D4604

Land at Place, Church Lane, , Tadley RG26 5LA

Proposed erection of a single-storey dwelling on the tennis court

Planning and Heritage Statement to be read in conjunction with the Design and Access Statement by Batterham Smith Architects

Location and relevant planning history

The application is a repeat of 17/00685/FUL, which was submitted in February 2017 and withdrawn in May so that certain issues could be addressed. The subsequent changes to the design of the scheme are outlined in the DAS, whilst a material change to the policy context and the definition of ‘isolated’is outlined in this Statement

Tadley Place is a Grade II listed dwelling on the southwest side of Church Lane, roughly midway between New Road Tadley to the north and the settlements of West Heath and to the south.

To the northeast of the house and close to the lane, is a thatch roof 5-bay barn that is listed Grade II in its own right. It has been modernised as a large recreation room and is also used for general storage purposes ancillary to Tadley Place.

The curtilage of Tadley Place extends to the opposite, northern side of the lane, where there is a hard tennis court enclosed within a chain link fence. Permission for that development was granted in 1989 under BDB/26876. The tennis court area is adjacent to the southern end of a horse paddock, either side of which are wooded areas – Browninghill Copse to the west being within the applicants’ ownership.

Just to the southwest of Tadley Place, fronting the lane, is a wooden bungalow (Cedar Cottage).

Cedar Cottage was the subject of an application for lawfulness in 2017 confirming that it is a lawful dwelling with no agricultural or occupancy tie

The proposal

It is proposed to erect a dwelling within the area of the approved tennis court. The proposal is fully described in the Design and Access Statement. It is designed for and would be occupied by the applicants, meeting their reasonable needs as they get older – hence the accommodation is on one floor.

Planning policy

The application site is not within a settlement but is within open countryside for planning policy purposes. This would normally indicate a presumption against development unless in compliance with one of the exceptions. As a rural brownfield site, the development can be considered under policy SS6, part (a) which states:

Policy SS6 – New Housing in the Countryside Development proposals for new housing outside of Settlement Policy Boundaries will only be permitted where they are:

1

D4604

a) On ‘previously developed land’, provided that: i) They do not result in an isolated form of development; and ii) The site is not of high environmental value; and iii) The proposed use and scale of development is appropriate to the site’s context.

Looking at the three criteria:

i) They do not result in an isolated form of development

That part of the text relating to ‘isolated’ from the previously submitted Planning Statement is reproduced in blue text below and remains a relevant assessment of the sustainability credentials of the site. That assessment was made prior to the High Court Judgement in ‘Braintree’ (Braintree District Council v Secretary of Statement for Communities and Local Government, Greyread Limited and Granville Developments Limited dated 15 November 2017) in which it was held that in the context of paragraph 55 of the NPPF ‘isolated’ must be given its ordinary objective meaning: ‘far away from other places, buildings or people; remote’

That judgement acknowledged that new dwellings in the countryside are likely to retain reliance upon private vehicles and that new development which is not ‘truly’ isolated could be deemed acceptable whereby this would support local services and facilities within the rural settlement to which the site is located as well as assisting to support the viability of services and facilities within neighbouring settlements.

The Judge also made reference to the 2017 Judgement in Dartford ( Dartford Borough Council v Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government [2017] EWCA Civ 141) and the comments of Lewison LJ who said, at [15], in relation to para. 55 of the NPPF

“… the definition of previously developed land, in the context of the present case, takes as its starting point that the proposed development is within the curtilage of an existing permanent structure. It follows that a new dwelling within that curtilage will not be an ‘isolated’ home.”

In the case of Tadley Place the proposed dwelling would be within the curtilage of the listed dwelling and would not be remote from other places, buildings or people. Occupiers of the proposed dwelling would help to sustain services and facilities not only in nearby villages, but also in the local rural area where pubs, farm shops, farm gate retailers etc rely on local customers.

Accordingly in the light of those two Judgements handed down since 17/00685/FUL was submitted, the applicant is even more convinced that the application site is not isolated, so there is no conflict with criterion i) of Policy SS6a.

2

D4604

As noted above, the previously submitted text on this subject reads:

By the Local Plan glossary definition, the site probably is isolated, but on the other hand at paragraph 7.32, the Local Plan confirms:

‘the borough does not have any ‘remote rural’ areas, since there is no part of the borough that is more than about 10km from its nearest town, district or local centre, including those outside the borough boundary’,

so it is appropriate to consider what is within easy reach of the application site, rather than rely on the narrow glossary definition, which clearly is not a one-size-fits-all guide. Indeed, the definition of isolated makes reference to ‘significant separation’ from a settlement, but there is no definition of ‘significant separation’ so that must be a matter of judgement, based on site-specific considerations.

The applicants’ analysis is as follows:

• Tadley Place is less than 30 minutes walk (7-8 min by bike) from GP surgery, shops, pubs, schools, churches, business park and a regular bus ride into .

• The closest amenities are with in 15 minutes walk covering, shops, pubs, churches, B&B, and farms in Tadley, West Heath and Baughurst.

