WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
Page No.
WARD NAME Tavistock South APPLICATION NUMBER 00216/2013 LOCATION Annan, Down Park Drive, Tavistock, Devon, PL19 9AH APPLICANT NAME Mr M Gray 16
WARD NAME Bere Ferrers APPLICATION NUMBER 00536/2013 LOCATION Hewton Nurseries, Bere Alston, PL20 7BW APPLICANT NAME Devon Growth Ltd 25
WARD NAME Exbourne APPLICATION NUMBER 00071/2013 LOCATION Land at SS578 090, Iddesleigh, Devon APPLICANT NAME Mr C Illman 35
WARD NAME Tavistock North APPLICATION NUMBER 00768/2013 LOCATION Land to rear of 18, Watts Road, Tavistock APPLICANT NAME Mr and Mrs R Baker 66
WARD NAME Drewsteignton APPLICATION NUMBER 00638/2013 LOCATION Martins Park, Exeter Road, Whiddon Down, Okehampton, Devon, EX20 2QL APPLICANT NAME Mrs J Ross 74
WARD NAME Buckland Monachorum APPLICATION NUMBER 00743/2013 LOCATION Uppaton Bungalow, Buckland Monachorum, Yelverton, PL20 7LL APPLICANT NAME Mrs J Halsall 78
WARD NAME Tavistock North APPLICATION NUMBER 00764/2013 LOCATION 20 Plymouth Road, Tavistock, Devon, PL19 8AY APPLICANT NAME Mrs E Baker 85
WARD NAME Milton Ford APPLICATION NUMBER 00089/2013 LOCATION Endsleigh Hotel, Milton Abbot, Tavistock, PL19 0PQ APPLICANT NAME Endsleigh Hotel Ltd 88
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
WARD NAME Tavistock South (Cllrs M Ewings; R Oxborough; E Sherrell) APPLICATION NUMBER 00216/2013 LOCATION Annan, Down Park Drive, Tavistock, Devon PL19 9AH APPLICANT NAME Mr M Gray
Site Address: Annan, Down Park Drive, Tavistock, Devon, PL19 9AH
Development: Outline planning permission application for the erection of 6 residential units for occupation by over 55 year-olds only.
This item is before Committee at the request of Cllr. Ewings who states that; “This application should have been decided by the 6th May and hasn’t due to difficulties with WDBC and the applicants agent. In light of their difficulties over the justification for the “occupancy of the units” and the “affordable housing” issue, I think it would be better decided by the P&L committee”.
Recommendation: Refuse
Reasons for refusal: 1. The proposed development fails to demonstrate why the occupancy of the units should be limited to persons 55+ years in age or that this is required to fulfil an indentified need which would be contrary to the aims of West Devon Core Strategy polices SP1 and SP8 which seek to create inclusive, balanced communities with an adaptable environment suitable for a range of occupiers which meets the long term housing needs of all. 2. The proposed development does not provide for affordable housing either on site or by way of financial contribution or provide evidence to indicate that the scheme would be rendered unviable by such provision. The proposed development is therefore considered to be contrary to Core Strategy policy SP9.
Key issues for consideration: The key issues for assessment with regard to this application relate to the principle of development in relation to current development plan policy the most relevant matters relate to the provision of affordable housing and viability.
Financial Implications (Potential New Homes Bonus or other as relevant): SP9 Affordable housing.
Site Description: The site currently consist of a large detached dwelling (Annan) and its immediate curtliage which is a substantive mature garden.
The proposal would require the demolition of the property in favour of the 6 proposed units which have been shown as an indicative plan as comprising 3 pairs of semi- detached units 9one block being of a link design toward the north of the site).
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
The site is bounded to the north by “Tatham House” and to the west by “Barafundle”. The site is bounded to the east by the properties of “Lindenfells” and No’s 1 and 2 Lang Grove.
There is a group TPO on this site consisting of a Golden Cypress and a Yew which are positioned towards the front of the site. A previously TPO’d birch has been removed (with permission from the LPA), however its required replacement has not yet been planted.
The site is currently accessed by a vehicular entrance connecting a short driveway to Down Park Drive. The proposed development is shown as being accessed via a new access more central to the plot; however it should be noted that this application is outline with matters reserved for future consideration.
The site is not within a designated area and is within the settlement boundary for Tavistock.
The Proposal: The application is an outline application for the erection of 6 residential units for occupation by over 55 year-olds only.
Consultations:
Tavistock Town Council: Support
County Highways Authority: No objections but notes length of private drive in relation to waste collection
Environment Agency: Standing advice
South West Water Services: No comments received
Countryside Officer: No objection and recommends conditions
Environmental Health: No objection and recommends standard contaminated land conditions
Affordable Housing: Support subject to provision of £47,250 towards affordable housing
Landscape Officer: 1.Existing trees on site; Tree Preservation Order reference S252 protects a single Silver Birch T8 and a group of two trees G5 a Golden Lawson’s Cypress and a Yew. During a review of tree preservation orders in the Down Road area in 2009 these trees were identified by the Council’s tree consultant as having sufficient merit to protect. The Silver Birch received consent to fell in May 2012 as the property owner had strong concerns that the tree was dangerous, although the tree was not necessarily dangerous the vigour was poor and there appeared limited prospect for the tree. The consent was conditional on the planting of a replacement Birch, I
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______understand that this replacement has not been planted. In view of the position of the tree towards the front of the property this replacement planting will be pursued.
2.The Golden Lawson’s Cypress and Yew are located to the south west of the property. These two trees were seen by the tree consultant as being of medium size, with 40-100 years life expectancy, with some importance within the landscape, of fair form and very suitable for their setting. In view of their visibility from Down Park Drive the consultants assessment was supported and it is still officer opinion that these trees should be retained in any development proposal or heavily mitigated for if shown for removal.
3.Helpfully the application is accompanied by a professional tree survey, this shows that the better trees are located on the western and eastern boundaries and are not too much of a constraint to some development on this site. In my opinion the local landscape character and neighbouring plot size suggests; a. the retention of the existing property with the addition of a single detached property or b. the redevelopment of the entire site to a lower density. Both these options would allow scope for the better existing trees to develop together with the opportunity to set the new development into a more landscape led layout that provides scope for; a. the planting of new trees of some size and b. quality boundary treatments that are more in tune with the local character of the Down Road end of Down Park Drive.
Strategic Planning: Objects – development is contrary to Core Strategy policies relating to inclusive communities and sustainable development including policies SP1 and SP8.
Senior Engineer: No objection recommends standard drainage conditions Representations: Six letters of representations have been received with regard to this proposed development five letters objecting to the proposal and one letter suggesting consideration be given to stopping up of the existing access and both construction traffic and post completion traffic be through the proposed entry on Down Park Drive.
Those objecting to the proposal raise the following points; - Density of 6 is too high, 4 would be better - Highways impacts - Sewer system will not cope with extra units - Overlooking and privacy issues - Removal of trees required - Existing property should be retained
Relevant Planning History N/A
ANALYSIS The key issues for assessment with regard to this application relate to the principle of development in relation to current development plan policy the most relevant matters relate to the provision of affordable housing and viability.
The agent for the applicant has submitted a statement has argued that the proposed development is justified by the Core Strategy and the HMNA which states that
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______existing housing stock cannot meet the needs of the ageing population. He specifically identifies that the retired population of West Devon will rise by 56% and that this will equate to over 15,000 people above the age of 65.
The LPA acknowledges the implications of an ageing population but also needs to consider how this proposal will address such matters within the context of Core Strategy policies SP8 and SP9.
Affordable Housing and Inclusive Communities Developments consisting of 5-9 dwellings should provide 255 affordable housing on site as stated within SP9. When affordable housing policy results in part of a dwelling the part dwelling shall be provided as a financial contribution where this would not compromise the overall viability of the development.
Of the 6 units proposed this would translate as 1.5 units meaning that 0.5 of a unit would need to be provided by way of a commuted sum and 1 dwelling located on site.
