. The first is an office based use located some distance from the nearest residential unit and as such raises no significant issues. ‘Out of the Woods’ is a general industrial use (joiner’s workshop) and is considerably closer to proposed Terrace F, in fact it literally abuts the terrace. A Noise Assessment has been carried out in accordance with PPS24 (Planning & Noise). This concludes that noise impacts are unlikely to result in complaints and whilst noise from the workshop is audible is could not be described as loud. No mitigation measures are proposed in this instance. In addition to this workshop, the proposal also involves B1, B2 and B8 uses in the Mill Building. The Mill Building is within 10.2m of the west gable elevation of Terrace A and approximately 20m to the eastern elevation of Terrace G. To safeguard the amenities of future residents, conditions have been requested by Environmental Health to restrict the hours of operation of the B2 uses in the Mill Building and hours of deliveries, as noted in the consultation section of this report. It is noted that the Mill Building intends to remain in the ownership of the Co-housing group but leased out to a separated Management company which will managed by residents of the group. Discussions are on going as to whether the ownership and management of the Mill Building should be covered by the Unilateral Undertaking to prevent unneighbourly industrial uses occupying this building, which have not be ‘vetted’ by the residents themselves, and may have an impact on residential amenity. Notwithstanding this, the cohousing residents have been involved in the design of the scheme and clearly acknowledge the close proximity of the workshop units to residential dwellings. The outcome and conclusion of this will be verbally presented at committee.

Page 46 7.29 Trees The proposal involves minimal tree losses, with only 4 individual trees and 4 groups of trees with the vast majority of trees to be retained and protected. A landscape design has been proposed with their species, location and use of trees and planting both appropriate and well planned. Notwithstanding this, precise details of the landscaping scheme and maintenance regime need to be conditioned together with the submission of an appropriate arboricultural method statement where works are proposed in close proximity of existing trees and their roof protection zones.

7.30 Open Space & Landscaping The concept of cohousing is to supplement pirate amenity space with open space. The scheme provides an abundance of open space throughout the site which will be provided, managed and maintained by the cohousing group. The site provides a hierarchy of play space with the needs of the younger children met closest to the Common House. The pedestrian street also provides an important area of informal space for both children and adults.

The open space throughout the site is very informal and whilst the amount of space is more than adequate to comply with the Council’s policy of open space provision, the physical appearance and long term management of the space will be left to the Cohousing group. This too may need to be tied into the Unilateral Undertaking. Offices are seeking legal clarification on this matter and will report the outcome verbally to Members at the committee meeting.

The main objectives of the landscaping is to restore a pleasant environment for residents and visitors; provide colour and interest; create new habitats and enhance existing habitats; accommodate horticulture; soften hard landscaping; demonstrate sustainable design and; foster pride and ownership of the whole site so that the landscape is maintained and enhanced in perpetuity. The landscaping and open spaces range from lawn gardens and terraces, allotment gardens to riverside woodlands, meadows and coppice. An informal picnic area below the exposed rock face at the east end of the site, near the fire appliance turning area, is proposed and will provide an area for residents and the public to enjoy. Given this enhancement to an existing recreation area, the approach is considered acceptable.

This is not the standard approach to dealing with open space, however as noted earlier in the report, the cohousing group would not be in a position to provide more formal public open space provision or provide contributions (commuted sums) towards public open space due to the fragile viability of the scheme. In this case, provided the landscaping and open space can be provided and maintained in perpetuity, preferably by way of a legal agreement (UU), there are no objections to this less conventional approach to landscaping and open space.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 As noted above, a development of this scale is generally required to contribute towards highway infrastructure and the provision of affordable housing. In this case, Officers and statutory consultees have accepted the unique circumstances of the case and accept that the financial implications associated with the above requests could affect the overall viability of the scheme. As such Members are advised that the environmental benefits and exemplary form of development proposed outweigh the need for contributions in this instance.

8.2 Notwithstanding the above, if members are minded to approve the development, a Unilateral Undertaking is required. A draft agreement has been provided which states the following:

• The developer shall establish a cohousing residents association terms of occupation which shall be agreed with the Local Planning Authority. • Each transfer lease or other disposal of a Residential Unit (except units 30-35) must be members of the Residents Association. • Implement the Travel Plan and ensure each transfer lease or other disposal shall require the transferee not to park between the hours of 11pm and 8am any vehicle of his/hers or otherwise on any road within a radius of 2km of the site; Parking spaces indicated on the site plan as car sharing spaces not to be used fro parking of other vehicles other than shard vehicles; Parking spaces indicated on the site as special needs spaces only t be used by specified members of the Residents Association.

Page 47 Officers are working with the developer to ensure the legal agreement is appropriately worded to ensure appropriate control and management of the future habitation of the cohousing dwellings, including car ownership and usage.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 There are clearly a number of considerations to be taken into account, but the principle one relates to the appropriateness of this mixed use scheme in this location. The project will be a cutting edge example of sustainable design and living. It will act as a catalyst and inspiration for significant improvements in the sustainability of new development, and will have close links to Halton and the wider community. The project is one of 22 in the UK awarded ‘Low Carbon Community’ status by the Department of Energy and Climate Change and is expected to be carbon neutral and gain both Passivhaus certification and Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH) certification at Levels 5 and 6 (the Government’s highest levels). This form of development in the district not only provides intrinsically linked employment and residential development, it will raise awareness of environmental issues and the importance of delivering sustainable communities. Based on the above considerations and subject to the submission and agreement of a Unilateral Undertaking, Members are strongly advised that this development should be supported.

Recommendation

That subject to the signing of a Unilateral Agreement, Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard Time Limit 2. Development to be carried out in accordance with the approved plans 3. Development to be carried out in accordance with the amended plans (7 June 2010) 4 External material sample panel for the new dwellings to be provided 5. Precise details of the windows, doors, balconies and rooflights to be provided and agreed in respect of the new housing 6. Precise details of the roof (eaves, verge, ridge) to be submitted and agreed in respect of the new housing 7 Details of the new windows, doors, viewing platform and roofing systems (including samples) to the boathouse and Mill Building to be agreed 8 Tree Protection condition 9 Landscaping and maintenance conditions 10 Submission of an Arboricultural Method Statement 11 Bat mitigation to be implemented in full 12 Submission of a Habitat Creation/Enhancement Management Plan 13 Submission of a woodland habitat management plan 14 A method statement for the removal of/or long term management/eradication of Japanese Knotweed and Himalayan Balsam to be submitted 15 Archaeological Recording Condition 16 Use of the Mill Building – no subdivision. 17 Use of the boathouse – as applied for and ancillary to the cohousing scheme (no overnight accommodation) 18 Use of residential Units (except units 30-35) to be used in association with the cohousing scheme 19 Scheme for odour control (the premises shall not be used for cooking or food preparation until a scheme for odour control has been submitted – rather than prior to commencement) 20 Scheme for odour control (the premises shall not be used for operations capable of producing odours beyond the boundaries of the premises until a scheme for odour control has been submitted – rather than prior to commencement related to industrial activities). 21 Restriction of operation hours to the B2 uses within the Mill Building to 08.00 – 18.00 Monday- Saturday. 22 Hours of construction condition 0800-1800 Mon- Fri 0800-1400 on Sat, no works Sun and Bank Holidays. 23 Scheme of dust control from demolition (no dwellings to be affected – is this necessary) 24 Site deliveries restricted to 08.00-18.00 Monday- Saturday. 25 Precise details of the biomass boiler, solar thermal and PV panels 26 Details of all external lighting to be submitted and approved 27 EH13-EH17 standard land contamination conditions 28 Development to be carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the submitted FRA. Page 48 29 No development to commence until details of a scheme for surface water drainage has been submitted 30 A scheme for the construction of the new footway to the front of units 30-35 to be submitted 31 Provision of car parking 32 Provision of cycle parking and storage as indicated on the approved plans 33 Implementation of the Travel Plan 34 Mill Lane footway to be provided in front of units 30-35 35 Site construction traffic to use Low Road/Forge Lane not Station Road/Mill Lane 36 Permitted Development rights removed to all dwellings. 37 No sheds, buildings, enclosures to be erected on the areas of open space fronting the River Lune or the allotment gardens within prior consent.

Human Rights Act

This recommendation has been reached after consideration of the provisions of The Human Rights Act. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the issues arising do not appear to be of such magnitude to override the responsibility of the City Council to regulate land use for the benefit of the community as a whole, in accordance with national law.

Background Papers

None.

Page 49 AgendaAgenda Item Item 11 Committee Date Application Number

A11 26 July 2010 10/00230/FUL

Application Site Proposal

Ellel House Alterations and extension to create a two-storey 29 bed nursing home with 21 assisted living apartments Chapel Lane

Galgate

Lancaster

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr J Ayrton Mr Anthony Hills

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

6 May 2010 Committee Cycle

Case Officer Petra Williams

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Refusal

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The site that forms the subject of this application is a Grade II listed building which is situated within a 0.48 hectare plot between St John’s Church and Galgate Mill on Chapel Lane in the village of Galgate. The two storey building has 29 no. rooms and the grounds which extend 68m to east of the rear elevation of the property are significantly overgrown. The property is currently vacant and following its last occupation in 2004 has subsequently fallen into a serious state of disrepair due to neglect, vandalism, arson attempts and theft of lead from the roof which has led to rain water ingress. The exterior white rendered walls show signs of decay with areas of rubble stone walling visible in parts. The roof is slated and the timber, sash windows have a vertical emphasis with bay features to the front elevation.

1.2 The main core of the village is situated to the south of the site with the main shops, services and bus route being within a short walking distance. Chapel Lane runs north-east from the site with residential properties dotted sporadically along its route. To the immediate south of the site lies the Grade II listed Galgate Mill which comprises small industrial units and an associated parking area. The building to the immediate north of the site is the Grade II listed St John’s Church which also has an associated parking area.

1.3 The village is within a Countryside Area as designated on the Lancaster District Local Plan proposals map. There are mature trees established to the side and rear of the existing building that are subject to Tree Preservation Order (No. 1 (1974) Ellel House, Galgate), and as such they are protected in law. Land levels rise beyond the eastern boundaries of the site which is open countryside.

Page 50 2.0 The Proposal

2.1 Ellel House itself was originally a residential property but was last in use as a nursing home. The application retains the last use of the site and involves alterations to the existing building and an extension to create a two-storey 29 bed nursing home with 21 assisted living apartments. The scheme will involve the restoration of the existing property and the site to the rear of the building.

2.2 The building shows signs of neglect and vandalism with window and door frames of the property in poor condition and lead removed from the roof. Extensive internal and external repair and refurbishments will be necessary in order to bring the listed building back into use. Refurbishments will include the insertion of new timber window and door frames, the making good of exterior walls, the repair of the slate roof and the renewal of lead guttering. Internally the works will include the removal of some non-original partition walls, making good of plaster cornices and the retention of timber floors. As part of the scheme an outhouse to the north west elevation of the house will be demolished. It is envisaged that the extent of the removal of defective render could be considerable. The plans propose the removal of the porch additions which are not original features of the property. The existing sash and case windows will be retained where possible and replacement windows will be like for like. Where possible the existing roofing slates shall be reused, however this will depend on their condition and any replacement slate would match the existing slates. The renewal of the lead roll ridges and hips and gutter linings is also proposed. All replacement rainwater goods to the existing building will be conditioned cast iron with a paint finish.

2.3 The land around the property which would have historically been laid out as a formal garden also shows signs of neglect and is significantly overgrown. There is a mature Beech tree to the northern end of the building and various smaller trees dotted around the site. However many of these trees are in close proximity to one another and this has resulted in their development being suppressed. In order to accommodate the scheme 20 trees will be removed and although replacement planting is proposed, a landscape scheme has not been submitted but could be the subject of a condition.

2.4 The existing house will be renovated and developed to provide four double bedroomed assisted living units as well as visitor accommodation, lounge and laundry, ancillary toilets and utility areas. A key part of the proposal also involves the development of the site to the rear of (and attached to) the listed building. This aspect of the scheme represents a significant extension and will utilise the majority of the plot behind the listed building. The two storey extension will incorporate a further 17 assisted living apartments and 29 single ensuite bedrooms which will form part of the nursing home aspect of the scheme. Other facilities associated with the nursing home such as communal lounge/dining room, treatment rooms, reception meeting areas and mobility bathrooms will also be incorporated into the extension.

2.5 Of the 20 trees to be removed, a number of these have relatively low value. The proposals by and large include the retention and protection of the most visually important trees/beech hedgerow to the front, and to the side of the existing building and the retention and protection of a large, mature beech tree immediately to the north of the existing dwelling.

2.6 The remaining landscaping of the site will include a tree screen to the southern boundary with a grassed area around the exterior of the new development. The existing driveway will be altered and extended to facilitate on site car parking for 26 vehicles. An internal courtyard shown on amended plans will provide a communal amenity space for residents.

3.0 Site History

3.1 Although originally built as a gentleman’s residence the property has had a varied planning history over the last 30 years.

Application Number Proposal Decision 79/00905/HST Conversion of student flats and bedsits into hotel and Permitted restaurant. 80/01517/HST Change of use from house to old peoples home. Permitted

88/00239/HST Erection of 19 bedroom extension to nursing home Refused (Appeal Page 51 Dismissed) 88/00240/HST Erection of 19 bedroom extension to nursing home – not Permitted implemented

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response Strategic Housing The number of assisted living units proposed triggers the threshold for affordable housing. Therefore more information or evidence of a financial appraisal is required in order to demonstrate why the normal percentage of 40% on site affordable housing cannot be achieved.

If the scheme is approved properties should be built to Lifetime Homes Standard along with the Code for Sustainable Homes relevant at the time of the development.

County Highways Requests a highway contribution of £6,000 for general highway improvements in the vicinity and also recommends that the developer is required to carry out footway improvements along the site frontage as part of any planning permission. Other standard conditions relate to: Provision of Car Parking Areas; Mobility Car Parking Spaces; Cycle storage details to be agreed; Protection of visibility splays site frontage.

Environment Recommend that a sustainable drainage system (SUDS) is considered. Details of Agency drainage to be conditioned.

County Ecologist Following receipt of further information the consultant has evaluated the potential for great crested newts and concluded that there is a low likelihood of newts being present within the application area. Impacts upon European Protected Species thus seem unlikely.