• 0.5 miles from St Peter's Church Tadley (9 min walk or 3 min cycle)

• 0.7 miles from village of West Heath (13 min walk or 4 min cycle) with shops, B&B and farms

• 0.7 miles from edge of Baughurst (13 min walk) via footpath with shops, pub and St Stephen's Church at this end.

• 0.9 miles (19 min walk or 5 min cycle) via byway from the A340 Green bus stops with a regular service to Tadley and Basingstoke

Buses start at 6:06am towards Tadley (4 min) 5 per hour to 10:27pm

Buses start at 6:10am towards Basingstoke (9 min to Hospital) 5 per hour to 10:31pm

• 1.2 miles from the edge of Tadley (23 min walk or 6 min cycle) with 4 shops, 2 churches, a doctors surgery, Swimming pool and a primary school on this edge)

• 1.2 miles by cycle from the edge of Baughurst ( 6 min cycle )

• 1.4 miles from Charter Alley ( 27 min walk or 7 min cycle ) with shops, pub, hair dresser, and business park

• 1.4 miles from Priory School ( 27 min walk via Wyfords)

In the ordinary meaning of the word, I suggest such a site would not be regarded as ‘isolated’ by the man on the Clapham Omnibus. It would relate well to the Tadley Place cluster of buildings and dwellings.

3

D4604

However, even if there is a choice of modes of transport for prospective occupiers of the dwelling, and even if they take advantage of deliveries that already generate traffic in the lane (royal mail, groceries, white van man etc) it is acknowledged that many journeys will be made by private car.

The owners who will occupy the dwelling already drive hybrid vehicles and are encouraged by the comments of Inspector Jones in respect of an appeal near (appeal ref: APP/H1705/W/15/3133111) who stated:

‘Even if future residents choose to travel by private car, it is likely that the journeys would be short given the close proximity to key services and facilities’.

It is considered that this would be the case for the Tadley Place application, with a lot more higher order facilities within reach by a short (hybrid) car journey.

Whether or not the site is isolated is a matter of judgement, but in any case, is capable of being outweighed by other criteria and other material considerations, as confirmed in numerous recent decisions by the LPA. Other material considerations include an assessment of whether the Proposal is NPPF sustainable and this will be considered below.

Turning to criteria ii) and iii), there is no change to the previously submitted text, which reads: ii) The site is not of high environmental value

The application site is not considered to be of high environmental value. It is not within the AONB and the land does not have any special landscape designation. The tennis court and fence are partially screened from view from Church Lane and the applicants have carried out extensive native planting; have removed alien species; and are now actively managing Browninghill Copse and land around the house in order to improve biodiversity, encourage understorey growth. Native hedge planting has been carried out on the road frontage. The applicants are also happy to consider ways in which public access may be made available to others for recreational or educational purposes.

The proposed dwelling would fit in to a very pleasant landscape setting, but certainly not an area of high environmental value or sensitivity. It is considered that the dwelling and its associated landscaping and sedum roofs, will have a positive impact on the immediate area and there would be no conflict with criterion ii) of SS6a. iii) The proposed use and scale of development is appropriate to the site’s context

The way in which the proposed dwelling would fit into its landscape setting is more fully described in the architect’s design and access statement.

There is an existing woodland access track that would be used to provide access to the dwelling, so there would be no need to engineer a new access to Church Lane or to carve out sight lines that would have a detrimental visual impact.

There is a public footpath (Tadley FP 26) through Browninghill Copse running east to west from a point roughly opposite Cedar Bungalow. However, due to the distance and the intervening vegetation, it is considered that the proposal will have no impact on users of that footpath.

4

D4604

The site is not within a conservation area, but the two listed buildings at Tadley Place are heritage assets, the settings of which need to be respected. The distance from Tadley Place house, the intervening structures and the careful siting and design of the proposed dwelling, mean that there would be no adverse impact on the setting of that property.

Moreover, Tadley Place is a large house on higher ground, so it would remain the dominant and most important building within the complex. Likewise, it is considered that there would be no adverse impact on the setting of the listed thatch barn, which turns its back on the lane and faces the host dwelling i.e. Tadley Place. The proposed dwelling also faces away from the lane and its single-storey design with low sedum roofs and the degree of mature and newly planted screening between the two buildings, will ensure there is no adverse impact on the setting of the listed barn. In any case, the difference in scale between the proposed single storey dwelling and the very large thatch barn will also mean that the barn will continue to dominate the street scene in this part of Church Lane.