The agent has not addressed this policy requirement within their statement instead directing their comments toward policy SP8.
The LPA therefore has not received a s.106 to provide the required affordable housing.
In addition there has been no submission of a viability study to counter the requirement under SP9. The agent has confirmed that;
“There is a demand for such a product in the housing market and this has been recognised by the two estate agents who have written to you. Furthermore, the Policy Exchange Think Tank have recognised the issue of the lack of bungalows being built, and the benefits of building smaller bungalows has in freeing up larger properties. The fact is that there are elderly couples/people already expressing firm interest in these properties, most if not all are over 60. We are not suggesting a viability issue rather the sale of the bungalows will be restricted and therefore not available on the open market, because they will not be available to all. The guidance in the affordable Housing SPD at paragraph 7.1 states Developments with a condition limiting the use of the dwellings on that development so that they are not available for market sale or rent, to include agricultural dwellings and holiday lets. This is not an exhaustive list, and clearly the proposal as submitted restricts the use future use of the properties to occupation by over 55's, thus complying with the SPD. Again I would be grateful if you would reconsider your recommendation.”
It is the LPAs considered view that whilst there may be a demand for such property the sale of the properties is not restricted to those at retirement age (being 55+ years of age suggested limitation) secondly the scheme has not been supported by a reason not to supply the required affordable housing provision.
The limitation of the age range whilst laudable does nothing to guarantee that the properties will be limited to those in local need of such properties, indeed there is indication from enquiries made by the Housing and Enabling officer of a local estate
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______agent that their recent sales of such properties (those limited to 55+ years) have been sold to people from outside of the Borough.
Equally there is little evidence that the sale of the properties would attract a substantially lower price than any other open market dwelling which would prevent affordable housing provisions being applied to this development.
Whilst the LPA is of the view that there is a restriction on age being offered this does not prevent the properties from being sold on the open market at a competitive price, nor does it limit occupancy to those in local need thus helping with the rise in the ageing population of West Devon.
Reliance is made upon SP8 of the Core Strategy in order to justifying the provision of housing for 55+ year occupation. Although this is the case no evidence has been submitted to quantify such a need for the Tavistock area, instead reliance is made upon the demographic data for the West Devon Borough and data relating to those aged 65+.
The agent states in their statement that the purpose of SP8 is to address “the imbalance outlined above” (refers to paragraph 3.7 of planning statement) which highlights the gap in provision of housing for the disabled and the elderly.
Neither the preamble to nor the policy wording of SP8 specifies that the purpose of the policy is as stated within the submitted statement, i.e. that the provision of housing for a specific age group is sought. The policy actually notes that the proportion of houses and bungalows is at 71% much higher than the national average and that the supply of smaller units is lower than the national average.
In addition para. 4.37 of the preamble states “the Borough is suffering a net out- migration of young adults. It is therefore important that steps are taken to ensure a good mix of ages in the community and there is a need for young people to be encouraged to stay in West Devon or to move here from elsewhere”.
The preamble to policy SP8 actually makes specific reference to the need for housing stock to cater for “newly forming households of one or two bedrooms”.
The preamble to SP8 states within para. 4 “it would not be sustainable or deliverable to build all new stock in one or two sectors of the market. However there is need for new housing at the lowest end, in terms of price, of the market. The Local Development Framework will therefore continue the approach contained in the Local Plan of seeking to increase the proportion of smaller dwellings in new developments with the aim of addressing the current shortage of one and two bedroomed properties”.
None of the 4 paragraphs of the preamble make reference to the need or encouragement for the proposed development of 55+ years accommodation or provision of accommodation for the elderly to be in isolation from houses in other forms of occupancy such as smaller homes or family homes.
Policy SP8 states that;
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
“Development should provide a mix of housing sizes and types to meet the needs of the Borough's communities. Provision should particularly be made for smaller homes to meet the needs of existing and new households.
It is aimed to create a socially inclusive, balanced community with an adaptable environment suitable for a range of occupiers which meets the long term housing needs of all. When making spatial planning decisions and when determining planning applications the needs of the following groups must be addressed: i. an ageing population, providing appropriate housing and health care accessible to all people and which is capable of adaptation to reflect changing lifestyles; ii. young people, providing jobs, housing and lifestyle to enable them to stay in the area; iii. people whose circumstances make them vulnerable; iv. minority groups within the Borough.
All new residential developments will maximise the potential to incorporate the principles of Lifetime Homes Standards where viable.”
Again it is evident that this policy is designed to ensure that new housing development provides a mix of housing where possible and highlights that provision should be made for smaller homes to meet the needs of existing and new households.
It is therefore evident that reliance upon policy SP8 to justify the proposed development is inappropriate as the policy is aimed at providing for mixed developments and providing;
“a socially inclusive, balanced community with an adaptable environment suitable for a range of occupiers which meets the long term housing needs of all”.
Clearly this development would only cater for a segment of the population above 54 years of age, which is not identified within the policy as being specifically required.
It is therefore considered that the development does not comply with SP8 and is directly contrary to it with no evidence of a specific need for such a limiting condition being applied with regards to occupancy for persons 55+ years in age.
In addition to the above Core Strategy policy SP9 is specific in stating that “all housing development will be expected to contribute to meeting the targets for affordable housing, subject to viability.
The development proposes 6 units and therefore 25% of the dwellings on site should be affordable. This would equate to 1.5 units from the proposed 6 units. In instances where the affordable housing requirement results in part of a dwelling, then SP9 does allow for that part dwelling to be provided by way of a financial contribution (commuted sum) again where this would not compromise the overall viability of the development.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
In this case affordable housing is required and that the lack of provision could only be justified on the basis that the viability of the proposed development would be compromised as a result of such provision. The LPA is willing to accept the provision in this instance to be provided by way of a commuted sum.
The agent has stated that the development is exempt from providing contributions on the basis that para. 7.1 of the proposed development is as defined within the adopted Affordable Housing Code of Practice states that “developments with a condition limiting the use of the dwellings on that development so that they are not available for market sale or rent, to include agricultural dwellings or holiday lets”.
Whilst the above does allow for dwellings with fettering conditions in relation to occupancy to not pay toward affordable housing this is on the basis that such dwellings are not usually sold on the open market for their full value due to the encumbrance of the condition. In the case of agricultural workers dwellings these are justified on the basis that the occupancy condition is applied to a dwelling that has been proven to be required for such purposes and that its retention will as such will also benefit the wider community of in keeping a stock of such agricultural dwellings within the Borough.
No evidence has been submitted to suggest that the condition limiting occupancy to 55+ years would result in the same benefit or prevent the units being sold or rented on the open market. It is considered by officers that this condition would not result in the same fettering as occurs with agricultural workers dwellings or holiday dwellings.
Agent for the applicant has stated that the units would enable those with larger properties within the borough to sell their larger properties and move into this proposed accommodation thus freeing up larger family sized dwellings within the West Devon.
Officers acknowledge that this may occur, however the Affordable Housing Strategy and Enabling Officer has made enquires with a local estate agent who has confirmed that units with the same occupancy limitation have been re-sold from a development at Green Lane in Yelverton to persons outside of the borough and therefore it is possible that the proposed freeing up of larger units in West Devon may not occur as envisaged by the applicant.
Site layout and principle of development There is no issue in principle with the redevelopment of this site for additional units. However although some of the nearby sites have been redeveloped, 6 units on this site in the manner which is demonstrated in the indicative layout, is considered to be out of keeping with the area and its grain and settlement pattern. However it is thought that with more modest unit sizes and a rearrangement of the units on site (all of which could be dealt with at a potential reserved matters stage) an acceptable layout could be achieved.
With regards to the protected trees, these are not central to the site and it is considered that both this grouped TPO and the necessary replacement tree for the previously removed birch could be accommodated on the site with this proposal.