Tree Protection Provision must be made for new planting within and around the boundaries of the site Officer in part to mitigate the proposed tree losses and contribute to the greening and screening of the site and to contribute to the amenity of the wider area. Trees should be replaced at a ratio of 3:1 (3 x new trees for each removed). A landscape proposal has not been submitted but could be covered by condition.

United Utilities This site must be drained on a separate system.

Access Officer Advice given regarding internal layout (these comments were subsequently taken on board in drafting amended plans).

County Travel Plan As this development falls below recommended thresholds there is no requirement for Co-ordinator a Travel Plan and therefore no request is made in this respect.

Conservation The Conservation Officer has been involved in pre-application discussions with the agent regarding this 'At Risk' grade II listed building. Key comments:

• The prospect of a development scheme which includes a full restoration of the house has so far prevented the present owners being issued with a formal Urgent Works Notice. • Satisfied with building recording report. • Whilst this development does impact on the listed house in terms of the scale of the roof it does provide a solution that provides an economic future for the listed building. • Satisfied with design and proposed materials- details could be covered by condition.

Page 52 Parish Council No specific observations to make about the plans but would like to see the refurbishment incorporate footpaths in the vicinity of the development.

North Lancs Bat No comments received within consultation timescale. Any comments subsequently Group received will be reported verbally.

County The submitted building record is considered to be more than adequate and Archaeologist consequently LCAS does not see any need for any further archaeological work on this site.

Environmental Environmental Health Services recommends refusal as no desk study has been Health submitted as required by Planning Policy Statement 23 - Planning and Pollution Control.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 One member of the public suggested that the site be used for the development of local authority housing.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 National Planning Policy Statements and Policy Guidance –

Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS1 - Delivering Sustainable Development) - sets out the overarching planning policies on the delivery of sustainable development, advocating high quality design, accessibility to services and facilities, reducing the need to travel, inclusiveness, efficient use of land and improvements and enhancing biodiversity and landscape character.

6.2 Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3 - Housing) – seeks to ensure that housing is developed in suitable locations which are easily accessible, well connected to public transport or other means of transport other than the private car and offers a good range of community facilities.

6.3 Planning Policy Statement 4 (PPS4 - Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth) - seeks to ensure that the countryside is protected for the sake of its intrinsic character and beauty, the diversity of its landscapes, heritage and wildlife, the wealth of its natural resources and to ensure it may be enjoyed by all. Furthermore this document advocates that most new development should be located in or on the edge of existing settlements where employment, housing (including affordable housing), services and other facilities can be provided close together.

6.4 Planning Policy Statement 5 (PPS5 - Planning for the Historic Environment) - outlines the Government’s overarching aim for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment and its heritage and states that in considering the impact of a proposal on any heritage asset,(e.g. listed building) local planning authorities should take into account the particular nature of the heritage asset.

6.5 Planning Policy Statement 7 (PPS7 - Sustainable Development in Rural Areas) establishes the Government’s objectives for rural areas and reiterates that d ecisions relating to development proposals should be based on sustainable development principles and ensures effective protection of the environment.

6.6 Planning Policy Guidance 13 (PPG13 - Transport) Promotes sustainable transport choices and accessibility to jobs, retail and leisure facilities by the public.

6.7 Lancaster District Core Strategy –adopted July 2008

Policy SC1 (Sustainable Development) seeks to ensure that new development proposals are as sustainable as possible; in that it is convenient to walk, cycle and travel by public transport; the site is previously developed and is well integrated into the landscape and where appropriate enhances biodiversity.

Page 53

6.8 Policy SC3 lists Galgate as one of the eight key villages where an allowance of 10% of new homes and 5% of employment is made to accommodate development to meet local needs.

6.9 Policy SC5 - Achieving Quality in Design – This policy seeks to ensure that new development contributes to the positive characteristics of its surroundings and the quality of life of the District by improving the quality of development and promoting good urban design.

6.10 Policy E1 –Environmental Capital – refers to the importance of conserving and enhancing the built heritage and minimising the adverse effects of development on such assets.

6.11 Policy E2 – Transportation measures – Highlights transport as a key priority and advocates that major developments should be resisted in car dependent locations.

6.12 Lancaster District Local Plan adopted April 2004 (saved policies)

Policy E4– Relates to development within the Countryside Area and states that development will only be permitted where it is appropriate to its surroundings and has no adverse effect on nature conservation.

6.13 Policy E33 – Relates to proposals involving external and internal alterations to listed buildings and advocates that new extensions should be sympathetic in scale, materials and position.

6.14 Policy H19 – New residential development within existing housing areas should provide a high standard of amenity, make satisfactory car parking arrangements and not impact unduly on neighbouring residential amenities.

6.15 Supplementary Planning guidance Note 12 : (SPG12) The Residential Design Code offers general guidance and design principles.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The Heritage Asset

The Government’s overarching aims for the historic environment are set out in PPS5 which advocates that heritage assets (which includes listed buildings) should be conserved and enjoyed for the quality of life they bring to this and future generations. To achieve this, the Government’s objectives for development relating to heritage assets is that it should recognise that heritage assets are a non-renewable resource and take account of the wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits of the conservation of the heritage asset. PPS5 also states that wherever possible, heritage assets should be put to an appropriate and viable use that is consistent with their conservation and the positive contribution of such heritage assets to local character and sense of place should be recognised and valued.

7.2 The application states that the house has been marketed but it is not ideally suited to be reinstated as a large residential house due to its proximity to neighbouring industrial units and uses within the adjacent Galgate Mill site which are considered unsightly and unneighbourly. The deterioration of the building over recent years has prompted the Conservation Officer to consider serving an Urgent Works Notice on the owners. However the prospect of the renovation of the building as part of this scheme has temporarily alleviated the concerns of the Conservation Officer.

7.3 Impact of the Proposal on the Heritage Asset

Although the restoration of the existing listed building is much needed and is seen as a key benefit of the scheme, the development of the plot immediately to the rear of the building raises significant concerns with regard to the overdevelopment of the site, as the scale of the new build is dominant in relation to the listed building to which it will be attached. The new build will occupy the majority of the plot to the rear of the existing building leaving a border of 5 metres between the development and the site boundary. The new build will be over three times the size of the existing building and as a result the proposal will have an adverse and dominant impact on the setting of the heritage asset.

Page 54 7.4 There are also the neighbouring listed buildings to consider and the development will have an adverse impact on the setting of these heritage assets due to its size and massing. The church will overlook the northern elevation of the new development which is considered incongruous in relation to the adjacent listed church and mill. Although there is limited tree screening between the church and the application site it is envisaged that the northern approach to the site along Chapel Lane will afford some limited views of the two together. PPS5 acknowledges that development within the setting of a heritage asset can harm the asset's significance. The development proposed will be detrimental to the setting of the two neighbouring heritage assets. This argument may be countered to some degree by the current condition of the site around Galgate Mill to the south which houses a number of industrial and storage uses. Despite this, the view held is that the proposed new development would be adversely affect the setting of the listed church and mill buildings.

7.5 The renovation of the building is considered to be not just preferable, but a more sustainable alternative than demolition. Policy HE1 of PPS5 advocates the re-use and where appropriate the modification of the heritage asset in order to secure sustainable development. By permitting development which keeps the heritage asset in use, it avoids the consumption of building materials and generation of waste from the construction of replacement buildings. However this benefit is significantly outweighed by the amount of construction which is proposed on the remainder of the site.

7.6 Public Benefit of the Proposal

PPS5 states that where a proposal has a harmful impact on the significance of a heritage asset local planning authorities should weigh the public benefits against the harm, and that the greater the harm the more justification is required for the proposed development. This derelict listed building has in recent years been a focus for vandalism and anti-social behaviour and the restoration and re-use of the property is likely to end this situation which would be of benefit to residents in the vicinity. Furthermore the application states that the completed development would provide 30 full time and 10 part time jobs. There is, therefore, some recognisable public benefit arising from the proposal.

7.7 Enabling Development

PPS5 refers to enabling development as the means of securing the long-term future of a heritage asset when conservation through development in compliance with policy cannot do so. Local planning authorities are required to assess whether the benefits of an application for enabling development to secure the future conservation of a heritage asset outweigh the ‘disbenefits’. In doing this the local planning authority will take into account whether:

• A proposal will materially harm the significance of the heritage asset or setting; • It will avoid detrimental fragmentation of the management of the heritage asset; • It will secure a long term future for the heritage asset; • It is necessary to resolve problems arising from the inherent needs of the heritage asset, as opposed to the circumstances of the owner or purchase price paid; and • The level of development is the minimum necessary to secure the future conservation of the heritage asset and of a design and type that minimises harm to other public interests.

7.8 In order to allow the local planning authority to make an assessment the applicant is required to demonstrate what the minimum level of development is to secure the future conservation of the heritage asset. This is done via the submission of a financial appraisal so that the local planning authority is able to make a balanced judgement on the scale of the development proposed. A financial appraisal has now been submitted in which the applicant defends the scale of the proposed development as they would not be able to financially break-even if the scale of the development was reduced below that proposed due to the poor state of repair of the building. It is estimated that the likely costs of refurbishments of the building fabric including internal and external repairs such as replacement lead work and timber frames will be between £500,000 and £750,000. It is concluded by the applicant that 17 new Assisted Living Units are required to show a small return and that less than 17 new Assisted Living Units would result in a loss.

Page 55 7.9 The financial appraisal has been assessed by City Council Officers. The purchase price plus the repair and refurbishment costs (to the listed building) and site clearance works (to the garden areas) exceeds the site’s value. This means that, in our opinion, the purchase price does not reflect the condition of the listed building and its curtilage. The purchase price would appear to be unrealistically high given the costs of repair and the property’s appeal, given its proximity to the commercial Mill buildings. To recover the large financial outlay of the purchase price, the applicant would need to provide additional units/bedrooms. A more realistic purchase price would mean the number of units/bedrooms could be reduced, thereby reducing the scheme’s scale. No evidence has been put forward indicating that other funding sources have been explored to support the heritage asset that would negate the need for enabling development.

7.10 It is therefore concluded that the level of development necessary to secure the future conservation of the heritage asset should be significantly less than that proposed in this application.

7.11 Refurbishment of Existing Building

The application proposes significant improvements to the fabric of the property through the repair and refurbishments of the existing building whilst retaining the general layout. The replacement external render along with other materials and finishes would be controlled by condition. The proposed refurbishment of the listed building is considered as being much needed and appropriate with this view being supported by the Conservation Officer. Although this is a positive aspect of the scheme it must be balanced with the effects of the new development to the rear of the site.

7.12 Design of the New Build

The new development will extend to cover the majority of the site to the rear of the existing building and will incorporate a number of projecting bays, with a mix of hipped and pitched roofs to the northern elevation and hipped roof projections to the eastern and southern elevations. It is our view therefore that the design of the new build lacks consistency in terms of its form and appearance. Critically, the main roofline will be higher than the existing building which is an indication of the dominance of the new development. The development will connect to the listed building at the southern end of the rear elevation and extend towards the rear of the site along the southern boundary. The point at which the existing and new elements connect will be punctuated by a narrow projecting pitched roof gable which is considered as unsympathetic in relation to the listed building.

Aside from the PPS5 concerns in this regard, it can be argued that the proposal fails to adhere to the design principles advocated by PPS1, which seeks to ensure high quality development.

7.13 The new development will have rendered wall finishes, but the Conservation Officer has requested that consideration should be given to the provision of linings to simulate ashlar walling to the facades that can be seen in conjunction with the listed building. This was thought to be unsuitable by the agent and therefore not included in amended plans. Precast door and window surrounds are proposed and white timber window frames will be incorporated into the scheme. Plans also indicate the use of natural slate roofing, aluminium gutters and similar rainwater goods which are considered acceptable. Notwithstanding this, the design, size and scale of the development and the mix of hips and gable roofs - including their differing heights and widths - are unsatisfactory and do not create a visually-pleasing arrangement. The revisions to the original submission still do not address the design concerns raised with the applicant. These concerns are echoed by comments submitted by the Ancient Monuments Society on the accompanying application for Listed Building Consent. They refer to the proposed new development as a “vast, bland box” and that the “listed building becomes a mere adjunct to a vast newcomer”. We concur with this view and have concluded that the scheme fails to adhere to the advice contained in PPS5.

7.14 Site Layout

Section 2 of this report explains the scale of the proposal, and paragraphs 7.7-7.9 refers to the enabling development proposed. Drawing this together, despite its currently neglected state, the property currently enjoys a detached setting within relatively extensive grounds. However the layout proposed is, by virtue of its sheer footprint and orientation, overwhelming. When combined with the proposed car parking areas, and the general loss of landscape surrounding the building, the cumulative impact is both significant and negative.

Page 56 7.15 Tree Protection/Landscaping

The main amenity space for residents will be a courtyard created within the development to the rear of the site. The courtyard will be designed as a sensory garden with a gated access for maintenance. The development proposal includes the removal of 20x trees in order to accommodate the development and the removal of an additional 4x trees in the interest of good arboriculture practice. The proposals include the retention and protection of the most visually important Beech tree to the northern side of the existing property and the development has been designed to protect the root system of this tree. A Beech hedgerow to the front of the site will be trimmed back and maintained at a height of 1 metre. Although the existing site is overgrown and untidy the planting within it does contribute to the greening of the surrounding environment. It is the local planning authority’s adopted practice to request replacement tree planting at a ratio of 3:1 which would require the planting of 60 trees in this case. However, given the level of development proposed within the site it is difficult to ascertain how this amount of planting could be achieved as a landscape proposal has not been submitted but could be conditioned.

7.16 Highways

The plans propose 26 car spaces mainly to the front and side of the existing building, which would be allocated on the basis of 1 space per assisted living unit with the balance of 5 spaces for use by the nursing home, which is reasonable in highway terms. 5 cycle parking spaces are also included in the scheme which would appear to accord with P PG13 in promoting sustainable transport choices. Staff shower and changing facilities are not included within the scheme. However, although the property is within a short walking distance of a bus route, visitors and employees may still be reliant on private motor vehicles, thus resulting in increased pressure on the limited on-site car parking provision and therefore putting undue pressure on the neighbouring car park at the adjacent mill. Nevertheless the proposed shift pattern (8am to 2pm, 2pm to 8pm and 8pm to 8am) outlined in the submitted Transport Statement means that there will be no more than ten staff on site at any one time.

