F.SL20160999 115 Station Road

Home , Cartmel Peninsula

SCHEDULE: (f) SL/2016/0999

PARISH: Lower Holker

PROPOSAL: Two Dwellings

APPLICANT: Mr Terence Miller

Grid Ref: E: 336355 N: 476413 6 Riverside View Pond Pond The Steps

Cark Bridge 6 The T he E House Fold ngine Br

(PH 1 4 ) 5 Th L 1 e old au F m re 9 l B

. an

0 k 0 3

1 3 1 1 1

1 1 El 9 . 4 7 Sub

m Sta a

127 8 129 8 PC Cark 25 1 Millstream Court

11.3m 5

1 1

2 6 1 1 1

W IE V 5 W O D

A 5

E 1 M 1 The Grange

Orchard Barn 106

11.3m

0 1

C D 3

o e

t r t w a

g 1 n e

t s " C ar k a SP

The material contained in this plot has been reproduced Scale 1:1250 from an Ordnance Survey map with permission of the PLAN REFERRED TO: Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office. SL/2016/0999 Licence No. 100024277 © Crown Copyright

Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings 115 Station Road Development Control Group Cark in Cartmel South Lakeland District Council South Lakeland House GRANGE-OVER-SANDS Lowther Street LA11 7NY KENDAL, Cumbria LA9 4DL January 2017 SUMMARY

Outline planning application with all matters reserved for the erection of 2no. dwellings.

The application site comprises an element of the residential grounds of the property known as 115 Station Road, Cark in Cartmel.

The principal issues are the impact of the proposals upon the character of the settlement, the setting of the Grade II Listed 121 Station Road, the living conditions of the existing and proposed dwellings, access and flood risk.

The application is required to be determined by Members of the Planning Committee as the applicant and the agent for the application are related to an employee of South Lakeland District Council.

DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSAL

Location and Site Description:

The application site comprises an element of the grounds of the semi-detached dwelling known as 115 Station Road, Cark in Carmel.

The site comprises a c.0.1ha area of managed grass covered lawns, domestic buildings and an ornamental pond.

The site is enclosed by a combination of hedgerows; stone boundary walls; timber panel fencing; and, the elevations of the dwellings adjacent to the site.

The site is bounded by the grounds of 113 Station Road to the southeast; the host dwelling (115 Station Road) and 2no. further dwellings to the northeast; 2no. dwellings and a collection of domestic garages to the northwest; and, agricultural land to the southwest.

An existing access and vehicle parking area serving 115 Station Road are located to northeast of the application site.

Proposal:

This application seeks outline planning permission with all matters reserved for the erection of 2no. dwellings.

No illustrative plans or drawings are submitted to demonstrate how the site could be developed.

Planning History:

A pre-1982 planning application history exists; however, full details of the relevant planning applications are no longer held by the Authority.

The details held confirm the following:

5/82/0130 – Temporary retrospective planning permission approved for siting of a residential caravan of occupation by Mr W. Miller or a member or members of his family subject to planning conditions.

5/81/1598 – Planning permission refused for the erection of a bungalow. Details of the reason(s) for refusal are no longer held.

CONSULTATIONS

Lower Holker Parish Council: Support. There is adequate access and the development would not be detrimental to existing properties.

Network Rail: No comments.

United Utilities: The discharge of the surface water into the public main is not acceptable in principle.

United Utilities will have no objection subject to foul and surface water being drained on separate systems with surface water being disposed in accordance with the hierarchy of drainage options in the National Planning Practice Guidance.

Cumbria County Council – Highway Authority and Local Lead Flood Authority: Object. The width and visibility splays to the access to the application site are inadequate

Environment Agency: No objection.

The Application Site is located within Flood Zone 2 and Flood Zone 3. The proposed development fall s under the flood risk classification of ‘More Vulnerable’.

In accordance with Paragraph 101 of the National Planning Policy Framework, development in Flood Zone 2 should be the subject of the Sequential Test and should not be permitted if there are reasonably available sites appropriate for the proposed development in areas with a lower probability of flooding. The Exception Test must also be applied to development in Flood Zone 3.

If the Local Planning Authority is minded to approve the application, Planning Conditions should be utilised to secure the flood resistance and resilience recommendation outlined in the Flood Risk Assessment be applied.

Representations - Neighbours / Interested Parties: The Application has been advertised by way of planning application site notice and notification letters sent to 15no. neighbouring properties.