Conclusion
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
As noted above officers acknowledge earlier within this report the site is located within the settlement boundary for Tavistock and whilst the development is not located close to the town centre when viewing the site being commutable by a range of transport it is not so isolated as to justify refusal on such a basis.
The site can be accessed by a suitable vehicular access onto the adjacent road network and there are no objections with respect to this or indeed the ability of the site to accommodate the proposed density of six units.
The key issues for the LPA relates to the proposed limited occupancy in that it directly conflicts with the aims of SP8 in terms of inclusive communities and also the requirements of SP9.
No viability statement has been provided to confirm why affordable housing provision could not be made on this site or by way of commuted sum (or indeed a mixture of these approaches) and indeed no evidence has been provided as to an indentified need for this form of housing which would be in conflict with the aims of Core Strategy SP8 to justify the limiting of this development to those persons of 55+ years in age.
It is officer view that the proposed development does not meet the specified policy objectives of the Core Strategy inclusive of SP1 (f) sustainable development and that development should “take into account the needs of all individuals and groups in the community to promote health, safety and social well being”.
It conflicts with Core Strategy policy SP8 in not delivering “a socially inclusive, balanced community with an adaptable environment suitable for a range of occupiers which meets the long term housing needs of all”.
The proposal also fails to evidence why the occupancy of the units should be limited to 55+ years or that this is required to fulfil an indentified need which would be contrary to the aims of the above policies and in failing to do so it does not therefore provide a justification as to why this development should not provide the required contributions toward affordable housing as set out within Core Strategy policy SP9.
It is officer view that the proposed development is not considered to comply with the aforementioned polices and should therefore be refused.
Planning Policy This application has been considered in accordance with Section 38 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and, where relevant, with Sections 66 and 72 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas).
Planning Policy National Planning Policy Framework
West Devon Borough Council Core Strategy 2011 SP1 – Sustainable Development SP6 –Density of Housing Development SP8 – Inclusive Communities
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
SP9 – Meeting Housing Needs SP17- Landscape character SP20 – Promoting High Quality Design
West Devon Borough Council Local Plan Review 2005(as amended 2011) H28 – Settlements with Defined Limits T9 – The Highway Network PS2 – Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems PS3 – Sewage Disposal
Considerations under Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 The provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report.
Notes of a meeting of the Site Inspection Panel held on Thursday 19th September 2013. Present: Cllr C Marsh – Chairman Cllr M Benson – Vice-Chairman Cllr R Baldwin Cllr W G Cann OBE Cllr C Hall
Planning Team Leader Senior Planning Officer (AK)
Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs J Hockridge, T Pearce, J Sheldon, Cllr D Whitcomb and D Wilde.
The applicant’s agent, Mr E Persse, attend this site inspection.
Cllr Marsh started the site visit at 10am and then Planning Team Leader described the site and the proposed scheme. She pointed out the street pattern of existing development within Down Park Road of large detached properties set within large spacious plots.
The Officer highlighted the application was outline with all matters reserved for subsequent approval, the submission showed an indicative layout of 6 bungalows served off an access driveway within the central part of the site.
The Panel then walked around the site and the Officer explained the tree and landscaping issues and pointed out the location of the former TPOd birch and the group TPO’s in the far corner of the site, towards the frontage area. The landscaping officer would be present at the next Planning Committee. No other trees at the site were protected.
Members looked at the central area where access was shown on the indicative plans and queried the density per hectare, which would be stated at planning committee.
The Officer drew Members’ attention to the principle of 6 bungalows, for over 55 year olds at the site and walked around the rear of the site and inspected the existing
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
property. Members inspected the boundary vegetation and we proceeded onto the site access driveway back towards the frontage onto Down Park Road.
Cllr Marsh asked questions of the agent, Mr Persse. He highlighted the mix of housing styles up and down Down Park Road which has varying character from the top part towards the bottom part. Cllr Benson asked Mr Persse what the reason for the application. He said that the existing premises was up for sale and is a 1920’s house with little merit. He went on to say that there is considerable market interest for over 55 bungalow accommodation within Tavistock and the submission has generated a number of expressions of interest from prospective purchasers. Members queried how the use will be restricted to over 55’s only. Mr Persse answered with planning conditions. Historical drainage issues were discussed relating to the site.
The Officer advised members to drive both left and right to get an idea of the character of Down Park drive and Down Road.
Meeting ended at 10.25am ______
WARD NAME Bere Ferrers (Cllrs M Benson; R Musgrave) APPLICATION NUMBER 00536/2013 LOCATION Hewton Nurseries, Bere Alston, PL20 7BW APPLICANT NAME Devon Growth Ltd
Site Address: Hewton Nurseries, Bere Alston, PL20 7BW
Reason Item is Before Committee This item is before Committee at the request of both Cllr. Musgrave and Cllr. Benson who state respectively that;
“Having considered your comments and noted the level of support for the application I would request that it be brought to committee for final consideration. Specific reasons for this request are the level of support the application has received and the benefits the proposed development would have in terms of regenerating an existing business”.
“I concur that this should go before P&L for a decision .Cllr Mike Benson”
A further support letter from Cllr. Musgrave reiterates his original call in request due to the considerable public support, Parish Council support, and the reasoning by the applicant to diversity their business which will assist in the regeneration of the site and wider landscape.
Recommendation: Refuse
Reasons for refusal:
1. The proposed conversion of the potting shed would require extensive alterations to the internal layout of the building, alterations to the external
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
finishes and the introduction of further fenestration as well as alterations to the existing apertures. The building by reason of its construction and materials is not considered to be suitable for conversion and proposed use, accordingly it is considered to be contrary to West Devon Local Plan policies RB1 uses and RB2 as well as the guidance contained in the adopted Supplementary Planning Document “The Re-use of Rural Buildings” (March 2006). 2. The redundant building proposed to be converted to holiday letting accommodation is not considered to be in keeping with the character of the local area in terms of its materials, architectural style or character. The building is therefore not considered to warrant retention through conversion or to visually enhance the site and surrounding area, accordingly it is considered to be contrary to West Devon Local Plan policy RB1 3. Both buildings are located in an unsustainable location necessitating access by private motor vehicles and as such the proposed development would be contrary to West Devon Core Strategy Policies SP1, SP14 and Devon Local Plan policies RB1 and RB2 4. The application has not been accompanied by an s.106 providing a commuted sum toward affordable housing provision as such the proposal is considered contrary to the requirements of West Devon Core Strategy policy SP9.
Key issues for consideration: The key issues that should be assessed with regard to this application are as follows; - Planning policy in relation to the proposed conversion and use of the buildings - The impact of the proposal on the amenities of the site and surrounding area, inclusive of the impacts upon the designated landscape in the Tamar Valley Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) - Impacts upon highways, ecology, drainage and neighbouring residents - Wider implications in relation to the potential economic, environmental and social impacts/ benefits of the development
Financial Implications (Potential New Homes Bonus or other as relevant): SP9 - affordable housing
Site Description: The two buildings are located in relative close proximity to one another being within 10m of one another in a hard surfaced section of the site. The two buildings are visible from the road which runs from east to west adjacent to the sites northern boundary.
At the time of the case officer’s site visit there were a number of polytunnels and structures/ sheds on site which were clearly utilised for the purposes of the nursery. At the time of the visit no one appeared to be on site either by way of workers or customers.
The two buildings, being the potting shed and the office building appeared to be in good repair, but it was unclear as to whether they were in active use, it did not appear that they were which would corroborate the information supplied with the planning application.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
The site is situated within the Tamar Valley AONB and approximately 51m to the east of “Hewton Cottage”, and 66m to the east of “Robinswood” both dwellings. The site is also visible from wider viewpoints from the opposite side of the River Tamar (Cornwall) however these are somewhat distant and from the waters edge. The two buildings are also partially obscured by some coniferous trees and set against the backdrop of the other structures.