In terms of public transport there are three buses an hour in each direction along the A6 during peak hours. Due to the limited service (despite the geographical spread of the locations that the buses serve - Lancaster, Morecambe, Garstang, Preston and Blackpool) staff and visitors from outside the immediate locality are unlikely to use the buses in any significant numbers.

It is acknowledged that increased pressure on parking may occur at evenings and weekends when there may be more visitors to the site. It is likely that parking off-site would be more readily available when neighbouring business would be closed. It is considered unlikely that all the allocated resident parking will be taken up by the occupants of the assisted living units and on balance the on-site parking provision is considered to be adequate.

The scheme would still undoubtedly lead to additional pedestrian and traffic movements as a result of visitors, residents and workers moving to and from the site. Given the scale of the proposal the Highway Authority has requested a contribution to highway improvements and suggests that the developer should contribute towards mitigating measures in the vicinity. The monies would be used to implement a scheme of signage and road-lining in Chapel Lane, at the narrow section where it passes by the Mill. Any excess would contribute to securing the delivery of the proposed 20 mph zone in the Chapel Lane area. This is considered a reasonable request that would also be of benefit to the wider community. These physical highway improvements would be secured by Section 278 Agreement.

The Highway Authority is satisfied that the application has demonstrated (via the submitted Transport Statement) that trip generation by the development will not have a negative impact on Chapel Lane and therefore highway objections would not be warranted. However, the Highway Authority requests that the developer is required to carry out footway improvements along this section of Chapel Lane to serve the development. This, along with the speed restrictions, would seem a reasonable request given the narrow nature of Chapel Lane in the vicinity of Ellel House coupled with the potential for increased pedestrian and traffic movements.

7.17 Affordable Housing

The Strategic Housing Market Assessment for Lancaster District shows that there will be a local Page 57 need for more accommodation for older persons within the district, particularly in rural areas, and a need for specialist provision. Initial enquiries reveal that Social Services have been informally contacted about the proposals and whilst they do not have any objections to this scheme and generally support what is being proposed, they do not necessarily favour it over and above any other proposals.

The 21 assisted living units are effectively open market housing and developments consisting of over 10 residential units in the rural area are the threshold which would trigger the requirement for affordable housing to be included in the scheme. As the threshold is exceeded and the housing type does not meet any specific housing need, the Strategic Housing Officer has requested further information or evidence of a financial appraisal if the normal percentage of 40% on site affordable housing cannot be achieved. However, the pursuance of this issue would result in extra costs for the applicant which would consequently increase the need for additional development on the site. Given the fact that the development proposed is already considered to be intensive, further development within the site would not be acceptable.

7.18 Rural Employment

When considering schemes involving economic developments in rural areas, PPS4 states that local planning authorities should adopt a positive approach to proposals which secure sustainable economic growth with particular regard to accessibility, quality of design, impact on the economic and physical regeneration of an area and the impact on local employment. It is acknowledged that in terms of rural employment the scheme will be beneficial. However the heritage and design issues arising from the proposal remain unsatisfactory.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 Two potential planning obligations are discussed in Section 7. These relate to highways and affordable housing.

A contribution of £6,000 is requested by County Highways towards mitigating measures in the vicinity of the development. However, as the 2 measures proposed relate to works on highway land (see paragraph 7.15 of this report) they should be secured by way of a s278 agreement. Both would also be of benefit to the wider community.

In terms of affordable housing provision, although the number of assisted living units triggers the threshold for the affordable housing it is not considered to be feasible to pursue this given the intensive nature of the development proposed. Therefore, no affordable housing is proposed.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 It is without argument that Ellel House is in a deteriorating state and as such the heritage asset is under threat. As a vacant property the future of the building is at risk and the situation has been aggravated by the unwanted attention of vandals. The poor state of the building coupled with the overgrown nature of the plot within which it is situated means that the whole site has an air of dereliction which makes a negative contribution to the surrounding area. There would be clear benefits following the refurbishment of the listed building. The scheme would allow the building to be retained and reused rather than face the risk of demolition. Along with the revitalisation of the property a further benefit would be the subsequent provision of additional employment within Galgate. The scheme would environmentally improve this part of Chapel Lane and has the potential to deliver improvements which would accommodate the extra demands of pedestrians that would result from the proposal.

9.2 However, the scheme is considered to be unsympathetic and excessive in scale in relation to the listed building to which it will be attached, and is considered as overdevelopment of the site with the new element being more than three times the size of the existing property. Insufficient justification has been submitted by the applicant to warrant the substantial harm which would be inflicted on the setting of the listed building as a result of the development. Although PPS5 advocates that there should be a presumption in favour of the conservation of designated heritage assets, local planning authorities are also required to assess whether the benefits (which in this case is the refurbishment of the listed building) of the enabling development (the number of units) outweigh the disbenefits (scale, massing and overdevelopment of the site). It is considered that the submitted scheme Page 58 exceeds the development capacity of the site and is considered as an over-intensive form of development which would have a d etrimental impact on the significance of the heritage asset. Therefore Members are advised that this application should not be supported in its present form.

Recommendation

That Planning Permission BE REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. The property that forms the subject of this application is a grade II listed building which is situated between two additional listed buildings and as such is considered to be within a setting of historic significance. Due to the scale and massing of the proposed development within the site the submitted scheme would be unduly injurious to the architectural character and appearance of the grade II listed building to which it would be attached and also detrimental to the character and setting of the adjacent listed buildings. Consequently the proposal is contrary to Lancaster District Local Plan saved policies E33 and National Planning Policy Statement 5 - `Planning for the Historic Environment’.

2. The proposal would constitute an undesirable, over-intensive form of development by virtue of its excessive depth and width in relation to the size of the existing building and dimensions of the site. The scheme would therefore constitute an unsatisfactory and inappropriate form of development and is contrary to the provisions of Planning Policy Statement 1 – ‘Planning for Sustainable Development’ and Lancaster District Core Strategy (LDCS) Policy SC5.

3. The proposed extension by reason of the mix and design of the hips and gable ends on the side projections would constitute an incongruous addition which would be unduly detrimental to the visual amenities of the area, and to the setting of Ellel House. As such the proposal is considered to be contrary to Planning Policy Statement 1, Planning Policy Statement 5, saved Policy H19 and Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 12: Residential Design Code of the Lancaster District Local Plan and Policy SC5 `Achieving Quality in Design' of the Lancaster District Core Strategy.

Human Rights Act

This recommendation has been rea ched after consideration of the provisions of The Human Rights Act. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the issues arising do not appear to be of such magnitude to override the responsibility of the City Council to regulate land use for the benefit of the community as a whole, in accordance with national law.

Background Papers

None.

Page 59 AgendaAgenda Item Item 12 Committee Date Application Number

A12 26 July 2010 10/00231/LB

Application Site Proposal

Ellel House Alterations and extension to create a two-storey 29 bed nursing home with 21 assisted living apartments Chapel Lane

Galgate

Lancaster

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr J Ayrton Mr Anthony Hills

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

6 May 2010 Committee Cycle

Case Officer Petra Williams

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Recommended for Refusal

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The site that forms the subject of this application is a Grade II listed building which is situated within a 0.48 Ha plot between St John’s Church and Galgate Mill on Chapel Lane in the village of Galgate. The two storey building has 29 no. rooms and the grounds which extend 68m to east of the rear elevation of the property are significantly overgrown. The property is currently vacant and following its last occupation in 2004 has subsequently fallen into a serious state of disrepair due to neglect, vandalism, arson attempts and theft of lead from the roof which has led to rain water ingress. The exterior white rendered walls show signs of decay with areas of rubble stone walling visible in parts. The roof is slated and the windows have a vertical emphasis with bay features to the front elevation.

1.2 The main core of the village is situated to the south of the site with the main shops, services and bus route being within a short walking distance. Chapel Lane runs north-east from the site with residential properties dotted sporadically along its route. To the immediate south of the site lies the grade II listed Galgate Mill which comprises small industrial units and an associated parking area. The building to the immediate north of the site is the grade II listed St John’s Church which also has an associated parking area.

1.3 The village is within a Countryside Area as designated on the Lancaster District Local Plan proposals map. There are mature trees established to the side and rear of the existing building that are subject to Tree Preservation Order (No. 1 (1974) Ellel House, Galgate), and as such they are protected in law. Land levels rise beyond the eastern boundaries of the site which is open countryside.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 This is the Listed Building submission that accompanies application 10/00230/FUL, which also appears on this committee agenda. Ellel House itself was originally a residential property but was Page 60 last in use as a nursing home. The application retains the last use of the site and involves alterations to the existing building and an extension to create a two-storey 29 bed nursing home with 21 assisted living apartments. The scheme will involve the restoration of the existing property and the site to the rear of the building.

2.2 The building shows signs of neglect and vandalism with window and door frames of the property in poor condition and lead removed from the roof and extensive internal and external repair and refurbishments will be necessary in order to bring the listed building back into use. Refurbishments will involve the insertion of new timber window and door frames, the making good of exterior walls, the repair of the slate roof and the renewal of lead guttering. Internally the works will include the removal of some non-original partition walls, plaster cornices made good and existing tiled and timber floors retained. As part of the scheme an outhouse to the north west elevation of the house will be demolished. It is envisaged that the extent of the removal of defective render could be considerable. The plans propose the removal of the porch additions which are not original features of the property. The existing sash and case windows will be retained where possible and replacement windows will be like for like. Where possible the existing roofing slates shall be reused, however this will depend on condition and any replacement slate would match the existing slates. The renewal of the lead roll ridges and hips and gutter linings is also proposed. All replacement rainwater goods will be conditioned cast iron with a paint finish.

2.3 The land around the property which would have historically been laid out as a formal garden also shows signs of neglect and is significantly overgrown. There is a mature Beech tree to the northern end of the building and various smaller trees dotted around the site. However many of these trees are in close proximity to one another and this has resulted in their development being suppressed. In order to accommodate the scheme 20 trees will be removed and this matter is assessed in the 10/00230/FUL report.

2.4 The existing house will be renovated and developed to provide four double bedroomed assisted living units as well as visitor accommodation, lounge and laundry, ancillary w.c.s and utility areas. A key part of the proposal also involves the development of the site to the rear of (and attached to) the listed building. This aspect of the scheme represents a significant extension and will utilise the majority of the plot behind the listed building. The two storey extension will incorporate a further 17 assisted living apartments and 29 single ensuite bedrooms which will form part of the nursing home aspect of the scheme. Other facilities associated with the nursing home such as communal lounge/dining room, treatment rooms, reception meeting areas and mobility bathrooms will also be incorporated into the extension.

3.0 Site History

3.1 Although originally built as a gentleman’s residence the property has had a varied planning history over the last 30 years.

Application Number Proposal Decision 79/00905/HST Conversion of student’s flats and bedsits into hotel and Permitted restaurant. 80/01517/HST Change of use from house to old peoples home. Permitted

88/00239/HST Erection of 19 bedroom extension to nursing home Refused (Appeal Dismissed) 88/00240/HST Erection of 19 bedroom extension to nursing home – not Permitted implemented

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Page 61

Statutory Consultee Response County Archaeology The Archaeological Building Recording report by Greenlane Archaeology has indicated that there are a number of original features surviving within the building and LCAS would support the recommendations made in 5.4.1 of the report with regards to their preservation. The record is considered to be more than adequate in addressing any need for recording that might have been recommended by the Archaeology Service.

English Heritage The application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance.

Ancient Monuments Whilst we welcome the repair of this fine but boarded up listed building, we must Society express dismay at the quality of the new extension. The listed building becomes a mere adjunct to a vast newcomer. This is in clear violation of the advice in PPS5.

Society for the No comments received within consultation timescale. Any comments subsequently Protection of received will be reported verbally. Ancient Buildings The Victorian No comments received within consultation timescale. Any comments subsequently Society received will be reported verbally.

Georgian Group No comments received within consultation timescale. Any comments subsequently received will be reported verbally.

The British Council No comments received within consultation timescale. Any comments subsequently for Archaeology received will be reported verbally.

Parish Council Parish Council would like to see the refurbishment incorporate footpaths in the vicinity of the development.

Conservation The Conservation Officer has been involved in pre-application discussions with the Officer agent regarding this 'At Risk' grade II listed building. Key comments:

• The prospect of a development scheme which includes a full restoration of the house has so far prevented the present owners being issued with a formal Urgent Works Notice. • Satisfied with building recording report. • Whilst this development does impact on the listed house in terms of the scale of the roof it does provide a solution that provides an economic future for the listed building. • Satisfied with design and proposed materials- details could be covered by condition.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 One member of the public suggested that the site be used for the development of local authority housing.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 The national planning policy statements relevant to the overall proposal are reported in the previous 10/00230/FUL report. In relation to the Listed building, the following national and local advice is considered to be of critical importance:

PPS5 (Planning for the Historic Environment) - outlines the Government’s overarching aim for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment and its heritage and states that in considering the impact of a proposal on any heritage asset,(e.g. listed building) local planning authorities should take into account the particular nature of the of the heritage asset. Page 62 6.2 Lancaster District Local Plan Saved Policy E33 – Relates to proposals involving external and internal alterations to listed buildings and advocates that new extensions should be sympathetic in scale, materials and position.

6.3 Lancaster District Core Strategy (LDCS) Policy E1 – Environmental Capital – refers to the importance of conserving and enhancing the built heritage and minimising the adverse effects of development on such assets.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The Heritage Asset

The Government’s overarching aims for the historic environment are set out in PPS5 which advocates that heritage assets (which includes listed buildings) should be conserved and enjoyed for the quality of life they bring to this and future generations. To achieve this, the Government’s objectives for development relating to heritage assets is that it should: recognise that heritage assets are a non-renewable resource and take account of the wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits of the conservation of the heritage asset. PPS5 also states that wherever possible, heritage assets should be put to an appropriate and viable use that is consistent with their conservation and the positive contribution of such heritage assets to local character and sense of place should be recognised and valued.

7.2 The application states that the house has been marketed but it is not ideally suited to be reinstated as a large residential house due to its proximity to neighbouring industrial units and uses within the adjacent Galgate Mill site which are considered unsightly and unneighbourly. The deterioration of the building over recent years has prompted the Conservation Officer to consider serving an Urgent Works Notice on the owners. However the prospect of the renovation of the building as part of this scheme has temporarily placated the concerns of the Conservation Officer.