Four representations in support of the application have been received and eight representations in objection to the application from seven individuals have been received.

The material planning matters raised comprise the following:

Support: - Minimal impact to the area. - New properties will help local businesses.

Objection:

Amenity; - The development will result in adverse impacts upon the amenity of adjacent dwellings including their garden areas through overlooking, overshadowing and loss of light. - Additional vehicle movements will impact upon the amenity of adjacent dwellings through noise generation. - Noise during construction will adversely impact upon the amenity of neighbouring residents.

Flood Risk; - The site is in a flood zone. - Additional surface water run-off from the development will increase flood risk at adjacent properties.

Access; - Access to the application site is inadequate.

Impact on Listed Building; - The development will adversely impact upon the setting of a Listed Building (No. 121 Station Road).

Impact on Character of Cark; - The development impaction upon the character of the local area. - A previous planning application for the development of a dwelling on the site has been refused.

Biodiversity; - The development will result in a reduction in biodiversity.

Representations – Applicant, Agent and Related Persons: The material planning matters raised comprise the following:

Need; - The proposals would boost housing supply in Cark.

Amenity; - No specific area has been chosen for the development of the site; therefore, objections on grounds of loss of light cannot be raised. - Dwellings overlook the application site as existing.

Flood Risk; - The application site does not flood. The railway cutting is below the level of the application site. - The development would deliver much needed money to businesses in Cark. - A Flood Risk Assessment has been submitted. - Amendment of the discharge water to soakaway will remove objection from United Utilities.

Access; - Access to the application site exists and is adequate.

Impact on Character of Cark; - The development would not have a detrimental effect on the surrounding area.

Other; - No planning application has been submitted before.

POLICY ISSUES

South Lakeland Core Strategy (CS):

Policy CS1.1 Sustainable Development Principles provides criteria for new development.

Policy CS1.2 The Development Strategy states that approximately 21% of new housing and employment development will be in the network of Local Service Centres. Revised town and village development boundaries for the Principal, Key and Local Service Centres will be identified as part of the Allocations of Land DPD.

Policy CS4 Cartmel Peninsula seeks to m ake provision for moderate housing development in Grange over Sands between 2003 and 2025, prioritising previously developed land and sites within the urban areas and to make provision for small scale housing development in the Local Service Centres and in the smaller rural settlements in the Cartmel Peninsula, with a particular focus on affordable housing. It also seeks to protect and enhance the diverse character and local distinctiveness of the area and promote high quality and locally distinctive design and designate (as required) a series of green gaps to prevent the coalescence of individual settlements and thereby protect their individual character and setting.

Policy CS8.2 Protection and Enhancement of Landscape and Settlement Character states that development proposals should be informed by and be sympathetic to the distinctive character landscapes identified in the Cumbria Landscape Character Guidance and Toolkit. Proposals should demonstrate that their location, scale, design and materials will protect and conserve the special qualities and local distinctiveness of the area.

Policy CS8.4 Biodiversity and Geodiversity requires that all development should p rotect, enhance and restore the biodiversity and geodiversity value of land and buildings; minimise fragmentation and maximise opportunities for restoration, enhancement and connection of natural habitats; and, incorporate beneficial biodiversity and geodiversity conservation features, including features that will help wildlife to adapt to climate change where appropriate.

Policy CS8.6 Historic Environment supports safeguarding and where possible enhancing historic environment assets such as listed building

Policy CS8.8 Development and Flood Risk seeks to ensure most new development is located in Flood Risk Zone 1. New development will only be permitted where it can be demonstrated that it would not have a significant impact on the capacity of an area to store flood water, measures required to manage any flood risk can be implemented and surface water is managed in a sustainable way.

Policy CS8.10 Design seeks to promote good design which maintains or enhances the quality of the area.

Policy CS10.2 Transport Impacts of New Development requires that development proposals should provide for safe and convenient access and foot, cycle, public and private transport, be served by safe access to the highway network without detriment to the amenity or character of the locality. Development Plan Document (DPD): Local Plan Land Allocations:

Policy LA1.1 Development Boundaries defines development boundaries including that for the Local Service Centre of Cark / Flookburgh.

It is stated that between 2010 and 2025 the development needs of these settlements will be met within the development boundaries defined on the policies map.