Both buildings that are the subject of this application have twin pitch roofs and are of a more modern construction as opposed to the typical vernacular of older agricultural buildings located in adjacent areas such as Tuckermarsh, Rumleigh and Gawton which generally are of stone, slate and timber construction. The residential properties in the area follow a similar palette of materials, with rubble wall construction and renders being the main variants in terms of finish.
The potting shed is a large building being of a utilitarian appearance with a mixture of windows and door types inclusive of a roller door and constructed of profiled sheet and profile fibre-cement cladding, block work (some rendered) walls with fibre- cement roof sheets and a mixture of metal and PVCu windows and doors.
The office building is presumed to be of block work construction and is finished in a spar dash render with PVCu windows and doors and composite cement roof tiles.
Neither building is considered to make a positive contribution to the area given the design and finish. Their design is clearly derived from their function within the context of a working nursery as opposed to any other historical use as may have taken place on the site.
The buildings are accessible from the main entrance to the site which is separated from the road by means of a set of gates, a small section of fence and the low hedge which runs to the east and west denoting the sites northern boundary.
The Proposal: The proposal is broken into two parts for ease of reference as follows:
Works to the potting shed include the following:
It is proposed to convert the potting shed to residential use to provide a 4 bedroom dwelling comprising, kitchen, dining room, atrium, lounge, office, pantry, entrance hall, 2 guest bedrooms, 4 ensuite bathrooms, general provision of storage space and WC facilities, shower room as well as a decked area to the perimeter of the building with garden area beyond. Measuring from the drawings provided the floor area dwelling will equate to 328 square metres of living accommodation.
The proposed materials are indicated as rendered board, proprietary coloured cladding coloured panels, standing seam metal roof sheets, single ply roofing membrane, timber double glazed windows and timber doors.
The works to the office building are: Conversion to provide 3 bedroom holiday accommodation including open plan lounge/ diner and kitchen area and communal bathroom. The building is not being
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______altered in terms of external finish. The floor area of the building from the drawing provided indicates a floor area of 74.7 square metres.
Consultations: County Highways Authority: No objection Environmental Health Section: No objection – recommend standard contamination conditions Bere Ferrers Parish Council: Support Senior Engineer: No objection Countryside Officer: No objection – recommends standard wildlife informative Landscape Officer: Comments that there is a lack of landscape detail in all regards and recommends a quality landscaping approach is required. Tamar Valley AONB: Support
Representations: 8 letters of representation have been received supporting this application raising the following matters:
- Will regenerate the business - Keep employment - Visual enhancement of site - Encourages tourism - Scheme is well designed - Further landscaping is not required
Relevant Planning History 3729/11 Extension to existing horticultural building used in wholesale nursery business. Granted 04/12/96 3729/6 Extension to existing office block. Granted 14/01/88
ANALYSIS Principle of Development/Sustainability: The planning application was submitted with some supporting documentation which provided a business plan for the nursery business to enable its regeneration.
It was therefore initially thought by the case officer that the proposed dwelling resulting from the conversion of the potting shed building was being sought as an agricultural/ rural worker dwelling as set out with the provisions of the NPPF and West Devon Local Plan Policy H31. The case officer was therefore concerned that as the applicants are living in an existing dwelling this would preclude the need for a further dwelling on site on the basis of the level of functional and financial justification that can be currently proved. The Local Plan policy is specific in not allowing for a new dwelling for such a worker if the need for it can be fulfilled by an existing dwelling or if such need has been generated by the recent disposal of a suitable dwelling.
Following a meeting with the agent for the application it is understood that this is not the case and that the dwelling should therefore be considered against the criteria of Local Plan Policies RB1and RB2 Which relate to the conversion of such buildings
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______as well as the Supplementary Planning Document on the conversion of rural buildings which aids detailed guidance to those policies.
The agent has confirmed that the proposed business plan was submitted a background to the proposed regeneration of the nursery business and not as an appraisal to justify the need for the dwelling.
The meeting also discussed the issues relating to the conversion of the office building to holiday let. Whilst it is acknowledged that the building would not be as significantly altered as the potting shed the building itself does not positively contribute to its setting within the AONB nor is it of historic or cultural significance. The relatively low impact of a single holiday let to the wider economy is also considered to be insufficient to justify the granting of consent for this proposed use.
The meeting also discussed the tension between para. 55 of the NPPF and the older guidance contained within Local Plan Polices RB1and RB2 this hinges around the apparent allowance under the NPPF for the conversion of rural buildings to dwellings and the requirement under the Local Plan polices to have first exhausted a re-use of such buildings for business purposes. It is the view of the case officer that the advice of the NPPF is obviously more recent and therefore more relevant in assessing applications for such conversions, but that para. 55 does only allow for such use in certain circumstances.
A summary of the main areas of agreement and contention across all of the above matters has been provided by the case officer to the agent in an email dated 30/07/13 which serves to summarise and offer conclusions on these points, the main text of which is reproduced below;
1) “You have confirmed that the business plan was not intended to justify the proposed dwelling under the provisions of the NPPF and Local Plan policy H31 as being required for an agricultural/ rural worker. 2) We have agreed that the application is being made with reference to para. 55 of the NPPF in that you feel the application is justified by the third bullet point to that para. As follows:
“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. Local planning authorities should avoid new isolated homes in the countryside unless there are special circumstances such as:
where the development would re-use redundant or disused buildings and lead to an enhancement to the immediate setting;
It was also agreed that the application was therefore suitable for assessment under Local Plan policies RB1 and RB2, as both a dwelling and holiday let are proposed on this site.
3) We also agreed that para. 55 of the NPPF should not be interpreted as meaning that any redundant building can be converted to residential use. I
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
would correct your statement with respect that we agreed that extensions were the LPAs only concern in conversion projects. The LPA is also concerned with “alteration” meaning any alterations to the building as proposed by a conversion project, this includes internal alteration, suitability of the shell of the building for conversion, alterations to curtilage, alterations to materials, alterations to fenestration, curtilage structures, extensions and the alteration of buildings to a more domesticated appearance. This is noted within policies RB1 and RB2 and expanded upon within the LPA’s adopted Supplementary Planning Document on the Conversion of Rural Buildings (SPD). 4) Whilst we discussed the landscaping and that it can be dealt with via condition and there is little doubt that removing redundant structure sin the open countryside would be beneficial I do not believe that I stated that the proposed landscaping was “a significant improvement” we did agree that conditions could be applied to any planning permission to ensure the concerns of the Landscape Officer as per her consultation response could be met. 5) We did agree that the quality of the two buildings that are the subject of the proposed conversion works lacked any particular architectural merit and that they did not contribute to the character of the wider area (being within the open countryside and the Tamar Valley AONB). 6) We also discussed the business plan, and whilst I acknowledge that your client would likely have every intent to implement the plan, I was not of the opinion that it was particularly sound, that it cannot be directly linked to this application and that whilst it might provide background to the site and future intent of your client, it was not, in my view, material to this application. This was based upon us agreeing that the business plan had not been submitted as a justification for a dwelling under the NPPF and Local Plan policy H31 provisions for agricultural/ rural workers. I advised that given this I would not be able to attached weight to its content in assessing the proposals under the NPPF (as highlighted above) and Local Plan policies RB1 and RB2. 7) You were of the opinion that whilst there is some risk to the LPA the business plan is a credible one and that it represents the only option to sustain the business and that without the granting of these applications the business will inevitably cease with the associated loss of jobs. I confirmed that whilst this may indeed be the aspiration and reasoning behind the current application there is still no way of linking the proposed conversions to the regeneration of the business and that without that level of comfort I could not recommend the application on that justification, irrespective of my other concerns with the proposed level of alterations required to convert the potting shed to a dwelling and the lack of desire to maintain the two buildings given their lack of contribution to their wider setting.
In summary it is the conclusion of the case officer that the proposed residential element of the scheme would require the extensive alteration both internally and externally of a building which is not historic, or indicative of the local vernacular and that does not positively contribute to the setting of the site, wider area within the AONB.