7.3 Impact of the Proposal on the Heritage Asset

Although the restoration of the existing listed building is much needed and is seen as a key benefit of the scheme the development of the plot immediately to the rear of the building raises significant concerns with regard to the overdevelopment of the site as the scale of the new build is dominant in relation to the listed building to which it will be attached. The new build will occupy the majority of the plot to the rear of the existing building leaving a border of 5 metres between the development and the site boundary. The new build will be over three times the size of the existing building and as a result the proposal will have an adverse impact on the setting of the heritage asset.

7.4 There are also the neighbouring listed buildings to consider and the development will have an adverse impact on the setting of these heritage assets due to its size and massing. The church will overlook the northern elevation of the new development which is considered incongruous in relation to the adjacent listed church and mill. Although there is limited tree screening between the Church and the application site it is envisaged that the northern approach to the site will afford some limited views of the two together. PPS5 acknowledges that development within the setting of a heritage asset can harm its significance and it is the view of the Case Officer that the development proposed in this case will indeed affect the setting of two heritage assets. This argument may be countered to some degree by the current condition of the site around Galgate Mill to the south which houses a number of industrial uses. Despite this, the view held is that the proposed new development would be adversely affect the setting of the listed church and mill buildings.

7.5 The renovation of the building is considered to be a more sustainable alternative than the resulting impacts of demolition. Policy HE1 of PPS5 advocates the reuse and where appropriates the modification of the heritage asset in order to secure sustainable development. By permitting development which keeps the heritage asset in use avoids the consumption of building materials and energy generation of waste from the construction of replacement buildings. However this benefit is significantly outweighed by the amount of construction which is proposed on the remainder of the site.

7.6 Public Benefit of the Proposal

PPS5 states that where a proposal has a harmful impact on the significance of a heritage asset local Page 63 planning authorities should weigh the public benefits against the harm and that the greater the harm the more justification is required for the proposed development. This derelict listed building has in recent years been a focus for vandalism and anti-social behaviour and the restoration and re-use of the property is likely to end this situation which would be of benefit to residents in the vicinit y. Furthermore the application states that the completed development would provide 30 full time and 10 part time jobs. There is, therefore, some recognisable public benefit arising from the proposal.

7.7 Enabling Development

PPS5 refers to enabling development as the means of securing the long-term future of a heritage asset when conservation through development in compliance with policy cannot do so. Local planning authorities are required to assess whether the benefits of an application for enabling development to secure the future conservation of a heritage asset outweigh the ‘disbenefits’. In doing this the local planning authority will take into account whether:

• A proposal will materially harm the significance of the heritage asset or setting; • It will avoid detrimental fragmentation of the management of the heritage asset; • It will secure a long term future for the heritage asset; • It is necessary to resolve problems arising from the inherent needs of the heritage asset, as opposed to the circumstances of the owner or purchase price paid; • The level of development is the minimum necessary to secure the future conservation of the heritage asset and of a design and type that minimises harm to other public interests.

7.8 In order to allow the local planning authority to make an assessment the applicant is required to demonstrate what the minimum level of development is required to secure the future conservation of the heritage asset by the submission of a financial appraisal so that the local planning authority is able to make a balanced judgement on the scale of the development proposed. A confidential financial appraisal has now been submitted in which the applicant defends the scale of the proposed development as they would not be able to financially break-even if the scale of the development was reduced below that proposed due to the poor state of repair of the building. It is estimated that the likely costs of refurbishments of the building fabric including internal and external repairs such as replacement lead work and timber frames will be between £500,000 and £750,000. It is concluded by the applicant that 17 No new Assisted Living Units are required to show a small return and that less than 17 new Assisted Living Units would result in a loss.

7.9 The financial appraisal has been assessed by one of the Council’s Senior Regeneration Officers . The purchase price plus the repair and refurbishment costs (to the listed building) and site clearance works (to the garden areas) exceeds the site’s value. This means that the purchase price does not reflect the condition of the listed building and its curtilage. The purchase price is unrealistically high given the costs of repair and the property’s appeal given its proximity to the commercial Mill buildings. To recover the large financial outlay of the purchase price, the applicant would need to provide additional units/bedrooms. A more realistic purchase price would mean the number of units/bedrooms could be reduced, thereby reducing the scheme’s scale. No evidence has been put forward indicating that other funding sources have been explored to support the heritage asset that would negate the need for enabling development.

7.10 It is therefore concluded that the level of development necessary to secure the future conservation of the heritage asset should be significantly less than that proposed in this application.

7.11 Refurbishment of Existing Building

The application proposes significant improvements to the fabric of the property through the repair and refurbishments of the existing building while retaining the general layout. The replacement external render along with other materials and finishes would be controlled by condition. The proposed refurbishment of the listed building is considered as being much needed and appropriate with this view being supported by the Conservation Officer. Although this is a positive aspect of the scheme it must be balanced with the effects of the new development to the rear of the site.

Page 64 7.12 Design of the New Build

The new development will extend to cover the majority of the site to the rear of the existing building and will incorporate a number of projecting bays with a mix of hipped and pitched roofs to the northern elevation and hipped roof projections to the eastern and southern elevations and the design of the new build therefore lacks consistency. The main roofline will be higher than the existing building which is an indication of the dominance of the new development. The development will connect to the listed building at the southern end of the rear elevation and extend towards the rear of the site along the southern boundary. The point at which the existing and new elements connect will be punctuated by a narrow projecting pitched roof gable which is considered as unsympathetic in relation to the listed building.

Aside from the PPS5 concerns in this regard, it can be argued that the proposal fails to adhere to the design principles advocated by PPS1, which seeks to ensure high quality development.

7.13 The new development will have rendered wall finishes, but the Conservation Officer has requested that consideration should be given to the provision of linings to simulate ashlar walling to the facades that can be seen in conjunction with the listed building. This was thought to be unsuitable by the agent and therefore not included in amended plans. Precast door and window surrounds are proposed and white timber window frames will be incorporated into the scheme. Plans also indicate the use of natural slate roofing and aluminium gutters and rainwater goods which are acceptable. Although materials are acceptable the design size and scale of the development and the mix of hips and gables, including their differing heights and widths are poorly arranged and revisions to the original submission still do not address the Case Officer’s concerns. These concerns are echoed by comments submitted by the Ancient Monuments Society. They refer to the proposed new development as a “vast, bland box” and that the “listed building becomes a mere adjunct to a vast newcomer”. As such the scheme is considered to be a clear violation of the advice in PPS5. We concur with this view and have concluded that the scheme fails to adhere to the advice contained in PPS5.

7.14 Site Layout

Section 2 of this report explains the scale of the proposal, and paragraphs 7.7-7.9 refers to the enabling development proposed. Drawing this together, despite its currently neglected state, the property currently enjoys a detached setting within relatively extensive grounds. However the layout proposed is, by virtue of its sheer footprint and orientation, overwhelming. When combined with the proposed car parking areas, and the general loss of landscape surrounding the building, the cumulative impact is both significant and negative.

7.15 Although a detailed landscaping scheme has not been submitted the works will involve some clearance of overgrown vegetation within the site which will improve the setting of t he listed building. The existing stone wall to the front of the site would be retained. A landscape scheme could be requested by condition to the satisfaction of the Conservation Officer.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 The planning obligations in respect of highways and affordable housing are reported on the full application. There are no obligation requests relating to the Listed Building or other heritage matters.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 It is without argument that Ellel House is in a deteriorating state and as such the heritage asset is under threat. As a vacant property the future of the building is at risk and the situation has been aggravated by the unwanted attention of vandals. The poor state of the building coupled with the overgrown nature of the plot within which it is situated means that the whole site has an air of dereliction which makes a negative contribution to the surrounding area. There would be clear benefits following the refurbishment of the listed building. The scheme would allow the building to be retained and reused rather than face the risk of demolition. Along with the revitalization of the property a further benefit would be the subsequent provision of additional employment within Galgate. The scheme would environmentally improve this part of Chapel Lane and has the potential to deliver improvements which would accommodate the extra demands of pedestrians that would Page 65 result from the proposal.

9.2 However, the scheme is considered to be unsympathetic and excessive in scale in relation to the listed building to which it will be attached and is considered as overdevelopment of the site with the new element being more than three times the size of the existing property. Insufficient justification has been submitted by the applicant to warrant the substantial harm which would be inflicted on the setting of the listed building as a result of the development. Although PPS5 advocates that there should be a presumption in favour of the conservation of designated heritage assets, local planning also authorities are required to assess whether the benefits (which in this case is the refurbishment of the listed building) of the enabling development (number of units) outweigh the disbenefits (scale, massing and overdevelopment of the site). It is considered that the submitted scheme exceeds the development capacity of the site and is considered as an over intensive form of development which would have a detrimental impact on the significance of the heritage asset. Therefore Members are advised that this application should not be supported in its present form.

Recommendation

That Listed Building Consent BE REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. The property that forms the subject of this application is a grade II listed building which is situated between two additional listed buildings and as such is considered to be within a setting of historic significance. Due to the scale and massing of the proposed development within the site the submitted scheme would be unduly injurious to the architectural character and appearance of the grade II listed building to which it would be attached and also detrimental to the character and setting of the adjacent listed buildings. Consequently the proposal is contrary to Lancaster District Local Plan saved policies E33 and National Planning Policy Statement 5 - `Planning for the Historic Environment’.

2. The proposed extension by reason of the mix and design of the hips and gable ends on the side projections would constitute an incongruous addition which would be unduly detrimental to the visual amenities of the area, and to the setting of Ellel House. As such the proposal is considered to be contrary to Planning Policy Statement 1, Planning Policy Statement 5, saved Policy H19 and Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 12: Residential Design Code of the Lancaster District Local Plan and Policy SC5 `Achieving Quality in Design' of the Lancaster District Core Strategy.

Human Rights Act

This recommendation has been reached after consideration of the provisions of The Human Rights Act. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the issues arising do not appear to be of such magnitude to override the responsibility of the City Council to regulate land use for the benefit of the community as a whole, in accordance with national law.

Background Papers

None.

Page 66 Agenda Item Committee Date AgendaApplication Item Number 13

A13 26 July 2010 10/00479/RCN

Application Site Proposal

19 Downes Grove Removal of condition 6 on approved application 05/00164/FUL relating to use of the garage Morecambe

Lancashire

LA4 5TR

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Mr J Taylor n/a

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

28 July 2010 n/a

Case Officer Mr Richard Bamforth

Departure None

Summary of Recommendation Refusal

1.0 Procedural Matter

1.1 This application would normally be dealt with under the scheme of delegation. However, the applicant is an immediate relative of a Council Member (Cllr Taylor) and the application is therefore before the planning Committee for determination.

2.0 The Site and its Surroundings

2.1 The site subject of this planning application relates to a two storey, semi-detached property situated at the head of a residential cul-de-sac known as Downes Grove, on the southern side of Lancaster Road, Morecambe.

2.2 Attached to the side of the property is a subservient two storey extension with what appears to be a garage at ground floor and bedroom(s) above. There is off street parking to the front of the property sufficient for two vehicles.

2.3 The property is one of a number of similar dwellings clustered around the head of the cul-de-sac, but orientated at a slight angle to each other. The properties are relatively tightly built with most of the houses only enjoying limited off street parking.

2.4 Some properties to the northern end of Downes Grove have a shared access arrangement between the dwellings with individual garages to the rear of the properties. Some of these properties appear to have subsequently created a boundary fence along the 'shared' driveway thereby preventing the access to the garages beyond.

3.0 The Proposal

3.1 The application seeks permission for the removal of condition no.6 on the approved application 05/00164/FUL. Condition No.6 states - Page 67

"Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that order) the proposed garage/s shall be retained solely for the housing of a private motor car and at no time shall it be used or alterations be undertaken that could result in it/them being used for any other domestic, trade or business purpose, without the formal consent of the local planning authority.\line Reason: To safeguard the residential amenities of neighbouring occupiers and the visual amenities of the locality, and to avoid the standing of vehicles on the adjoining highway."

3.2 The applicants have stated that the removal of condition will allow the garage to be used as part of accommodation. They comment that an occupant of the property requires a downstairs bedroom and as part of the submission, reference is made to a letter from Dr S E Brear (referred to in Paragraph 6.2).

4.0 Site History

4.1 The site gained planning consent under 05/00164/FUL in April 2005 for the erection of a two storey side extension and conservatory to the rear of the property. Accommodation to the side extension comprised of a garage and extended kitchen with bedroom to the first floor area. Overall the extension measured approximately 2.8m in width and sat wholly within the application land ownership.

4.2 An enforcement enquiry resulted in a subsequent planning application being submitted (05/01281/FUL) for the retention of a two storey side extension and rear conservatory. This was a partial retrospective application for the retention of the two storey side extension which had actually been constructed 650mm wider than the previously approved scheme. The internal accommodation was similar to the previously approved scheme, retaining the garage at ground floor level, but extended across the full width of the applicants land ownership to the side of the dwelling, encroaching onto the neighbouring pathway with the soffit and drainage gutters overhanging further onto the neighbouring land.

4.3 The original planning permission (05/00164/FUL) has a condition attached to specifically prevent the conversion of the garage without a planning consent. This condition was repeated in the 05/01281/FUL permission.

4.4 There are currently two enforcement cases pertaining to the unauthorised development not in accordance with the approved plans.

5.0 Consultation Responses

5.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response Parish Council No observations received

6.0 Neighbour Representations

6.1 No observations received.

6.2 A letter has been received from a Dr S E Brear of York Bridge Surgery who has made comment regarding an occupant of the dwelling, stating that they have suffered severe knee pain in the past and cannot manage stairs due to this medical problem.

7.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

7.1 Policy H19 of the Lancaster District Local Plan, which covers development within the existing housing areas of Lancaster, Morecambe and Carnforth. Para.2.7 states that "………residential development within existing housing areas will be permitted which; would not have a significant adverse effect on the amenities of nearby residents; provides a high standard of amenity……makes Page 68 satisfactory arrangements for access….and car parking."