Saved Policies of the South Lakeland Local Plan (LP):

Policy S2 South Lakeland Design Code Policy S3 Landscaping Policy S10 Parking Provision in new Development Policy S26 Sewage Treatment and Disposal

Other material considerations

Council Plan 2014 – 2019:

The broad aims of the five year Council Plan are to:- · Enable and deliver opportunities for economic growth. · Provide homes to meet need. · Imp rove residents’ health and well -being. · Protect the environment.

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF):

Paragraph 53 states local planning authorities should consider the case for setting out policies to resist inappropriate development of residential gardens, for example where development would cause harm to the local area.

Paragraph 55 states to promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. For example, where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby.

Paragraph 100 states that inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding should be avoided by directing development away from areas at highest risk, but where development is necessary, making it safe without increasing flood risk elsewhere.

Paragraph 126 states that local planning authorities should set out in their Local Plan a positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment, including heritage assets most at risk through neglect, decay or other threats.

Self-build and Custom Housebuilding Act 2015; and, Self-build and Custom Housebuilding (Register) Regulations 2016:

The Regulations place a duty on relevant local planning authorities to keep a register of individuals and associations of individuals who are seeking to acquire serviced plots of land in the authority’s area in order to build houses for those individuals to occupy as homes. It is required that local planning authorities have regard to each self-build and custom housebuilding register that relates to their area when carrying out their planning, housing, land disposal and regeneration functions.

Housing and Planning Act 2016:

The Housing and Planning Act 2016 came into law on the 12 th May 2016. Section 10 of the Act places duty on a relevant local planning authority to grant permissions for enough serviced plots of land to meet the demand for self-build and custom housebuilding in the authority’s area arising in each defined base period. It is confirmed that the demand for self- build and custom housebuilding arising in an authority’s area in a base period is the demand as evidenced by the number of entries added during that period to the Self-build Register of the relevant local planning authority.

The regulations enacting the provisions of the Act are yet to be prepared, therefore, limited weight is to be given to the relevant duties.

HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

This application has been determined to accord with the rights and limitations of the Act in relation to Article 6 (Right to a fair and public hearing), Article 8 (Right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence), Article 14 (Prohibition of discrimination) and Article 1 of Protocol 1 (Right to peaceful enjoyment of possessions and protection of property).

ASSESSMENT

Principle

Policy CS1.2 of the CS identifies Flookburgh / Cark as a Local Service Centre. The application site is located within the development boundary of Cark / Flookburgh as defined in the LADPD.

In principle, the erection of 2no. new building market dwellings on the application site is acceptable subject to site specific matters.

Landscape and Settlement Impact

All matters (access, appearance, landscaping, layout and scale) are reserved for subsequent approval. As such it is necessary to assess the potential to erect a design of any design and layout on the application site that would be acceptable in planning terms.

Policy CS8.2 requires that “ proposals for development should be informed by, and be sympathetic to, the distinctive character landscape types identified in the Cumbria Landscape Character Guidance and Toolkit” and that “developmen t proposals should demonstrate that their location scale, design and materials will protect, conserve and, where possible, enhance :… the distinctive settlement character”.

The proposed would comprise a back land and likely tandem form of development, which would not be well related to Meadow View and would be out of character with the linear highway frontage development that prevails in this area of Cark. Notwithstanding the limited views from public vantage points, it is considered that any scheme for the erection of the 2no. dwellings located within the application would cause harm to the developed character and form of this area of the settlement.

In the context of the location of the site in relation to the developed extent of Cark and the features of the rising mass of the land to the west, the development would not, subject to the design and scale, result in adverse impacts upon the character of the wider landscape.

Impact on the Setting of Listed Building

The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 sets out a clear presumption that gives considerable importance and weight to the desirability of preserving a heritage asset and its setting.

Section 66.1 requires that: “In considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the local planning authority or, as the case may be, the Secretary of State shall have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses”.

The governme nt’s guidance in the NPPF requires that when considering the impact of development proposals on designated heritage assets such as listed buildings, great weight should be given to the conservation of the asset’s significance.

The application site comprises part of the setting of the Grade II Listed 121 Station Road to the northwest. The existing Grade II Listed Building is in part compromised by the modern development to Meadow View. The proposed development is physically located in close proximity to the asset. The development would be visible in key views of the property and by virtue of its back land form, will distract from the appreciation and understanding of the asset. Any works to improve the existing access would result in harmful urbanising effects, further detracting from the character of the setting of the asset. The proposal would result in development that would have a moderately adverse impact on the special character and appearance of the asset.