The proposed holiday let is not considered to preserve and enhance a historic or building of local character, does not provide an overriding economic justification for its retention as part of this scheme.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
Officers acknowledge that the proposed scheme may help with the applicant’s stated intent to regenerate the nursery business, but as noted in the officer’s email to the agent this cannot be linked in any meaningful way by way of condition or s.106 and therefore the scheme must be assessed by the LPA as a standalone proposal under the aforementioned NPPF and Development Plan policies.
Officers must acknowledge that the applicant has stated that some enhancements such as the removal of poly tunnels and landscaping could be provided to enhance the site. Whilst this is laudable it is not considered that this in itself is of such significance to justify the proposed development nor does it seem consistent with the stated desire to regenerate the business It is also acknowledged that the site would possibly fall into dereliction if the nursery business were to fail, however this is not an inevitable scenario, nor is it guaranteed that the proposed development, which as noted cannot be tied to the regeneration of the business, would lead to the nursery becoming more viable than at present. It is possible that an alternate business plan for the site could be put forward possibly incorporating alternate uses, but this would need to be a holistic approach across the site and one that could tie what is proposed to the overall business on site, which the current application does not.
Design/Landscape: The main issues in relation to design relate to the potting shed which is the subject of significant external and internal alteration. The office building is not being altered in any significant sense other than in terms of its internal layout and use.
The drawings submitted for the conversion of the potting shed as well as the floor plans, layout of curtilage and materials show that the resultant building would significantly improve the quality of the existing building. However in doing so the range of work required is not considered to be in keeping with policy RB1and RB2 and the adopted SPD on conversion of rural buildings. The proposed conversion essentially only retains the walls as a shell to which a new roof, internal partitioning and lining would be undertaken. The existing windows and doors are to be removed and replaced, including the resizing of apertures, introduction of new apertures and a number of alterations to provide doorways out onto a new decked area to run around the perimeter of the building.
It is officer view that the range of alterations is not compliant with a conversion project and that their extensive nature demonstrates that the building whilst, most likely structurally sound, is not capable of accommodating the new design and use without extensive alteration.
In effect the conversion results in what amounts to an entirely new building with no reference to its origin other than being based upon the envelope provided by the existing building in terms of floor area and the retention of a twin pitch roof profile.
The level of accommodation provided is not considered to be at issue given that the proposal is not being proposed as a rural workers residence which would normally be sized appropriately to that which could be sustained by the holding/ rural enterprise. It is also understood that some of the accommodation is intended to be utilised as holiday accommodation, however this has not been defined on the floor plan.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
The Landscape officer has objected to the proposal citing that there is insufficient detail with respect to the proposed landscaping. It is officer view that whilst this is the case such information could be secured by way of conditions to ensure a suitable landscaping scheme is provided as well as its maintenance.
Neighbour Amenity: The relationship of the application site to the nearest residential properties has already been noted in the site and surrounding section of this report. The proposed use should be assessed against that as existing and taking into account the variance in levels of noise, traffic and operations that would occur from the new use.
Given the site is capable of being accessed by a range of vehicles and at various levels due to its existing use as nursery and the likely day to day operations undertaken on site within the various buildings and structures would be considered more intensive that those created through the residential/ holiday let uses proposed.
The distance of the proposed dwelling from the nearest residences and the level of landscaping that exists and could be achieved to screen the site, would preclude the possibility for undue overlooking to occur.
The envelope of the building does not increase and therefore the level of visual intrusion form the building remains as existing.
Highways/Access: The site is currently accessed by a suitable vehicular access point, and there is ample room for parking and turning of vehicles. The Highways Officer has not objected to the proposed uses.
Ecology: A survey of the buildings has been undertaken and the Countryside officer has confirmed that there are no wildlife conflicts with the proposed development and recommends a standard informative.
Other Matters: The Core Strategy policy SP9 requires that developments of between 1-4 dwellings are required to contribute toward affordable housing provision by way of a commuted sum. It was initially considered that if the dwelling were to be tied by way of a planning condition then this would not be applicable as set out within the Affordable Housing Code of Practice (adopted SPD, March 2012).
As the proposed development is not seeking such occupancy the proposed dwelling would need to provide £13,125. The agent for the applicant has confirmed that this payment would be provided via s.106 should the application be determined by the Planning and Licensing and Committee and in the event that the Committee were to grant planning consent. In the meantime a standard reason for refusal based upon lack of such s.106 would be applicable to this application.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
Planning Policy: This application has been considered in accordance with Section 38 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and, where relevant, with Sections 66 and 72 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas).
Planning Policy: NPPF: National Planning Policy Framework
West Devon Borough Council Core Strategy 2011 SP1 – Sustainable Development SP9 – Meeting Housing Needs SP10 – Supporting the Growth of the Economy SP11 – Rural Regeneration SP17 – Landscape Character SP18 – The Heritage and Historical Character of West Devon SP19 – Biodiversity SP20 – Promoting High Quality Design
West Devon Borough Council Local Plan Review 2005(as amended 2011) NE10 – Protection of the Countryside and Other Open Spaces BE13 – Landscaping and Boundary Treatment H31 – Residential Development in the Countryside H32 - Residential Development in the Countryside H33 - Residential Development in the Countryside ED21 – Rural Diversification RB1 – Conversion and re-use of rural buildings for business RB2 - Conversion and re-use of rural buildings for business TLS1 – Holiday Accommodation TLS3 – Tourist Accommodation Outside Defined Limits T8 – Car Parking T9 – The Highway Network PS2 – Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems PS3 – Sewage Disposal PS4 – Private Water Supply
Other guidance: Supplementary Planning Document – Re-Use of Rural Buildings March 2006
Considerations under Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 The provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report.
Notes of a meeting of the Site Inspection Panel held on Thursday 19th September 2013.
Present: Cllr C Marsh – Chairman Cllr M Benson – Vice-Chairman Cllr R Baldwin Cllr C Hall Cllr T Pearce Cllr D Whitcomb
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
Planning Team Leader Senior Planning Officer (AK)
In attendance: Cllr R Musgrave – Ward Member Mr B Lamb- Bere Ferrers Parish Council
Apologies for absence were received from Cllrs W G Cann OBE, J Hockridge, J Sheldon and D Wilde.
Meeting began at 9am.
The Panel went into the main building proposed for conversion to a dwelling and the Senior Planning Officer explained that proposal and the Panel noted the construction of the building. The Officer explained the broad business case which had been put forward with regards to the selling of Robinswood and reinvestment into both the proposed conversion and site.
The Panel then viewed the office building and went inside it. The Officer explained the proposed segregation of the site and the new access route through the site and highlighted the difference in structure and construction between the office building and ‘potting shed’.
The Officer then identified Robinswood from the site and the Planning Team Leader reiterated the proposed link between this property and the nursery site in the applicant’s business plans.
The Parish Council fully support the application expressing the view that regeneration of the business from the conversion is important and would enhance the area. It would bring orchards back to the area which have been lost elsewhere. Although jobs were seasonal they were all year round and Bere Alston needed this type of job opportunities.
In addition, it would visually enhance the site as it is a derelict site. The conversion would be addressed by Building Regulations. Holiday let/B and B is suitable use for the area which has others forming a cluster of similar uses.
The Ward Member, Cllr Musgrave agreed the site was in a derelict state but reserved the right to comment further at committee
Cllr Benson did not comment in his capacity as ward member.
The site meeting ended at 9.20 am ______
WARD NAME Exbourne (Cllr T Hill) APPLICATION NUMBER 00071/2013 LOCATION Land at SS578 090, Iddesleigh, Devon APPLICANT NAME Mr C Illman
Site Address: Land at SS578 090, Iddesleigh, Devon
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
Development: Erection of 1 wind turbine (estimated output 225 kw) hub height of 30m, 44.5m to tip height and associated access and infrastructure.