As such it is considered that the development would accord with criterion iii) of SS6e

Application 17/00685/FUL was referred to the NE Architects’ Design Review Panel. That body ‘very much liked the design approach, but felt the design is capable of further development’ , making a number of recommendations to improve the scheme. How the application has been amended to reflect thos recommendations is set out the Design statement by Batterham Smith

Other Local Plan policies (text below is as for 17/00685/FUL)

The proposal has evolved with the following additional Local Plan policies in mind:

CN4 Housing for older people/Specialist housing

Whilst the proposal is not specifically for over-55’s or sheltered accommodation, it is designed with the likely future needs of the applicants very much in mind, so to that extent it accords with CN4 and will add to the very limited stock of single-storey lifetime mobility homes that currently exist. It would be at the higher end of the market, but there is an increasing need for such accommodation at all levels of the property market

CN9 Transport

This policy states:

Development should seek to minimise the need to travel, promote opportunities for sustainable transport modes, improve accessibility to service and support the transition to a low carbon future. Development proposals will be permitted that: a) Integrate into existing movement networks; b) Provide safe, suitable and convenient access for all potential users; c) Provide an on-site movement layout compatible for all potential users with appropriate parking and servicing provision; and d) Do not result in inappropriate traffic generation or compromise highway safety

5

D4604

a) and d): Church Lane is a relatively lightly trafficked road, but it is considered that the increase in traffic associated with a single dwelling would not have a material impact on traffic flows or highway safety. As explained in pages 2-3 above and in the Design and Access Statement, the applicants are environmentally conscious; they work nearby in Calleva Park and make use of local shops and services. They walk and cycle locally, but will also make short journeys by car using their hybrid vehicles. They will also continue to make use of delivery services that already serve Church Lane and thereby help to minimise their carbon footprint insofar as it relates to transport. It should also be noted that the dwelling will be designed to the highest standards of energy efficiency, making it as close to energy neutral as possible b) and c): As noted above it is proposed to use an existing access with adequate visibility in a section of the lane where the geometry ensures that traffic speeds are very slow. Appropriate and well located car parking will be provided on site, together with cycle parking, and bin storage for daily use. A bin collection point will be provided with suitable screening and within the carry limits. It is envisaged that the dustcart will service from Church Lane, as it does for other properties.

EM1 Landscape

The policy requirement includes the need for proposals to be ‘sympathetic to the character and visual quality of the area concerned. Development proposals must respect, enhance and not be detrimental to the character or visual amenity of the landscape likely to be affected’.

The issue of design, appearance and landscape/visual impact is addressed above and in the architect’s design and access statement. It is considered that the proposal will meet the above requirements, causing no harm to visual amenity or landscape character.

EM4 Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Nature Conservation

The application site comprises an old tennis court that was erected on long-established agricultural land. Part of the site is on land that is currently used as a pony paddock. So that the potential impact on biodiversity can be considered, a PEA has been commissioned and will follow.

EM10 Delivering High Quality Development

Paragraph 6.80 . ‘The council encourages creative and innovative design where appropriate’. Please refer to the drawings and the architect’s Design and Access Statement. It is considered that the proposal represents high quality development that will help to raise standards of design more generally in rural areas and significantly enhance its immediate setting. As such it is considered that the proposal accords with EM10 and the relevant sections of the NPPF.

EM11 The Historic Environment

‘All development must conserve or enhance the quality of the borough’s heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance’.

The proposal does not directly relate to a Heritage Asset, but the setting of the nearby Heritage assets has been considered above. We firmly believe there would be no harm and no conflict with EM11.

6

D4604

EM12 Pollution

‘Development which is sensitive to pollution will only be permitted where: a) There would be no detrimental impact on quality of life as a result of existing, historic, or nearby land uses and activities’

Whist past land uses do not suggest there is any likelihood of contamination that would affect the wellbeing of future occupants, residential use is a land use that is sensitive to contamination, so a destktop/walkover survey has been commissioned and will follow shortly.

NPPF sustainability

With regard to the three dimensions of sustainability, it is considered that the proposed development would accord with all three, so would accord with paragraph 7 of the NPPF.

A. Economic: the construction phase will create employment opportunities for local building companies and various consultants, and will require materials, fixtures and fittings that are likely to be sourced locally. The dwelling is likely to require support in terms of cleaning services and building/grounds maintenance, creating further local job opportunities. This will provide a boost to the local economy. Occupiers of the dwelling are also likely to use local services and facilities, thereby helping to sustain those services and facilities, for the benefit of the wider community. This would also accord with the NPPF para 55

B. Social: Even a single dwelling will accord with the social role in that it will contribute to supporting strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and future generations; and by creating a high quality built environment, with accessible local services that reflect the community’s needs and support its health, social and cultural well-being. The dwelling would be designed to meet the specific needs of the applicants but would make a valuable contribution to the local housing stock for future generations, in terms of a dwelling that would be wheelchair friendly and is 100% accessible for those with mobility impairment. Very few such properties exist or are being built. The dwelling would also enable the applicants to vacate Tadley Place, which would then be available to provide a lovely home for another family.

C. Environmental: It is considered that the proposed development will contribute to protecting and enhancing our natural, built and historic environment; and, as part of this, helping to improve biodiversity, use natural resources prudently, minimise waste and pollution, and mitigate and adapt to climate change including moving to a low carbon economy. Please refer to the Design and Access Statement for details of the environmental credentials of the dwelling and see above with regard to the biodiversity enhancement measures already introduced, with opportunities for further enhancement if recommended by BDBC and/or the appointed ecologist. The building as a piece of architecture is also considered to make a significant contribution to the environmental dimension of sustainability.

DGG Planning Limited March 2018

7