In applying the statutory duty of the 1990 Act, for the reasons outlined above, the proposal would neither preserve nor enhance the special interest of the asset. Having paid special attention to the desirability of preserving the asset; and taking into account recent case law, despite finding the harm to be less than substantial, there remains a statutory presumption against granting planning permission.

The Applicant has not cited any public benefits arising from the development. It is clear that the development will not result in direct heritage benefits; however, the provision of 2no. dwellings will result in social and economic benefits. Given the nature of these benefits, these are not considered sufficient to outweigh the harm arising from the development.

Flood Risk and Drainage

Policy CS8.8 is consistent with the provisions of Paragraph 100 and Paragraph 101 of the NPPF, which seek to steer new development to areas with the lowest probability of flooding and not approving development if there are reasonably available sites at lower risk of flooding.

The proposed development falls under the flood risk classification of ‘More Vulnerable’. The Application Site is located within Flood Zone 2 and Flood Zone 3. The Sequential Test is applicable to the proposed development, with the Exception Test applicable to any development in Flood Zone 3. A Sequential Test has not been completed and submitted in support of the application; therefore, the requirements of Policy CS8.8 and the NPPF are not achieved.

The proposed development comprises the erection of 2no. market led dwellings which do not contribute towards the meeting of a specific identified housing need e.g. affordable housing need. The development will contribute towards meeting the wider need for housing within the district of South Lakeland; therefore, the applicable geographic area for the Sequential Test should comprise that on which the wider housing need is calculated, unless other material factors dictate a reduction of that area. The Strategic Housing Market Assessment for South Lakeland divides the district into six geographical housing market areas based upon geography and market dynamics. It is arguable that the development will contribute toward meeting a housing need within the Cartmel Peninsula Housing Market Area, within which the application site is located.

Notwithstanding the above, given the scale and nature of the proposed development and the reasonable availability of comparator sites for this nature and scale of development within the wider district of South Lakeland and the Cartmel Peninsula Housing Market Area, the potential to potential to pass the Sequential Test is considered to be limited.

As it has not been demonstrated that the Sequential Test has been passed, the Exception Test has not been fully engaged.

Amenity

Primary windows serving existing dwellings are located to the northeast and northwest boundaries of the application site.

Given the location of these windows within the existing dwellings and the arrangement of the application site, limited interface distances are achievable between the existing and any proposed dwellings. This results in a limited area within the site that could be developed without adverse impacts upon the living conditions of the existing and proposed dwellings through overlooking, loss of light, overshadowing and overbearing. This area is limited in area and is not reasonably sufficient in scale to accommodate 2no. single storey or two storey dwellings. The limitations resulting from the required arrangement of any fenestration would severely compromise the design and form of any dwellings.

Domestic grounds serving existing dwellings are located to northeast; southeast; and, northwest. The erection of any two storey dwellings on the application site is likely to result in physical overlooking and increased perception of overlooking of the existing domestic grounds.

Access

Access to serve the proposed 2no. dwellings is only reasonably available via the existing access and parking area located to the northeast of the application site.

Sufficient space exists within the site to achieve 5no. vehicle parking spaces and a manoeuvring area to enable vehicles to turn within the site and both enter and exit the site in a forward gear.

Notwithstanding the above, the width of the existing access and visibility splays serving the access are significantly substandard. Visibility splays are impaired by existing dwellings to the southeast and parked vehicles to the northwest.

The proposed development will result in a material increase in the use of the existing access and will therefore adversely impact upon the safe operation of the public highway to the detriment of highway safety.

In the absence of evidence to justify a departure from the provisions of the Cumbria Design Guide, visibility splays of 90metres x 2.4metres x 1.05metres and an access width of 4.1metres are required to serve the proposed development. These are not demonstrated as achievable.

The use of on highway parking provision to serve the proposed development will exacerbate a known existing parking problem in this area of the settlement to the detriment of highway safety.

Contamination

The application site comprises an area of residential curtilage. No contamination is known to exist on the site.

A planning condition could be attached in respect of any contamination identified on the application site during construction.

Biodiversity and Geodiversity

The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 requires that consideration be given to the impact of any development on European Protected Species.

The existing buildings to the east boundary of the site are of timber, plastic sheet and corrugated sheet construction. The buildings do not fall within the planning and development trigger list for bat surveys contained within the Bat Conservation Trust Bat Surveys Good Practice Guidelines 2012 and are therefore considered to hold very limited potential for bats.