7.2 SPG12, which covers the Residential Design Code in the Lancaster District Local Plan. It has been produced as supplementary planning guidance in determining all new housing developments and is “also intended to apply to house extensions and non-residential building of a domestic scale” (Introduction 1.7). Para.2.6 states that "……..developers must demonstrate that car parking is accessible but does not visually dominate the development. Where possible, at least one parking space per dwelling should be provided behind the building line."

8.0 Comment and Analysis

8.1 The application seeks to have the restrictive condition (No.6) attached to the permission 05/00164/FUL be removed to allow a change of use from a garage to a bedroom.

The application site has a long enforcement history dating back to 2005, for a breach of the original consent relating to the works not being carried out in accordance with the approved plans. The site history seems to indicate that there was a reluctance to respond to correspondence and the local authority reluctantly sought to exercise their powers of entry to determine the exact nature of the rooms.

8.2 It is questionable whether the garage has ever been utilised in accordance with the approved plans – i.e. as a garage.

On the day of the Officer's site visit (8:45am, 8 July 2010) it was clearly apparent that the 'garage' door was in fact false and concealed a fully glazed unit, which of course already restricts vehicular access. The applicant voluntarily permitted access into the room subject of this application, where it was apparent that it was being utilised as additional living accommodation (desk and chair, bookshelf, toys, guitar, and additional chair). There was clearly no evidence of this room being utilised as a bedroom.

8.3 If the removal of the condition was permitted, the property would lose the car parking space behind the building line resulting in additional vehicle(s) being parked to the front of the property and on the highway. The conversion would ultimately remove this option of the garage being used for its intended purpose and it is extremely unlikely that it would be converted back. In their defence the applicant does have off-street parking facilities to the front of the property to accommodate two vehicles. However the loss of the garage for its intended use has the potential to create an adverse direct impact on the general street scene and the amenities of the area, which would be in conflict with SPG12 and thereby Policy H19.

8.4 Previously, there have been occasional circumstances where a similar restrictive condition has been removed, both under delegated powers and by Planning Committee. These generally relate to situations where there is a severe disability, perhaps involving the creation of rooms where small lifts or ceiling-mounted hoists are necessary. Clearly each case is considered on its merits, and Members will want to give consideration to the particular merits of this case. Our advice is that this does not appear to be a comparable case to previous exceptions to policy. There may be the possibility of further dialogue with the occupant’s doctor regarding this case, but of course patient confidentiality may restrict any further information being available.

8.5 Some of the properties to the northern end of Downes Grove appear to have erected a dividing boundary fence along the 'shared' driveway thereby preventing the access to the garages beyond. This it would appear does not require the benefit of planning permission. The loss of another useable parking space behind the building line would result in vehicles either being parked to the front of the dwelling, within the curtilage, or along the highway. This is precisely why the policies are in place; to avoid a situation where there is vehicular clutter. This is especially important in this case, given the cul-de-sac location of the proposal.

9.0 Planning Obligations

9.1 None.

Page 69 10.0 Conclusions

10.1 The proposed removal of the restrictive condition would remove the use of the garage for its intended purpose. This would be contrary to the general guidelines in the Residential Design Code and ultimately removes the parking space behind the building line, resulting in vehicles either being parked to the front within the curtilage, or along the highway which will have a cumulative impact which is considered detrimental to the general amenity of the area.

Accordingly, the application is contrary to policy and a recommendation of refusal is reached.

Recommendation

That the removal of Condition No.6 on the approved application 05/00164/FUL BE REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. Approval of the development would remove the parking space behind the building line and preclude the intended purpose of the associated garage resulting in vehicles being parked to the front of the property. The outcome would be detrimental to the amenity of the surrounding area and nearby residents and as such, contrary to Supplementary Planning Guidance Note 12: The Residential Design Code and Policy H19 of the Lancaster District Local Plan. The applicant has failed to demonstrate that there are exceptional circumstances in this case that warrant a departure from this policy.

Human Rights Act

This recommendation has been reached after consideratio n of the provisions of The Human Rights Act. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the issues arising do not appear to be of such magnitude to override the responsibility of the City Council to regulate land use for the benefit of the community as a whole, in accordance with national law.

Background Papers

None.

Page 70 Page 71 AgendaAgenda Item Item 14 Committee Date Application Number

A14 26 July 2010 10/00495/DPA

Application Site Proposal

The Dome Demolition of The Dome and re-instatement of land Marine Road Central Morecambe Lancashire

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Ian Robinson N/A

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

6 August 2010 N/A

Case Officer Mr Andrew Drummond

Departure No

Approve subject to conditions – final decision is Summary of Recommendation subject to referral to Government Office

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The Dome is located off Marine Road Central in an area of land to the north east of the Midland Hotel. The site has had a number of names in the past including Morecambe Leisure Park, Central Promenade Site and Bubbles Leisure Complex. The Dome was built as the ‘Superdome’ in 1979.

1.2 The Dome is situated on a piece of low lying land between Bubbles Road to the north and the promenade immediately to the south. The ground level is about 3m lower than the promenade.

1.3 The site is designated in the Lancaster District Local Plan as a Conservation Area and a Tourism Opportunity Area.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 It is proposed to demolish The Dome and reinstate the land it currently occupies. The exposed site would be covered in tarmacadam following demolition of the building to tie the site in with the surrounding surface treatment.

2.2 The Dome is the remaining structure of the former Bubbles Leisure Complex. The indoor and outdoor swimming pools that formed parts of 'Bubbles' have been replaced with temporary hard and soft landscaping. The main building is of concrete block construction with a concrete ground floor and has a concrete insulted roof with a steel clad done roof. This is made up of galvanised steel frame with clear polycarbonate roof sheets. The original roof was of glass construction, but it was altered after 5 years to be covered with a metal roof because of problems with overheating.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The Local Planning Authority has not previously received any relevant applications relating to this site.

Page 72 4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory and internal consultees:

Consultees Response English Heritage The application should be determined in accordance with national, regional and local policy guidance and specialist conservation advice.

Ancient Monument No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations Society received will be reported verbally.

Georgian Group No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations received will be reported verbally.

Victorian Society No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations received will be reported verbally.

Twentieth Century No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations Society received will be reported verbally.

Society for the No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations Protection of received will be reported verbally. Ancient Buildings Council for British No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations Archaeology received will be reported verbally.

County Archaeology No archaeological observations.

Morecambe Town This application was referred to a meeting of the full Town Council where the Council application was objected to.

Environmental No objection subject to dust control, hours of construction and unforeseen Health contaminated land conditions.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 No correspondence has been received at the time of compiling this report. Any comments subsequently received will be reported verbally.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 National Planning Policy Statements (PPS) and Guidance Notes (PPG)

PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) - provides generic advice for all new built development. Sites should be capable of optimising the full site boundary and should deliver an appropriate mix of uses, green and other public spaces, safe and accessible environments and visually pleasing architecture. The prudent use of natural resources and assets, and the encouragement of sustainable modes of transport are important components of this advice. This advice is echoed in PPG 13 - Transport. A high level of protection should be given to most valued townscapes and landscapes, wildlife habitats and natural resources, conserving and enhancing wildlife species and habitats and the promotion of biodiversity.

PPS5 (Planning for the Historic Environment) - has superseded PPG15 and PPG16. The Government’s overarching aim is that the historic environment and its heritage assets should be conserved and enjoyed for the quality of life they bring to this and future generations. In order to deliver sustainable development, PPS5 states that polices and decisions concerning the historic environment should:

Page 73 • Recognise that heritage assets are a non-renewable resource • Take account of the wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits of heritage conservation • Recognise that intelligently managed change may sometimes be necessary if heritage assets are to be maintained in the long term.

PPS25 (Development and Flood Risk) - recognises that though flooding cannot be wholly prevented, its impacts can be avoided and reduced through good planning and management. All forms of flooding and their impact on the natural and built environment are material planning considerations. Positive planning has an important role in helping deliver sustainable development and applying the Government’s policy on flood risk management. It avoids, reduces and manages flood risk by taking full account in decisions on plans and applications of present and future flood risk, involving both the statistical probability of a flood occurring and the scale of its potential consequences, whether inland or on the coast, and the wider implications for flood risk of development located outside flood risk areas.

6.2 Regional Spatial Strategy - adopted September 2008

The Regional Spatial Strategy (and thus the policies contained therein) was formally revoked by the Government earlier this month.

6.3 Lancaster District Local Plan - adopted April 2004 (saved policies)

Policy E35 (Conservation Areas and their Surroundings) development proposals that would adversely affect important views into and across a Conservation Area or lead to an unacceptable erosion of its historic form and layout, open spaces and townscape will not be permitted.

Policy E37 (Demolition) - total or substantial demolition of an unlisted building will only be permitted where it does not make a positive contribution to the architectural or historic interest of a Conservation Area. Proposals to demolish any building within a Conservation Area will only be approved where detailed planning permission has been given for a scheme of redevelopment which would preserve and enhance the Conservation Area, including effective guarantees of early completion.

Policy TO2 (Tourism Opportunities) - The Council will direct new visitor attractions to Morecambe centre. Proposals that would prejudice the possibility of achieving new visitor attractions will not be permitted.

Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) Note 17 provided a development brief for the whole Central Promenade site. The Dome was part of the site identified for regeneration.

6.4 Lancaster District Core Strategy - adopted July 2008

Policy SC1 (Sustainable Development) - development should be located in an area where it is convenient to walk, cycle or travel by public transport between homes, workplaces, shops and other facilities, must not result in unacceptable flood risk or drainage problems, does not have a significant adverse impact on a site of nature conservation or archaeological importance, uses energy efficient design and construction practices, incorporates renewable energy technologies, creates publicly accessible open space, and is compatible with the character of the surrounding landscape.

Policy SC5 (Achieving Quality in Design) - new development must reflect and enhance the positive characteristics of its surroundings, creating landmark buildings of genuine and lasting architectural merit.

Policy SC6 (Crime and Community Safety) - encourage high quality design, incorporating "secure by Design" principles, avoid car dominated environments, remove dereliction and eyesore sites, achieving greater use of pedestrian and cycle networks, parks and open spaces in particular the key greenspace systems

Policy SC8 (Recreation and Open Space) - new residential development will make appropriate provision for formal and informal sports provision in line with needs identified in the Open Space and Recreation Study. Page 74

Policy ER2 (Regeneration Priority Areas) - Central Morecambe is identified as a Regeneration Priority Area. Through tourism, housing renewal and heritage led regeneration, central Morecambe will be re-invented as a visitor destination drawing on its natural and built heritage, and as an office and service centre with restored historic townscape and a revived housing market.

Policy ER6 (Developing Tourism) - the Council will promote and enhance tourism development in the District by creating a quality leisure offer in central Morecambe.

Policy E1 (Environmental Capital) - development should protect and enhance nature conservation sites and greenspaces, minimise the use of land and non-renewable energy, properly manage environmental risks such as flooding, make places safer, protect habitats and the diversity of wildlife species, and conserve and enhance landscapes.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 Tourism and Future Development Potential

The Dome was granted planning permission in 1979, but was closed in April 2010 due to the costs of ongoing maintenance and subsidisation of its operation. No viable use, long or short term, has been identified for this site.

The site falls within an area identified as the Central Promenade Redevelopment Area (SPG17). Retention of The Dome is not envisaged within this document. The long term future of the site will be determined through the production of the Morecambe Area Action Plan and subsequent or current planning applications to redevelop this area. Given the uncertainty over the long term use of the site, it is proposed to hard surface the footprint of The Dome post-demolition to match that of the adjoining site (and to make good any exposed services). This is considered an appropriate approach. It also ensures that the site is safe.

7.2 Conservation

Morecambe Conservation Area was designated in 2003 and covers an extensive area of Central Morecambe, including Poulton, the Midland Hotel and the former railway station. A Conservation Area Appraisal was undertaken in 2008 that states that the area around the Dome is of limited architectural and historic interest, and that redevelopment of the area was likely. Although The Dome lies within this Conservation Area it is considered to be of limited architectural or historic interest, especially in light of the changes made to the building post construction. In terms of PPS5 the demolition of this building would not be detrimental upon the heritage asset (the Conservation Area) nor could the building itself be considered to be a heritage asset.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 No planning obligations are sought.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 The proposal seeks to preserve the Conservation Area whilst not prejudicing future development of the site and its wider environment. The reinstatement of the site with a hard surface would create a safe space for passing pedestrians and cyclists, thereby ensuring the safety of the community. For these reasons, it is recommended that Conservation Area Consent is granted subject to the conditions listed below.

Recommendation

That the application be referred to Government Office North West with a recommendation that Conservation Area Consent BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard Conservation Area timescale 2. Construction hours 0800-1800 Monday to Friday and 0800-1400 on Saturday 3. Dust control 4. Unforeseen land contamination Page 75 5. Site Management Plan (including access, site compound, removal of waste, protective fencing) 6. Contract for restoration in place prior to demolition

Human Rights Act

This recommendation has been reached af ter consideration of the provisions of The Human Rights Act. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the issues arising do not appear to be of such magnitude to override the responsibility of the City Council to regulate land use for the benefit of the community as a whole, in accordance with national law.

Background Papers

None

Page 76 Agenda Item Committee Date AgendaApplication Item Number 15

A15 26 July 2010 10/00546/DPA

Application Site Proposal

University of Cumbria Provision of signed and marked cycle route with a Bowerham Road short section of new cyclepath (St Oswald Street to Lancaster Coulston Road and Wyresdale Road) including Lancashire additional street lighting and associated signs and markings

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Lancaster City Council

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

26 July 2010 N/A

Case Officer Mr Andrew Drummond

Departure No

Summary of Recommendation Approve subject to conditions

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The application site is within the educational establishment of the University of Cumbria. This campus is situated on a hilltop site in Bowerham, defined within the urban area by its grassy slopes that fall away to Bowerham Road. The application site utilises an existing network of roads and paths that run through the campus with the exception of one small section that cuts across an area of green space to St Oswald’s Street.

1.2 The built-up area of the campus is confined by Coulston Road to the south-east, residential properties to the south-west (Adelphi Street, Golgotha Road) and a green sward running through from Bowerham Road up to Wyresdale Road to the northwest of the campus. Various bus services run along Bowerham Road and parts of the Strategic Cycle Network are located on Bowerham Road, St Martin's Road and Wyresdale Road to the north and north west of the site.