Reason item is being put before Committee:
“Due to the impact this application will have on the local community and surrounding country side, I feel it only democratic to allow the residents to address the planning committee, with their concerns or support of this application.
I therefore request that this application be placed on the agenda for the next planning committee meeting.” Cllr T Hill
Recommendation: Conditional Approval
Conditions/Reasons 1. 3 year time limit 2. Recommended EH noise conditions covering noise limits 3All recommendations within section 5.1 of the Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey should be adhered to and implemented including timings, ecologist supervision and hedgerow translocation methodology. 4. Condition regarding restriction on future tree works on the site, access way to the site and any planting done as a result of this proposal 5. Removal and site reinstatement of site within 6 months of cessation of use 6. Turbine to be coloured a matt pale grey unless otherwise agreed in writing by the LPA
Informatives Proactive statement
Attention is drawn in particular to the third and fourth bullet points in Section 5.2 of the Survey – these measures would enhance the wildlife value of the site and would be welcomed Inform MOD of required information Key issues for consideration: The noise data survey required has now been undertaken and provided to the LPA. This has then been out for a further 14 day consultation to the public and consultees.
The environmental benefits of the scheme must be weighed against the impact upon the landscape, neighbour and community amenity, tourism, the highway, biodiversity and the historic environment. In this instance the impact of the proposal upon these issues is not considered to outweigh the benefits and is therefore recommended for approval.
Financial Implications none
Site Description:
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
The site is located in the open countryside to the North East of Iddesleigh village. The site is in a field currently grazed in agricultural use, this site is just to the south of the route of the Tarka Trail which runs, for this section, along the driveway to Coombe Farm and then up northwards across fields. The site lies at an OS level of just over 130 m ODN. Coombe Farm itself is the nearest residential property (215 m away) with other properties as follows:
Whitemoor ~309 m to the rear wall of the dwelling Whitemoor Farm ~ 347m to the rear wall of the dwelling Coombe cottage ~ 390m to the rear wall of the dwelling Pewson Barton ~568 m to the rear wall of the dwelling
Coombe Farm itself is not listed but the nearest listed properties are Pewson Barton and Coombe Cottage (grade II),
The Proposal: Erection of 1 wind turbine (estimated output 225 kw) hub height of 30m, 44.5m to tip height and associated access and infrastructure.
CONSULTATIONS Iddesleigh Parish/Town Council: object for the following reasons: 1. The visual impact on the unspoilt landscape: this wind turbine is a structure, height 44.5m to tip, 30m to hub and a rotor diameter of 29m. This is not a tiny domestic turbine; it is twice the height of our church tower, and as tall as a 15 storey building. Residents now look out on an uninterrupted view of Dartmoor. Views to and from Dartmoor are protected and this will be an alien feature in an unspoilt landscape. 2. The Parish council believe that this will have a detrimental effect on tourism within the Parish; especially in the wake of the War Horse interest shown by many tourists. This wind turbine would be constructed in Ruby country; this is an area for outdoor pursuits; walking, cycling, riding etc. It will also be just 60m away from the Tarka Trail; again a much used and high profile trail for tourist and locals alike.
3. Health and safety: the Council are very concerned that the wind turbine may become unsafe; as others around the country have proved. It is not unknown for wind turbines to collapse and if this one were to fail it would devastate the Tarka Trail and anyone who might be using it, and then who is liable? The turbine needs maintaining regularly but with a life span of approximately 25 years, possibly less, what happens then? Who is responsible for the decommissioning? 4. The Noise: The noise study supplied with the planning is misleading as it is non-site specific and is just a generalised statement; as noted by your environmental health officer. Therefore, the assessment is inadequate and we request that an in depth site specific survey is carried out to protect the residents who live within 350m of the proposed site and who would be subject to noise levels in excess of 35dBA. 5. Environmental Survey: this is totally inadequate; one visit in January during inclement weather where one bird was seen does not show the full extent of the ecological diversity or value of this area. (As stated in their survey under survey methodology section 2.3 and expanded phase 1 habitat survey section
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
3.1.2). 6. The possibility of flicker or strobe effect: this can cause problems in the morning and evening to the west and east of the turbine. This is especially worse in the winter than the summer. No thought has been given to this and the effect local residents will experience. 7. Photo montage: the photographs are of very poor quality, taken into the sun, completely failing to show any of the north side of Dartmoor which is clearly visible from the site of the photographs. Therefore they are unfit for purpose and do not follow best practice. 8. Parish Plan: this is in discussion and in the process of being put together. The parishioners have indicated that they wish to keep the area and the village as it is.
A public meeting was held to discuss this planning application and 98% of parishioners who attended were opposed to this wind turbine.
This is an unspoilt area of Devon and as one of our parishioners put it: Iddesleigh is one of the Jewels in the crown of West Devon ad has not changed over the last 100 years. It is a unique village and we mean it to stay that way. This was agreed by all.
The Parish Council also later raised their thoughts that the information initially provided was inadequate: -The photomontage is inadequate and there is no ZTV -The noise data is lacking and outdated and the health and safety information is scant -The biodiversity information is inadequate - No mitigation or decommissioning information has been set out
On receipt of the additional noise data a further 14 day consultation was held and the Parish Council’s comments can be summarised as follows:
The Parish wished to point out what they felt were shortfalls in the noise survey. These were mainly that they considered that the Council’s EH department had advised that the nearest property should be used as a base for noise readings rather than the main objectors down wind of the prevailing winds to the north. They considered the fact that none of the properties to the north had been used for measuring to be unacceptable. The PC also raised that the dawn chorus noise was not removed from the readings and should have been.
These issues are addressed in detail by officers in the Noise section of the report below.
Monkokehampton Parish Council: Neutral view.
County Highways Authority: No objection.
Environmental Health: Following the initial submission and requirement for further information leading to this application’s deferral, Environmental Heath have given the following concluding comments on the application including the new background noise data (their further
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______comments are included in the noise discussion within this report):
‘It is the opinion of Environmental Health that using the predicted noise levels from both consultants that the turbine is unlikely to cause a significant noise problem as defined by the National Planning Policy (NPPF) Framework. To put into context both consultants who looked at the application have predicted noise levels outside at the nearest neighbouring property (at 10m/s wind speed) of between 38-40 dB LA90 or an average of 40-42 dB, this can be compared to what we would expect at a library or domestic living room (Bruel & Kjaar). There will be a further reduction for inside the properties. We are in agreement with MAS that the turbine will be on occasion heard, however our understanding of ETSU/NPPF is, that it does not look to protect tranquillity. We appreciate the importance of tranquillity however protection of it may be seen as going above and beyond government guidance.
Therefore whilst the Environmental Health department feels that there are parts of the submitted report that diverge from national good practice, the outcome of the protection offered by the proposed condition in the report is in accordance with the national planning guidance. Therefore we would suggest imposing the condition suggested by Peter Ashford and extend the noise limit of 43dB to wind speeds of 11 m/s and 12 m/s.
To add further protection to neighbours we would like to add the following amendment to the proposed condition.
Noise from the wind turbine shall not exceed 35dB LA90 (10 mins) in wind speeds up to 10 metres per second, as measured at any dwelling 500 metres or more from the turbine. Wind speeds described shall be derived from wind speeds measured at the turbine, “standardised” by reference to a height of 10 metres.’
Countryside Officer: The Extended Phase 1 Survey described the site as ‘two semi-improved grassland fields surrounded by species rich hedge banks.’ The siting of the turbine ensures a distance of circa 53m between blade tip and hedgerow in line with Natural England guidance which the ecologist consider has minimised the risk to bat populations. No records of high risk bat species were recorded within the 4km data search. The ecologist considered given the results and adherence to Natural England guidance, there was no requirement for further bat activity surveys.