No other European Protected Species are known to be present on the application site.

Hedgerows and small trees exist on the application site. Planning conditions could be attached to mitigate impacts during construction and safeguard the retention following completion if necessary.

Financial Considerations

In accordance with the requirements introduced by Section 115 of The Housing and Planning Act 2016. The financial benefits of the proposed development are estimated below.

Source Benefit Community Infrastructure Levy £55.86/m2. Nil - If self-build exemption applied. Council Tax Income £3000 per annum. SLDC element: £335 per annum. Based on 1.8 Band D Equivalents. New Homes Bonus £2558 per annum. SLDC element: £1160 per annum. Based on 1.8 Band D Equivalents. New Homes Bonus received for first four years only.

It is considered limited weight should be attached to the financial benefits arising from the proposed development.

CONCLUSION

In principle, the erection of 2no. new building market dwellings on the application site is acceptable subject to site specific matters.

It is for Members to consider if in terms of site specific matters, the erection of 2no. dwellings on the application site is acceptable.

It is the view of Officers, that in the lack of evidence to the contrary, the proposed development will cause harm to the developed form of Cark in Cartmel, the settling of the Grade II Listed 121 Station Road and the residential amenity of the existing adjacent and proposed dwellings. The development is located within Flood Zone 2 and Flood Zone 3 and the Sequential Test has not been demonstrated as passed.

Whilst weight must be afforded the statutory duties of the Self-build and Custom Housebuilding Act 2015; Self-build and Custom Housebuilding (Register) Regulations 2016; and, the Housing and Planning Act 2016, it is considered that this does not override the fundamental conflicts with the development plan as identified.

It is therefore considered that the development does not accord with the provisions of the Development Plan and should be resisted.

RECOMMENDATION: REFUSE for the reasons below:-

Reason (1)

Cark is principally characterised by intimate linear highway frontage development. A small number of developments exist, which do not follow this form. Meadow View to the north of the application site comprises an intimate projecting form of development arranged around a linear access from Main Street. The modern development to Meadow View has consolidated for the form/arrangement, diminishing both its character and interest. The proposed would comprise a back land and likely tandem form of development, which would not be well related to Meadow View and is at odds with the character of the linear highway frontage development that prevails in this area of Cark. Notwithstanding the limited views from public vantage points, the proposed would cause harm to the developed character and form of this area of the settlement contrary to the provisions of Policy CS8.2 of the South Lakeland Core Strategy and Paragraph 58 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Reason (2)

The application site comprises part of the setting of the Grade II Listed 121 Station Road to the northwest. The existing Grade II Listed Building is in part compromised by the modern development located to the west of Meadow View. The proposed development is physically located in close proximity to the asset. The development would be visible in key views of the property and by virtue of its back land form, will distract from the appreciation and understanding of the asset. Any works to improve the existing access would result in harmful urbanising effects, further detracting from the character of the setting of the asset. No public benefits have been identified to outweigh the harm arising from the development. The development is therefore contrary to the provisions of Policy CS8.6 of the South Lakeland Local Plan, Paragraphs 132-134 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Section 66.1 of The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.

Reason (3)

The application site is located within defined Flood Zone 2 and Flood Zone 3. The proposed development is a more vulnerable use; therefore, the Sequential Test and Exception Test are applicable to the development. The applicant has failed to provide sufficient information to demonstrate that the Sequential Test haw been passed to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority control contrary to the relevant provisions of Policy CS8.8 of the South Lakeland Core Strategy and Paragraphs 99 - 103 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Reason (4)

The application site is constrained by the form of the site, the location of primary windows and residential grounds serving existing dwellings. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, it is considered that the proposed is likely to result in unacceptable impacts upon the living conditions of the residents of the existing and proposed dwellings through loss of light, overshadowing, overbearing, overlooking and perception of overlooking contrary to the provisions of Paragraph 17 of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Reason (5)

As proposed, access to serve the application site is only reasonably available via the existing access and parking area located to the northeast. Visibility splays of 90metres x 2.4metres x 1.05metres and an access width of 4.1metres required to serve the proposed development are not demonstrated as achievable to the existing access and no evidence has been provided to justify a departure from these standards. The development will adversely impact upon the safe operation of the public highway to the detriment of highway safety contrary to the relevant provisions of Policy CS10.2 of the South Lakeland Core Strategy and Paragraph 32 of the National Planning Policy Framework.