1.3 The site that is the subject of this application is partially allocated as Urban Greenspace and Key Urban Landscape, as designated by the Lancaster District Local Plan. Further areas of the site are allocated as University College of St Martin, the establishment's name prior to its amalgamation with the University of Cumbria.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The application seeks planning permission for a cycle route into and through the campus of the University of Cumbria, with associated lighting, markings and signage. It would provide cycle access from St Oswald's Street/St Martins Road, Golgotha Road/Coulston Road, and Wyresdale Road in addition to Bowerham Road.

2.2 The route would utilise existing service roads or paths, and only requires one new section of path (80m long by 3m wide) to cut across an existing grass area to St Oswald's Street. A new opening would be created in the stone wall boundary to facilitate access into the site. The path would be constructed with timber edgings and surfaced with tarmacadam, with 1m wide strips either side levelled and re-seeded. No other landscaping works are proposed. Red textured surfacing will only Page 77 be utilised at the junctions and potential conflict points within the site. The section of newly constructed path will be lit to the same standard as the existing footpath which runs through the grounds, using lighting columns and lanterns to match the existing. Inclusive access will be catered for by ensuring the new section of path complies with DDA requirements and crossing points will be provided with kerbs flush with path and carriageway.

3.0 Site History

3.1 A number of relevant applications relating to this site have previously been received by the Local Planning Authority. These include:

Application Number Proposal Decision 04/01155/FUL Provision of a car par to provide 185 spaces Refused 06/01320/FUL Creation of a temporary car park Permitted 06/01202/FUL Erection of a new 4 storey Gateway building Permitted 07/01392/RCN Removal of Condition 10 of 06/01320/FUL and removal of Permitted Condition 5 of 06/01202/FUL 09/00529/RENT Renewal of temporary consent of 06/00486/FUL to provide Permitted two temporary teaching buildings 09/01198/FUL Renewal of temporary consent for a car park for a further Permitted three years

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory and internal consultees:

Consultees Response County Highways No objection to the proposal.

Environmental No comments received within the statutory consultation period. Any observations Health received will be reported verbally.

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 No correspondence has been received at the time of compiling this report. Any comments subsequently received will be reported verbally.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 National Planning Policy Statements (PPS) and Guidance Notes (PPG)

PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development) - provides generic advice for all new built development. The encouragement of sustainable modes of tra nsport is an important component of this advice. This advice is echoed in PPG 13 - Transport.

PPG13 (Transport) - encourages sustainable travel, ideally non-motorised forms of transport such as walking and cycling, but also other means like public transport. The use of the car should be minimised. This can be encouraged by the location, layout and design of new developments.

6.2 Regional Spatial Strategy - adopted September 2008

The Regional Spatial Strategy (and thus the policies contained therein) was formally revoked by the Government earlier this month

6.3 Lancaster District Local Plan - adopted April 2004 (saved policies)

Policy R13 (University College of St Martin) states that development associated with the expansion of the university will be confined to the site boundaries identified on the Local Plan proposals map. Page 78 Outside these areas development will be limited to outdoor sports facilities; small scale ancillary buildings; areas which already benefit from planning permission; and development of a scale and type acceptable within the greenspace and key urban landscape (partially superseded by policy ER1 of the Core Strategy)

Policy E29 (Urban Green Space) indicates that areas identified as UGS will be protected from development and where appropriate enhanced. Exceptionally, essential education or community related development will be permitted.

Policy E31 (Key Urban Landscape) Areas designated as Key Urban Landscape will be conserved. Only development which preserves the open nature of the area and the character and appearance of its surroundings may be permitted (partially superseded by the Core Strategy).

Policy T17 (Travel Plans) - requirement to produce a Travel Plan for development likely to generate large numbers of daily journeys.

Policy T26 and T27 (Footpaths and Cycleways) - requirements to include cycle and pedestrian links for new schemes.

6.4 Lancaster District Core Strategy - adopted July 2008

Policy SC1 (Sustainable Development) – ensures new development proposals are as sustainable as possible, minimise greenhouse gas emissions and are adaptable to the likely effects of climate change.

Policy E2 (Transportation Measures) – states that the Council will minimise the need to travel by car by focusing development on town centres and locations which offer a choice of modes of transport.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The proposed works are all part of the wider scheme to improve the cycle network throughout the Lancaster District. The alterations, which include new signage, markings, lighting and paths, are all seen to be an improvement to the existing layout which is currently not cycle friendly.

7.2 The proposed cycle route will provide:

An alternative cycle access to the campus from the town centre direction avoiding the busy A6 /Bowerham Road roundabout and the main entrance off Bowerham Road;
Pedestrian access from the St Martin’s Road area;
Access from the bus stop on St Martin’s Road;
Level access to the campus for students resident at Waddell Halls; and
Through routes for cyclists and pedestrians.

7.3 The design of the layout and the use of relevant materials have been carried out in accordance with Department for Transport's current guidance and best practice aimed at providing pedestrian and cyclist priority, all off which are seen to be satisfactory by the Highway Authority.

7.4 The scheme will require little alteration to the existing landscaping, and therefore the important Urban Greenspace and Key Urban Landscape are retained.

7.5 These measures are also welcomed as they support the University's Travel Plan, which in turn seeks to encourage the University's students and employees to use a non-car mode of transport to travel to their place of study or work.

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 No planning obligations are sought.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 The proposed cycleway improvements are seen to be a substantial improvement and will result in a much safer, easier and more efficient route for cyclists. It also helps to support the University's Page 79 Travel Plan by encouraging maximum uptake of cycling as the primary mode of transport. Therefore the scheme can be supported.

Recommendation

That Planning Permission BE GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard 3 year timescale 2. Development to accord with plans

Human Rights Act

This recommendation has been reached after consideration of the provisions of The Human Rights Act. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the issues arising do not appear to be of such magnitude to override the responsibility of the City Council to regulate land use for the benefit of the community as a whole, in accordance with national law.

Background Papers

None.

Page 80 Agenda Item Committee Date AgendaApplication Item Number 16

A16 26 July 2010 10/00465/DPA

Application Site Proposal

Town Hall Listed building application for repointing to all lightwells Dalton Square

Lancaster

Lancashire

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Lancaster City Council Mrs S Sealby

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

19 August 2010 None

Case Officer Petra Williams

Departure No

Approval with conditions subject to referral to Summary of Recommendation Government Office.

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The application has been brought before Committee Members as the subject property is in City Council ownership.

1.2 The application site is the Lancaster Town Hall situated in Dalton Square in the core of the Lancaster City Centre. The Town Hall is a Grade II* Listed Building and is made up of sandstone ashlar under slate roofing. The site is also within the City Conservation Area.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The application relates to five lightwells which provide daylight to the internal core of the building. Due to the defective condition of the existing mortar joints of glazed brickwork to the lightwells within the building, the application proposes to re-point the brickwork with hydraulic lime mortar. This is one aspect of a range of maintenance and repair works which are currently being carried out on this listed building.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The Town Hall has an extensive planning history which largely relates to matters of maintenance and repair. No previous applications materially affect this current submission.

Page 81 4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response English Heritage This application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance and on the basis of the LPA’s expert conservation advice. Conservation No objections – Requires conditions Officer

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 No representations received.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 PPS5 (Planning for the Historic Environment) - outlines the Government’s overarching aim for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment and its heritage and states that in considering the impact of a proposal on any heritage asset, (e.g. listed building) local planning authorities should take into account the particular nature of the of the heritage asset.

6.2 Lancaster District Local Plan (LDLP): Saved Policy E33 of the Local Plan refers to proposals involving external alterations to Listed Buildings. It states that alterations which would have an adverse effect on the architectural or historic character or interest of the buildings or their surroundings will not be permitted.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The key issue is to ensure that this important building remains weatherproofed and that the works do not have any adverse impact upon the heritage assets in question. The poor state of the existing mortar is allowing water ingress to the building. Access to carry out the works will be via scaffolding which will also be used with other ongoing maintenance works and via roof hatches.

7.2 The existing mortar will be carefully removed using hand held non mechanical tools and replaced with mortar to match existing. It is considered that these works will not have an adverse effect on the special architectural or historic character of the building and will not harm the significance of the heritage asset. The proposal therefore accords with national and local plan policies (PPS5 and EE33).

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 There are no planning obligations to consider.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 The proposed work is necessary in order to improve maintenance within this Grade ll* Listed Building. The re-pointing will not be publically visible. In conclusion, this proposal will not adversely affect the character or the setting of listed building. The work is considered sympathetic and complies with the policy principles which guide development in relation to historical assets and it is on this basis that Members are advised that this application can be supported.

Recommendation

That the application be referred to Government Office North West with a recommendation that PERMISSION BE GRANTED subject to conditions as follows:

1. Standard listed building time limit 2. Development in accordance with approved plans 3. A sample of the cutting out of the joints in the glazed brickwork is to be prepared for the approval of the Conservation Officer. Page 82 4. A sample of the existing mortar is to be analysed and a report submitted to the Conservation Officer. 5. The mortar specification is to be agreed with the Conservation Officer following the results of the analysis. 6. A sample area of re-pointing in the agreed mortar mix is to be carried out for the approval of the CO.

Human Rights Act

This recommendation has been reached after consideration of the provisions of The Human Rights Act. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the issues arising do not appear to be of such magnitude to override the responsibility of the City Council to regulate land use for the benefit of the community as a whole, in accordance with national law.

Background Papers

1. None

Page 83 AgendaAgenda Item Item 17 Committee Date Application Number

A17 26 July 2010 10/00585/DPA

Application Site Proposal

Town Hall Listed building application for new leadwork to existing rendered brickwork Dalton Square

Lancaster

Lancashire

Name of Applicant Name of Agent

Geoff Jackson Mrs Su Sealby

Decision Target Date Reason For Delay

6 August 2010 None

Case Officer Petra Williams

Departure No

Approval with conditions subject to referral to Summary of Recommendation Government Office.

1.0 The Site and its Surroundings

1.1 The application has been brought before Committee Members as the subject property is in City Council ownership.

1.2 The application site is the Lancaster Town Hall situated in Dalton Square in the core of the Lancaster City Centre. The Town Hall is a Grade II* Listed Building and is made up of sandstone ashlar under slate roofing. The site is also within the City Conservation Area.

2.0 The Proposal

2.1 The existing parapet walls of the Town Hall are in a defective state and are not currently watertight to external elements. In order to address this issue this application proposes new lead work to the lower section of the rendered brickwork around the parapet on the east and west elevations of the building. This is one aspect of a range of maintenance and repair works which are currently being carried out on this listed building.

3.0 Site History

3.1 The Town Hall has an extensive planning history which largely relates to matters of maintenance and repair. No previous applications materially affect this current submission.

Page 84

4.0 Consultation Responses

4.1 The following responses have been received from statutory consultees:

Statutory Consultee Response English Heritage This application should be determined in accordance with national and local policy guidance and on the basis of the LPA’s expert conservation advice.

Conservation Comments to be reported verbally at Committee. Officer

5.0 Neighbour Representations

5.1 No representations received.

6.0 Principal Development Plan Policies

6.1 Planning Policy Statement (PPS) 5 (Planning for the Historic Environment) - outlines the Government’s overarching aim for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment and its heritage and states that in considering the impact of a proposal on any heritage asset,(e.g. listed building) local planning authorities should take into account the particular nature of the of the heritage asset.

6.2 Lancaster District Local Plan (LDLP): Saved Policy E33 of the Local Plan refers to proposals involving external alterations to Listed Buildings. It states that alterations which would have an adverse effect on the architectural or historic character or interest of the buildings or their surroundings will not be permitted.

7.0 Comment and Analysis

7.1 The key issue is to ensure that this important building remains weatherproofed and that the works do not have any adverse impact upon the heritage assets in question. Access to carry out the works will be via scaffolding which will also be used with other ongoing maintenance works and via roof hatches. The parapets are not highly visible and nevertheless the replacement lead work will be a light grey colour to match existing.

7.2 The works will not have an adverse effect on the special architectural or historic character of the building and will not harm the significance of the heritage asset. The proposal therefore accords with national and local plan policies (PPS5 and E33).

8.0 Planning Obligations

8.1 There are no planning obligations to consider.

9.0 Conclusions

9.1 The proposed work is necessary in order to improve maintenance within this Grade II* Listed Building. The replacement lead work will not be highly visible. In conclusion, this proposal will not adversely affect the character or the setting of listed building. The work is considered sympathetic and complies with the policy principles which guide development in relation to historical assets and it is on this basis that Members are advised that this application can be supported.

Recommendation

That the application be referred to Government Office North West with a recommendation that PERMISSION BE GRANTED subject to conditions as follows:

1 Standard listed building time limit Page 85 2. Development in accordance with approved plans

Human Rights Act

This recommendation has been reached after consideration of the provisions of The Human Rights Act. Unless otherwise stated in this report, the issues arising do not appear to be of such magnitude to override the responsibility of the City Council to regulate land use for the benefit of the community as a whole, in accordance with national law.