The hedgerows were considered to provide high potential to support dormice. A short length of hedgebank will be removed, and another translocated. It was not considered that this would affect the use of the landscape by dormice, but given potential for disturbance to dormice, a 2 stage approach to bank removal, or summer removal is proposed supervised by an ecologist. Additionally, hedge translocation methodology is detailed, and gapping up proposed to improve the functionality of the hedgerow. Subject to adhere to the proposed mitigation, it seems reasonable to expect that a Habitats Regulations offence would be unlikely to be triggered against dormice. To minimise potential for reptiles using the grassland area, it has been advised to maintain the grass at a short height.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
Should you be minded to approve the application, I would suggest condition and informative. Natural England: This proposal does not appear to affect any statutorily protected sites or landscapes. Standing advice is offered for protected species.
English Heritage: initially they were concerned about the cumulative impact that wind turbines have on the historic rural landscape. This application fails to address the requirements of NPPF 128 and should therefore be refused. English Heritage object.
Following the submission of the heritage assessment from the applicant by SW Archaeology, EH commented that ‘Having considered the assessment, other documentation submitted with the application and our own records we believe that the proposals will not result in substantial harm to the historic environment, We therefore have no objections to this proposal’.
On receipt of the further noise information, English Heritage responded that they did not wish to offer any further comments.
Conservation Officer: Following the heritage statement submission: ‘This is a good report that assesses the impact on the setting of relevant heritage assets fairly. I would not disagree fundamentally with the assessments but I consider that the impact on Pewson Barton is worthy of closer consideration. Pewson Barton is a vernacular farm group which does not lie within a designed or planned landscape. Views from this property will be adversely affected but the impact of a relatively modest turbine could be seen as another incidental element of the countryside as much as it can be seen as a visual intrusion. Weight could be given to the fact that the Tarka trail passes between Pewson Barton and the proposed site so walkers will be faced with the turbine as part of the experience of both landscape and the heritage asset. At the scale proposed there will be impact but not on a level that will cause sufficient harm to warrant refusal. I would, however, be concerned if this proposal led onto further applications for more and/or larger turbines on the site. More intensive development may well have an unacceptable impact on the setting of this, and other, heritage assets.
My conclusion is that the assessment rightly says the impact is negative/moderate on Pewson Barton and I would not challenge the other assessments made in this report. ‘
Torridge District Council: Due to the close proximity of the turbine to the boundary with TDC they have sent a detailed response covering landscape, residential amenity, and heritage and have assessed the turbine against these. Overall they raise no objections, extracts from their response are included in the assessment below.
NATS: No safeguarding objection.
Landscape Officer: This proposal is for the siting of a 44.5m turbine at Coombe Farm between
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
Whitemoor and Upcott north east of Iddesleigh with associated works. 1. West Devon and Tamar Valley AONB Landscape Character Assessment 2008
This site falls within 1G Open Inland Plateaux Pertinent Key Characteristics; Gently rolling upland plateaux Pastoral farmland with variable small scale woodland cover Many streams with wet rush pasture and ditches Low trimmed hedgebanks with few hedgerow trees Sub-regular medium-large scale field pattern Distinctive sparse pattern of dispersed hamlets and isolated farms with a few historic settlements Dense network of narrow sinuous lanes with curved verges of variable width High and open with long views over river valleys to east and west
Pertinent Management Guidelines; Ensuring that development does not lead to loss of valuable habitats 1. In all areas of open countryside resisting development which is uncharacteristic and visually intrusive over wide areas. Any development should reinforce the traditional landscape character of the area Having regard to the potential impact on and dilution of local landscape character through the introduction of renewable energy sources such as windfarms
2. Principle Area Constraints
Presence of local properties Tarka Trail Local footpath network Local heritage assets
3. Site Visit and Submission Documentation The site visit concentrated on the local lane network as follows; From the country lane to the north of the site the turbine will not be visible from the lane past Upcott due to hedges and trees but will be clearly visible to all properties on the southern side of the lane. When viewing the site from the country lane to the south of the site in the vicinity of Whitemoor it was our conclusion that the presence of trees and hedges and local topography would ensure that there are no views of the turbine from both the country lane and properties. Importantly the Tarka Trail runs along the Coombe Farm access track directly past this site; for the section of trail from Upcott to Whitemoor there will be intermittent clear views to the turbine; a section of just over 1km. The submitted photomontages show clear and prominent visibility from Pewson Barton (photomontage 1.) the Tarka Trail (2.and 6.), and all those properties visible in photomontage 8 taken from within the application field.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
4. Possible Impact on Trees The existing trees on the Coombe Farm access track are relatively low over the track and I therefore have a concern that there might be damage during construction, please therefore condition that all future tree surgery work is subject to our written approval. 5. Cumulative Impact The submission doesn’t cover this. It is my opinion that on this occasion this is not a major issue. 6. Landscape Conclusion This is classified as a small scale turbine (ref. Devon Landscape Planning Group Advice Note No 2 on the Guidance and Siting, Design and Assessment of Wind and Solar PV Developments in Devon; draft November 2012). The Landscape Character Assessment stresses the importance of resisting development that is visually intrusive over wide areas. In my opinion the relatively small scale of the turbine ensures that the visual impact of this proposal will be largely localised, this however is not backed up by a zone of theoretical visibility study which would have been a helpful inclusion in the submission. The turbine will have a localised detrimental impact upon the scenic quality of a section of the Tarka Trail. The properties on the southern side of the Upcott country road will have a clear view to the turbine to the south, this will interrupt the fine landscape views in this direction, this is a strong consideration. Recent tree planting to Coombe Farm access drive and existing tree cover will, in time, help to set this proposal into the landscape but it will undoubtedly continue to have prominence when viewed from these properties at Upcott and from sections of this particular part of the Tarka Trail. This is undoubtedly landscape of high visual quality and tranquillity and on that basis the application is a finely balanced one. Localised detrimental impact on landscape character and scenic quality over only a limited area. Following the submission of the heritage statement and the further comments on the heritage aspect of the landscape which followed from DCC Archaeology, the Landscape Officer had nothing further to add. CPRE: Object on the following grounds: - The negative visual impact. - The adverse effects of flicker on nearby residents. - The lack of economic benefit to the community - The addition to the spread of individual turbines over West Devon.
MOD: No objection
Dartmoor National Park: The proposed wind turbine is 17km from the Dartmoor National Park boundary: No objection.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
County Archaeologist: The Devon County Historic Environment record does not record any currently known sites of archaeological or historic interest within the proposal area. In my opinion there is some limited potential for new sites to be identified prior to or during development, but in my opinion this can be addressed through a standard archaeological recording condition. A staged programme of work would be appropriate, with an initial desk based study and recommendations for further work.
I agree with English Heritage that this information could usefully have been presented with the application, But given the relatively low likelihood of and direct impact on archaeology I am sufficiently confident that this can be mitigated through an appropriate programme of recording.
However, I also agree with English Heritage that insufficient information has been submitted with the application to gauge the impact on the landscape setting of the designated heritage assets in the wider area.
Following submission of the heritage statement by the applicant DCC Archaeology commented as follows:
I agree with the overall conclusion of the report that the impacts on Listed buildings and the historic landscape range between neutral and negative/moderate.
The relationship between Pewson Barton and the fields at Coombe is perhaps the main issue here. However, in my opinion the medieval character of the landscape at the application site is less ‘intact’ than in other areas in this locality. For example the medieval fields on the WNW side of Upcott are much more complete. I would therefore not object to this proposal on historic landscape character grounds.
However, I do not think that this location could take more or larger turbines.
The potential for buried archaeology to be revealed by the development can in my opinion be dealt with through a staged programme of archaeological investigation. I would recommend that such a programme be a condition of any consent.
Local Residents/Interested Parties: Seven: letters of support received on the following grounds: - Benefits to future generations and the planet. - Help with meeting targets for renewable energy to combat climate change and electricity shortages. - No objection on grounds of visual or noise intrusion - Meets local and national policy guidelines - It is not visible from the village of Iddesleigh - It will not have a detrimental effect on local tourism. Cornwall has many wind turbines and this has not affected tourism. - Wind energy is clean renewable energy and in contrast to coal, gas and nuclear energy, no footprint is left on the land after the turbine’s removal.