Background Papers

None

Page 86 Agenda Item 18 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS

LANCASTER CITY COUNCIL

APPLICATION NO DETAILS DECISION

09/00379/FUL Ryelands Service Station, Owen Road, Lancaster Application Permitted Retrospective application for the redevelopment of existing petrol filling station and demolition of 27 Owen Road for Euro Garages Ltd (Skerton East Ward)

09/00389/FUL Ryelands Service Station, Owen Road, Lancaster Application Permitted Retrospective application for the erection of 3 poles to support lamp and CCTV cameras for Euro Garages Ltd (Skerton East Ward)

09/00406/CU Stable Block Field 3225, Arna Wood Lane, Lancaster Application Permitted Retrospective application for continued use of land as Menage and the relocation of stable block and hardstanding for Ms J Thompson (Scotforth West Ward)

09/00042/DIS Former Recreation Area For Special Care Unit, Request Completed Elterwater Place, Lancaster Discharge of all conditions on application no. 06/01588/FUL for Adactus Housing Association Limited (Bulk Ward)

09/01022/CU Rooten Brook, Rakehouse Brow, Quernmore Change of Application Permitted use and conversion of agricultural buildings to 3 self- catering holiday accommodation units and a residential annexe to include external alterations and the addition of roof lights for Mr T Longton (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

09/00058/DIS 29 Castle Hill, Lancaster, Lancashire Discharge of Application Permitted conditions 1- 6 on application number 09/01002/LB for (Castle Ward)

09/01254/FUL Railway Cottage, Corricks Lane, Conder Green Erection Application Permitted of ground floor extension to servery of existing tea room. for Mr David Sharratt (Ellel Ward)

10/00034/FUL Halton Hall, Church Brow, Halton Erection of first floor Application Permitted extension above existing garage for Dr A Whitton (Halton With Aughton Ward)

10/00050/LB Bolton Le Sands Free Grammar School, St Michaels Application Permitted Lane, Bolton Le Sands Listed building application for various remedial works to include damp treatment, re- plastering, opening up old fireplace and improvements to the roof space insulation. for The Trustees Of Bolton Le Sands Free Grammar School (Bolton Le Sands Ward)

10/00058/FUL 24 Lymm Avenue, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection of a Application Permitted replacement garage for Mr M Robinson (Skerton West Ward)

10/00062/FUL Burrow Cottage, Burrow Heights Lane, Lancaster Application Permitted Retrospective application to regularise the demolition of existing dwelling and erection of replacement dwelling for Mr A Stanyon (Ellel Ward)

10/00067/ADV B And M Bargains, Marine Road Central, Morecambe Application Permitted Page 87 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS Erection of advertising sign to the rear of the existing shop for Mr Anthony Dalby (Poulton Ward)

10/00082/FUL 1 Beach Street, Morecambe, Lancashire Installation of a Application Permitted new front window for Mr D Masheder (Bare Ward)

10/00109/LB Clarksons Farm, Moss Lane, Thurnham Listed building Application Permitted application for the erection of a replacement porch for Ms J Coulton (Ellel Ward)

10/00146/LB Adj Cafe Nero, 23 Market Street, Lancaster Listed Application Refused building application for the creation of lock-up kiosk adjacent Cafe Nero for Mr D Sharpe (Dukes Ward)

10/00149/FUL 55 Borrowdale Road, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection of Application Permitted a single storey extension to the rear, a two storey extension to the east side including a workshop extension and creation of a new vehicular access for Mr Andrew Halladay (Bulk Ward)

10/00155/LB The Green, Mewith Lane, Tatham Listed building Application Permitted application for replacement of existing roof for Mr R Bradley (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00160/FUL Lydon House, Potters Brook, Bay Horse Erection of a Application Permitted private garage and mobility scooter charging facility for Mr Russell Sanderson (Ellel Ward)

10/00161/CU Heaton House, Woodman Lane, Leck Erection of a Application Permitted single storey garage and retrospective change of use of agricultural land to domestic curtilage and a single storey sustainable plant/store room extension. for Mr & Mrs Trinder (Upper Lune Valley Ward)

10/00170/VCN A B C Lancaster (disused), King Street, Lancaster Application Withdrawn Variation of condition No.17 on approved application no. 08/01129/FUL to change the use class for most of the first floor from A1 (non-food) to C1 (hotel) for Kempsten Ltd (Dukes Ward)

10/00018/DIS Old Hall Farm, Over Hall Road, Ireby Discharge of Request Completed condition numbers 6 and 7 on application number 09/01238/FUL for Mr A And Mrs S Key (Upper Lune Valley Ward)

10/00174/FUL Land At Sidegarth Lane, Halton-w-Aughton, Lancashire Application Permitted Erection of a cattle building for Mr J Maxwell (Halton With Aughton Ward)

10/00183/FUL 20 Emesgate Lane, Silverdale, Carnforth Amendments Application Refused to approved application 08/01102/FUL to form a one bed dwelling for Mr John Baldwin (Silverdale Ward)

10/00187/ADV Lune View Garage, Melling Road, Melling Application for Application Permitted the retention of one internally illuminated pole mounted display unit for Mr Matt Swindles (Upper Lune Valley Ward)

10/00223/NMA 1 Oaklea, Main Street, Wray Non material amendments Application Permitted to previously approved application 09/01025/FUL for Mrs E Garnett (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00228/LB Arkholme CE Primary School, Main Street, Arkholme Application Permitted Listed building application for various works for School Page 88 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS Governors (Kellet Ward)

10/00235/FUL 1 Westover Avenue, Warton, Carnforth Erection of two Application Permitted semi detached 3 bed dwellings with integral garage for Mr D Bell & S Bateman (Warton Ward)

10/00248/CU Unit 5 Westgate Works, Whitegate, Morecambe Application Permitted Change of use from storage and warehouse to car sales and repair for Mr J Palmer (Westgate Ward)

10/00241/CU Box Tree, Ravens Close Road, Wennington Change of Application Permitted use of agricultural land for the enlargement of existing fresh water private fishing pond to allow commercial coarse fishing for Mr Ian Armour (Upper Lune Valley Ward)

10/00255/LB 1 Hall Gowan Cottages, North Road, Carnforth Listed Application Permitted building application for the installation of a satellite dish for Mr D Riley (Carnforth Ward)

10/00252/CU 384 Heysham Road, Heysham, Morecambe Change of Application Permitted use from Tanning Salon (A1) to a Coffee Shop (A3) for Mrs Lindsay Lucas (Heysham Central Ward)

10/00253/ELDC Gibraltar Farm, Lindeth Road, Silverdale Application for Application Permitted a Certificate of Lawful (Existing) Use of Land as a Touring Caravan Site (Re-Submission of 09/00704/ELDC) for Mr James Burrow (Silverdale Ward)

10/00257/FUL 282 Bowerham Road, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection of Application Permitted a single storey extension to rear and new pitched roof over existing extension and garage to side for Mr A Jackson (Scotforth East Ward)

10/00258/FUL Beaumont Grange, Kellet Lane, Slyne Erection of a Application Permitted conservatory to rear and side for Mr P Edmondson (Slyne With Hest Ward)

10/00259/LB Beaumont Grange, Kellet Lane, Slyne Listed Building Application Permitted application for the erection of a conservatory to rear and side for Mr P. Edmondson (Slyne With Hest Ward)

10/00270/FUL Great Bridge Cottage, Adjacent To Greta Bridge House, Application Permitted Cantsfield Road Application for extension of time on application 05/00222/FUL for the demolition of store and erection of two storey side and rear extension for Mr F Tudor (Upper Lune Valley Ward)

10/00279/CU Hillam Lane Farm, Hillam Lane, Cockerham Change of Application Permitted use of agricultural land to form extension to existing commercial fishing lake for Chris Parry (Ellel Ward)

10/00283/FUL Kendal Hill Farm, Dobbs Lane, Glasson Dock Application Permitted Construction of roof and walls to existing silage store for Mr J.D. Charnley (Ellel Ward)

10/00289/CU Manor House Farm, Lancaster Road, Slyne Change of Application Permitted use of an existing barn into one dwelling for Mr & Mrs R Hoggarth (Slyne With Hest Ward)

10/00292/FUL 15 Monkswell Drive, Bolton Le Sands, Carnforth Application Permitted Erection of a single storey extension to the side with accommodation in loft space above, two dormer windows to the front elevation and single storey Page 89 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS extension to the rear for Mrs Y Herron (Bolton Le Sands Ward)

10/00297/FUL Hornby C O E Primary School, Main Street, Hornby Application Permitted Extension to the main entrance to create secure lobby area for The Governors Of Hornby St. Margaret's CE Primary School ( Ward)

10/00300/FUL 185 Bare Lane, Morecambe, Lancashire Retrospective Application Refused application for the retention of new access for Mr & Mrs J Fletcher (Torrisholme Ward)

10/00302/CU Caton Youth Club, Copy Lane, Caton Change of use Application Permitted and conversion of existing youth club and community centre to form office and store room, demolition of existing two storey side extension and erection of a replacement single storey extension for Mr G Baines (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00307/FUL 69 Hest Bank Lane, Hest Bank, Lancaster Erection of a Application Refused two storey extension to the rear and dormer window to front for Mr & Mrs Dennis Pratt (Slyne With Hest Ward)

10/00308/FUL 5 Penrod Way, Heysham, Morecambe Siting of a Application Permitted portable building for training and office for Mr Martyn Horabin (Heysham South Ward)

10/00311/FUL The Sheiling, Church Lane, Yealand Conyers Demolition Application Withdrawn of existing building and erection of four bed property and access works for K Howson And C Waine (Silverdale Ward)

10/00324/FUL 30 Yealand Drive, Lancaster, Lancashire Extensions Application Refused and alterations to increase the height and form of existing roof together with the installation of a dormer window to the front for Mr And Mrs A Yates (Scotforth East Ward)

10/00290/LB Manor House Farm, Lancaster Road, Slyne Listed Application Permitted Building for change of use of an existing barn into one dwelling for Mr & Mrs R Hoggarth (Slyne With Hest Ward)

10/00320/FUL Chipping Road Barn, Chipping Lane, Bay Horse Application Refused Retrospective application for the erection of side and rear balconies to existing dwelling. for Mr James Gardner (Ellel Ward)

10/00321/FUL Leck Fell Farm, Leck Fell Road, Leck Erection of Application Permitted extension to existing livestock building for Mr Alan Middleton (Upper Lune Valley Ward)

10/00323/NMA 10 Leslie Avenue, Caton, Lancaster Non-Material Application Permitted amendment to approved application 09/00786/FUL to alter the position of the gutter for J And E Huddleston (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00326/LB Bailrigg House, Bailrigg Lane, Lancaster Listed building Application Permitted application for landscaping works for Susan Palmer (University Ward)

10/00346/FUL The Stables Hyning Home Farm, Milnthorpe Road, Application Permitted Warton Erection of ground floor extension to the front for Mr Spruce (Warton Ward) Page 90 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS

10/00327/FUL 14 Coastal Road, Hest Bank, Lancaster Erection of Application Permitted raised decking to the rear for Mr A Considine (Slyne With Hest Ward)

10/00331/FUL 3 Hawksworth Grove, Heysham, Morecambe Erection of Application Permitted a two storey side extension and single storey extension to rear for Mr A Greenwood (Heysham Central Ward)

10/00334/FUL 51 Anstable Road, Morecambe, Lancashire Erection of a Application Permitted single storey extension to the rear for Mrs Pauline Evans (Torrisholme Ward)

10/00345/FUL 24 Alderman Road, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection of Application Permitted an extension to the rear for Mr A Sargeant (Scotforth West Ward)

10/00336/FUL 10 Broadacre Place, Caton, Lancaster Erection of a rear Application Permitted dormer window for Miss K Addis And Mr D Kyle (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00343/VCN Field No 0006, Jeremy Lane, Glasson Dock Variation of Application Permitted condition 2 on application 08/00689/CU to allow use for flying of model aircraft up to 7 days per week during summer months of 1 April - 30 September for Lancaster And Morecambe Model Aircraft Club (Ellel Ward)

10/00348/FUL 328 Heysham Road, Heysham, Morecambe Erection of Application Permitted a two storey extension to the front, north side and rear, single storey garage extension to the south side and dormer window to the rear for Mr A Nuttall (Heysham Central Ward)

10/00342/FUL 9 Holker Close, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection of a 2 Application Permitted storey side extension with first floor extending over existing garage, conservatory to rear and chimney to side for Mr Michael Yates (Castle Ward)

10/00347/CU 99 Marine Road West, Morecambe, Lancashire Change Application Permitted of use from book-keepers (use class A2) to yoga and holistic therapy studio (use class D2) for Ms Collette Corcoran (Harbour Ward)

10/00349/CON 12 - 22 Northumberland Street, Morecambe, Lancashire Application Permitted Conservation area consent for the demolition of existing outriggers at rear of property for (Poulton Ward)

10/00350/FUL 12 - 22 Northumberland Street, Morecambe, Lancashire Application Permitted Change of use of numbers 12-16 from commercial to three town houses. demolition of small rear outriggers on units 14 and 18/20, internal alterations, external refurbishment of existing facades, including new and replacement windows and doors, new ramped and altered step access to yard areas, existing parking spaces to be re-surfaced and new bin and cycle storage for Bannister Bates Property Lawyers (Poulton Ward)

10/00352/FUL 12 St Annes Close, Brookhouse, Lancaster Erection of Application Permitted dormer extension to the rear for Mr M Woods (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00353/RENU 1 Carrington Grove, Morecambe, Lancashire Renewal of Application Permitted unexpired application 07/00403/FUL for the erection of a single storey extension to the rear for Mrs D Page 91 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS Fotheringham (Torrisholme Ward)

10/00355/LB Pearson House, Hutton Roof Road, Whittington Listed Application Permitted Building application for the erection of a conservatory for Mr & Mrs J Parsons (Upper Lune Valley Ward)

10/00364/FUL 43 Rutland Avenue, Lancaster, Lancashire Construction Application Permitted of a decked area to the rear for Mr A Cook (Scotforth East Ward)

10/00361/FUL Land Between 11 And 11a Coach Road, Warton, Application Refused Carnforth Erection of detached dwelling for Mr A Fothergill (Warton Ward)

10/00363/FUL Higher Kit Brow, Kit Brow Lane, Ellel Creation of new Application Permitted field access gate for Mr And Mrs Airth (Ellel Ward)

10/00365/FUL Nazareth House, Ashton Road, Lancaster Erection of Application Permitted two single storey extensions to the west and east elevations, erection of a canopy over existing outdoor play area and alterations and replacement windows and doors at the Day Nursery for The Sisters Of Nazareth (Scotforth West Ward)

10/00367/FUL 7 Marsh Lane, Cockerham, Lancaster Erection of two Application Permitted storey extension to the side for Miss Helen Wilson (Ellel Ward)

10/00368/FUL Unit 2 And 3, Melling Mill, Melling Road Removal of Application Permitted existing wooden storage building and erection of new workshop for Mr Charles Stephenson (Upper Lune Valley Ward)

10/00371/FUL 6 Kingsmuir Close, Heysham, Morecambe Erection of Application Permitted single storey rear extension to adapt home for a wheelchair use for Mr Chris Robertson (Heysham South Ward)

10/00376/FUL 8 Pembroke Avenue, Morecambe, Lancashire Erection Application Permitted of an extension to garage for Mr K Maloney (Bare Ward)

10/00328/FUL Various Locations Near , Booth Hall, Bay Horse Road Application Permitted Creation of seven passing places for United Utilities Water Plc (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00372/FUL Lorien (formerly Salkeld Cottage), Whitebeck Lane, Application Permitted Priest Hutton Erection of a porch to the front for Mr K Dunn (Kellet Ward)

10/00377/FUL 13 The Roods, Warton, Carnforth Erection of a two Application Permitted storey side extension and front porch for Mr Daley And Ms Gill (Warton Ward)

10/00383/ADV Skerton Hotel, 2 Owen Road, Lancaster Erection of Application Permitted various signs for Mr R Whitehead (Skerton East Ward)

10/00384/FUL Knowe Hill Lodge, 25 A Shore Road, Silverdale Application Permitted Demolition of attached outhouses and erection of a new attached double garage for Mr & Mrs Simon Williams (Silverdale Ward)

10/00385/ADV Morecambe FC, Globe Arena, Langridge Way Application Permitted Advertisement consent for signage affixed to main elevation and totem sign fronting the main access Page 92 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS junction for Morecambe Football Club Ltd (Westgate Ward)

10/00387/FUL Pearson House, Hutton Roof Road, Whittington Erection Application Permitted of conservatory to the rear for Mr & Mrs J Parsons (Upper Lune Valley Ward)

10/00388/ADV Carnforth Service Station, Lancaster Road, Carnforth Application Refused Erection of an internally illuminated free standing double sided display unit for Mr Matt Swindles (Carnforth Ward)

10/00397/FUL 93 Silverdale Road, Yealand Redmayne, Carnforth Application Permitted Erection of a single storey extension to the rear for R Oaks And A Bingley (Silverdale Ward)

10/00399/ADV Future House, 10 Mannin Way, Lancaster Erection of 2 Application Permitted illuminated signs for Mr W Metcalfe ( Ward)

10/00411/FUL 24 Schoolhouse Lane, Halton, Lancaster Erection of a Application Permitted side extension and dormers to front and rear for Mr And Mrs Phillipson (Halton With Aughton Ward)

10/00395/FUL Cobwebs, Woodman Lane, Leck New detached single Application Permitted garage to side elevation and 3 new roof lights to rear elevation of existing dwelling for Mr Paul Kelly (Upper Lune Valley Ward)

10/00402/ADV 67 King Street, Lancaster, Lancashire Installation of 2 Application Permitted illuminated signs for Mr Dave Jones (Dukes Ward)

10/00403/CU 6-7 Marketgate, Lancaster, Lancashire Change of Use Application Permitted Class from Retail (A1) to Professional and Financial Services (A2) for Ms Fiona MacFadyen (Dukes Ward)

10/00404/FUL 5 Lawson Close, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection of two Application Permitted storey extension to side and single storey rear extension for Mr L. Sutcliffe (Scotforth West Ward)

10/00405/FUL 42 Greenwood Crescent, Bolton Le Sands, Carnforth Application Permitted Erection of a two storey extension to the front and conservatory to the rear for Mr & Mrs D Farrer (Slyne With Hest Ward)

10/00409/AD Red Lodge, Biggins Lane, Whittington Erection of a Prior Approval Not storage shed for Mr & Mrs G Bell (Upper Lune Valley Required Ward)

10/00410/FUL Ocean Edge Caravan Park, Moneyclose Lane, Heysham Application Permitted Retrospective application for the retention of a porch extension for Mr Nigel Wimpenny (Overton Ward)

10/00416/ADV Asda Stores Ltd, Ovangle Road, Lancaster Erection of Application Permitted various signage for ASDA Stores Ltd (Westgate Ward)

10/00418/NMA Asda Stores Ltd, Ovangle Road, Lancaster Non material Application Permitted amendments to 09/01171/FUL relating to fascia for Asda Stores Ltd (Westgate Ward)

10/00419/FUL Asda Stores Ltd, Ovangle Road, Lancaster Erection of Application Permitted 3m palisade fence and 6m wide gate to perimeter of home shopping loading area canopy for ASDA Stores Ltd (Westgate Ward)

10/00413/FUL Hawthorne Caravan Park, Carr Lane, Middleton Application Permitted Page 93 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS Retrospective application for the creation of an outdoor play area for Mr Nigel Wimpenny (Overton Ward)

10/00414/FUL Kitchen Ground, Kit Brow Lane, Ellel Phase one of a two Application Permitted phase plan, new agricultural storage building for feed and machinery for K & DE Woodhouse (Ellel Ward)

10/00415/FUL Kitchen Ground, Kit Brow Lane, Ellel Phase two of a two Application Permitted phase plan - extension to agricultural livestock buiding for K & DE Woodhouse (Ellel Ward)

10/00421/FUL 53 Brookhouse Road, Caton, Lancaster Erection of part Application Permitted single and part two storey rear extension for Mr And Mrs Ward (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00422/FUL 12 Osborne Crescent, Morecambe, Lancashire Erection Application Permitted of a single storey rear extension to ground floor flat for Mrs M Sargeant (Heysham North Ward)

10/00427/FUL Ullevi, Chapel Lane, Ellel Erection of a single storey Application Permitted extension to rear for Mr David France (Ellel Ward)

10/00428/FUL 21 Crofters Fold, Heysham, Morecambe Erection of a Application Permitted conservatory to the rear for Mr & Mrs Ahad (Heysham Central Ward)

10/00430/FUL 4 The Hawthorns, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection of first Application Permitted floor extension to the side over existing garage for Mr & Mrs S. Fisher (Scotforth East Ward)

10/00432/LB The Green, Mewith Lane, Tatham Listed building Application Permitted application for the removal of a garden wall for Mr R Bradley (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00434/ADV Chancellors Wharf, Aldcliffe Road, Lancaster Erection of Application Permitted various signage for Lancaster University (Dukes Ward)

10/00438/LB 19 Yealand Road, Yealand Conyers, Carnforth Listed Application Permitted building consent for replacement windows and french doors for Mr John Calnan (Silverdale Ward)

10/00448/CU Hay Carr, Preston Lancaster Road, Ellel Change of use Application Permitted of agricultural land to form extended parking area and garden, erection of cricket pavilion and extension to existing stable block to house electric transformer for Mr & Mrs Higginson (Ellel Ward)

10/00439/FUL Five Ashes Farm House, Burrow Road, Lancaster Application Permitted Proposed amendment to the external materials and finishes to the extensions approved by planning permission 06/00727/FUL and the erection of a plant room to the rear elevation for Dr & Mrs J Orr (Ellel Ward)

10/00445/FUL 138 High Road, Halton, Lancaster Erection of a side Application Refused extension with dormers to front and rear for Mr I Ferguson (Halton With Aughton Ward)

10/00470/FUL 45 Morecambe Road, Morecambe, Lancashire Erection Application Permitted of single storey extension to side and rear for Mr N Pinnington (Torrisholme Ward)

10/00033/DIS Wood House, Home Farm Close, Wray Discharge of Request Completed conditions 4, 5, 6, 7 and 10 on approved application 09/00640/FUL for Paul Wilson (Lower Lune Valley Page 94 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS Ward)

10/00441/FUL 14 St Pauls Drive, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection of a Application Permitted single storey front extension for Ian Norris (Scotforth West Ward)

10/00443/FUL Sand Villa Farm, Sandside, Cockerham Retrospective Application Permitted application for the retention of an agricultural cattle building for Mr R Jones (Ellel Ward)

10/00447/NMA Bell Hill Farm, Littledale Road, Brookhouse Non-material Application Refused amendment to approved application 02/00698/CU for D Fulford (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00451/FUL Regent Park Filling Station, Regent Road, Morecambe Application Permitted Temporary permission for the installation of a storage container for Mr Shiraz Master (Harbour Ward)

10/00453/RENU The Grange, Littlefell Lane, Lancaster Renewal of Application Permitted unexpired application 05/00635/FUL for the erection of a garage and domestic storage building for Mr George Kenneth Burt (Ellel Ward)

10/00454/NMA Land Rear Of 98 - 104, Windermere Road, Carnforth Application Permitted Non-material amendment to approved application 06/00148/FUL to amend the fascia boards to uPVC for Northern Affordable Homes Ltd (Carnforth Ward)

10/00455/FUL Asda Stores Ltd, Ovangle Road, Lancaster Erection of a Application Permitted standalone canopy with an additional chiller and freezer compartment to the rear of store for ASDA Stores Ltd (Westgate Ward)

10/00460/CU 1 Dalton Square, Lancaster, Lancashire Proposed Application Permitted change of use from dental surgery to hair dressing salon for Jo & Cass (Dukes Ward)

10/00462/FUL Stables Near Railway, Out Moss Lane, Morecambe Application Refused Erection of a garage for horse boxes and implement storage for Mr J. Harrison (Poulton Ward)

10/00463/FUL Lancaster University, Bailrigg Lane, Lancaster Application Permitted Replacement of external windows and doors to The Chaplaincy Centre. Roof to be replaced like for like. for Lancaster University (University Ward)

10/00468/CU First Floor Flat, Former Conservative Club, 173 Euston Application Permitted Road Change of use of existing 2 bedroomed flat into 4 no. offices with D1 (Medical _ needle exchange in association with the approved ground floor area), B1 (but specifically part 'a' office use); and/or A2 restricted to financial advice; plus additional kitchen and wc for Mr D Dixon ( Ward)

10/00469/FUL Grisedale, Littlefell Lane, Quernmore Erection of single Application Permitted storey extension to front and side for Mr David Jarrard (Ellel Ward)

10/00034/DIS Wenning House, Wennington Road, Wennington Request Completed Discharge of conditions 5, 6, 7,8, 9 and 11 on approved application 09/00537/FUL for Mr I Johnson (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00471/NMA Halton Mill, Mill Lane, Halton Non-material amendment Application Permitted Page 95 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS to approved application 06/00786/REM for Like Technologies (Halton With Aughton Ward)

10/00488/NMA Carr House Farm, Carr House Lane, Lancaster Minor Application Permitted amendments to approved application 09/00918/FUL to reposition boundary wall for Mr Robin Loxam (Castle Ward)

10/00489/ELDC 25 Middleton Road, Middleton, Morecambe Existing Application Permitted lawful development certificate for use of an outbuilding for the storage of antique furniture. for Mr Stephen Goulding (Overton Ward)

10/00486/FUL Lancaster University, Bailrigg Lane, Lancaster Application Permitted Refurbishment of the existing ISS building including replacement windows, additional windows, new entrance and alteration to part of roof for Mr Mark Swindlehurst (University Ward)

10/00504/FUL 3 Monkswell Avenue, Bolton Le Sands, Carnforth Application Permitted Erection of a replacement single storey extension to rear for Mr And Mrs Casson (Bolton Le Sands Ward)

10/00498/FUL 2 Redruth Drive, Carnforth, Lancashire Proposed first Application Permitted floor extension over existing garage for Mr & Mrs D. Salmon ( Ward)

10/00500/FUL 10 Spring Bank, Silverdale, Carnforth Proposed attic Application Permitted conversion with a rear dormer extension for a bathroom for Mr R Watts (Silverdale Ward)

10/00508/NMA 2 Lythe Brow Barn, Quernmore Road, Quernmore Non- Application Permitted material amendment to approved application 08/01435/FUL to amend the height of the windows for Mr Jonathan Brakewell (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00507/CU The Barn, Clarksons Farm, Moss Lane Retrospective Application Permitted application for the erection of stable extension and change of use of land to create a menage (re- submission of application no 10/00154/CU) for Ms Catherine Helliwell ( Ward)

10/00515/FUL 38 Esthwaite Gardens, Lancaster, Lancashire Erection Application Refused of front and rear dormers for Mr & Mrs A Nickson (Bulk Ward)

10/00530/FUL 13 West Street, Lancaster, Lancashire Raising of roof to Application Refused incorporate conversion of attic for Mr & Mrs M. Campbell (Scotforth West Ward)

10/00547/FUL 4 Shady Lane, Hest Bank, Lancaster Erection of Application Refused extension to the rear to form sun lounge for Mr D Ormerod (Slyne With Hest Ward)

10/00550/FUL 8 Windham Place, Lancaster, Lancashire Application for Application Permitted extension of time on application 08/00491/FUL for the erection of a two storey extension to side for Mr D Hough (Skerton West Ward)

10/00572/PLDC 398 Marine Road East, Morecambe, Lancashire Lawful Application Permitted Development Certificate for the erection of a detached garage to the rear for Mr Ronald Thorpe (Bare Ward)

10/00577/CCC Moorside Primary School, Bowerham Road, Lancaster No Objections Page 96 LIST OF DELEGATED PLANNING DECISIONS Erection of a canopy and new entrance for Lancashire County Council (Scotforth East Ward)

10/00582/AD West Hall, West Hall Lane, Whittington Agricultural Prior Approval Not determination for the erection of an agricultural building Required for the housing of cattle for Mr John Airey (Upper Lune Valley Ward)

10/00603/CCC Heysham Mossgate County Primary School, Kingsway, No Objections Heysham Replacement of existing fences with 2.4m high railings to front of school and 2.4m high to 3m high weldmesh fencing to other boundaries for Lancashire County Council (Heysham Central Ward)

10/00041/DIS The Barn, Addington Road, Halton Discharge of Request Completed conditions 5 and 6 on approved application 09/01111/FUL for Mr Richard Jackson (Kellet Ward)

10/00580/FUL The Hollows, Brookhouse Road, Brookhouse Removal Permitted Development of existing single storey conservatory and erection of new single storey conservatory at the rear of the building. for Mr Brian Pinington (Lower Lune Valley Ward)

10/00600/AD Scaleber Farm, Burton-In-Lonsdale, Carnforth Erection Prior Approval Not of an agricultural building for Mr R Wilcock (Upper Lune Required Valley Ward)

10/00604/FUL Red Bridge Barn, Red Bridge Lane, Silverdale Removal Application Withdrawn of a stainless steel flue, construction of a chimney stack and velux roof windows along with various internal alterations for Mr & Mrs P Morgan (Silverdale Ward)

10/00649/NMA 4 Burlington Avenue, Morecambe, Lancashire Non- Application Permitted material amendment for the insertion of two velux windows and the use of 'Forticrete' Centurion red concrete roofing tiles to the rear ground floor lean-to extension of the approved application 08/01004/FUL . for Mr J Hanson (Poulton Ward)