81 Letters of objection received on the following grounds: Letters of objection received on the following grounds:
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
Design: - The turbine should be painted a pale, matt grey rather than white to make slightly less visual impact. - The size of this turbine represents a commercial wind turbine and not domestic. It will dominate and have a detrimental effect on this rural area.
Impact on landscape: - It will have a detrimental visual impact on the local landscape and a wider area. - It will be a prominent and dominating alien feature within the landscape and when viewed from Dartmoor National Park. - It will remain prominently visible for many miles. - Views directly to the west to Hatherleigh Moor, Dartmoor and Huntshaw Cross will be negatively affected. - It will skyline for at least 240 degrees. - Council policy SO15 is to protect and enhance the high quality landscape of West Devon. - Impact on heritage: - It will be detrimental to Pewson Barton a vernacular farm group, Grade II Listed with Domesday Book boundaries that is 600m from the proposed turbine. - It will affect the setting of the following Listed Buildings: Pewson Barton, Windscott, Dartmoor cottage, Ridges Farm, Nethercott House, Ash House, East Park Farm and Iddesleigh church. - The 15th century church would be dwarfed twice over and the development is out of proportion with anything that is existing
Impact on the local population: - Noise in excess of 35DBA would be damaging to health. - It would create noise by day and night, thereby reducing the peaceful character of the area to the detriment of local residents with possible adverse health implications. - There would also be a flicker or strobe effect from the turbine. - It would affect television and mobile phone reception. - It will devalue local property and cause resentment in the community. - It is far too close to residential properties. The current suggested minimum distance from residential housing for siting a turbine is 350m but this only relates to noise disturbance. There are at least two properties that fall within this distance. - The distance is totally inadequate when it comes to the safety of residents in the event of a turbine structural failure. There are a number of reports where turbines have failed and debris has been found up to a mile away posing a serious threat through injury. - Wind turbines require aircraft warning lights which may create light pollution.
Impact on ecology: - It is well documented that wind turbines can kill birds and bats. - There are somewhere in the region of 60 species of resident and migratory birds in the area.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
- There are known bat colonies and barn owls living in a neighbouring farmhouse and outside cob building. - Migrating birds like house martins and swallows pass through the area. These birds are on the RSPB’s Amber list. - Of more concern are the winter visitors to the fields, lapwing, fieldfare, redwing and starling, all are on the RSPB Red list. - There is a healthy population of wild geese that use the nearby pond. - The Bat Conservation Trust on their website state the positioning of midsized turbines in hedgerows is a concern. - It would be an unacceptable danger to already at risk and endangered wildlife. - The construction of a wind turbine can alter local water courses and their chemistry. This planned development lies very close to a local water source important to the local ecology.
Impact on tourism and business: - It will dominate the Tarka Trail, a very important and successful attraction to tourists. - It will also dominate much of the Ruby County “Iddesleigh and War Horse Valley” route. - It would be detrimental to the number of visitors to the area who stay at local B&B’s and inns. - Iddesleigh attracts many visitors who do not come to rural Devon to be confronted with industrialisation of the landscape. - Already tourists are looking at Devon and Cornwall as one big wind farm and a no go area. We must act now before we lose our tourists completely.
Health and safety: - The site is within 60m of the Tarka Trail and could cause injury. - It is not unknown for wind turbines to topple over, which would cause considerable damage over a large area.
Procedure: - Residents in Torridge District not notified of the proposal - The archaeological report/impact assessment submitted does not take into account the historical nature and medieval landscape of the proposed site, which forms part of a fossilised medieval park. A separate comprehensive document has been submitted outlining the history of the area and findings of the author in support of this objection to the proposal. - No site specific noise assessment has been undertaken as required by ETSU- R-97, required when nearby properties are affected. - The photomontages are not fit for purpose. They have not been prepared in accordance with best practice guidance. - There is no zone of theoretical visibility provided. - Inadequate assessment of the impact on heritage assets. - Habitat survey inadequate. - A valid bat survey must be conducted because there are significant numbers in the vicinity and not least because bats are extremely sensitive to acoustic anomalies. - The Heritage Impact Assessment is flawed and reaches conclusions which are contradictory, misleading statements and opinions presented as facts.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
The wrong size of turbine has been used in their assessment, using a height of 30m, not 44.5m. - The report is in breach of the Institute for Archaeologists Code of Conduct and their standard for desk based assessment. - Highways Dept have said the traffic associated with this proposal is minimal but there appears to be no investigation into possible damage in getting such large parts to the site through several miles of single track road. - There is no evidence that there will be no noise nuisance to neighbouring properties. - The documentation associated with the application is so inadequate and so erroneous that WDBC would be acting illegally if it approved the application based on the supplied information. - Dartmoor National Park has not been consulted with respect to this application. (DNP were emailed 18/2/13 for consultation and responded)
Other: - The proposal does not comply with numerous policies and is contrary to the aims of the NPPF. - The dwelling at Coombe Farm is subject to an Agricultural Occupancy Condition, to ensure affordable housing is available to those solely employed in agriculture. The wind turbine would generate a significant income, raising the value of the dwelling and rendering it unaffordable to those solely employed in agriculture. - Coombe Farm, which despite the name is a residential holding rather than a working establishment with, say, milking sheds and cattle barns. It is not a working farm and has no large need for power such as one would have with dairying. It is not an exercise in self sufficiency or the turbine would be much smaller, this is for personal profit. - Turbines are not cost effective. They cannot store electricity effectively and cause surges to the national grid. - Wind turbines are not living up to the technical advantages originally claimed for them. - If this turbine is passed then it opens the floodgates for others in the future. - WDBC strategic policy 11 Rural Regeneration says support will be given to small scale renewable energy projects. A turbine 44.5 metres high is hardly within the category small. - The electricity will be delivered directly to the grid and there will be no local benefits. - Military jet aircraft using the valley and many a time they fly very close to the ridge line. Helicopters can fly into tall cranes when visibility is poor, what would be the consequence of a military jet aircraft hitting a turbine. - Ministers from the UK and Ireland signed an agreement on Thursday 24th January that will see some of the largest wind turbines in the world built across Irish bog land. The electricity from these will be sold to the UK. Surely this takes a lot of pressure off land in Devon? - If there should be any wind turbines sited in this area of Devon, they should be sited on the brown field site of Winkleigh Airfield which is approximately 4 – 5 miles distant from the planning application. - WDBC should seek to absorb new technologies in a manner which demonstrate cogent reasoning to the distribution of turbines rather than what appears to be a reactive and scattergun process in response to pressure from
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
subsidiary deadlines and cynical promotional drive from the energy companies. - The effective working life of the current generation of turbines may be 25 years, some evidence is pointing towards only 15. Will WDBC have any statutory authority to require private owners of turbines to maintain or removed turbines no longer viable? - During construction the local very small lanes will be subject to traffic and emissions totally unknown in the area, this will cause even more damage to hedgerows, wildlife and road surfaces which will need to rectified by the Council. - The project will result in waste products such as tonnes of buried counterbalance concrete and biologically un-degradable materials i.e. fibre glass, silicone and epoxy resin. - Recent applications for “renewable energy projects” have been rejected by the Council in very close locations such as Nethercott House and Broadwoodkelly. Visual impacts from viewpoints have been cited for rejection and as such this application should be rejected. - Wind power inflates energy prices and drives the vulnerable into fuel poverty. - We should be investing more into wave, tidal and solar power.
Following the second round of consultations on the noise data, a further 17 letters of representation were received. 16 of these were objection letters highlighting the following opinions:
-The area is tranquil -It will be damaging and set a precedent -The noise element should not be dismissed -The background levels were higher than at other times of the year, it was high due to tourist traffic and harvest, also noise from inside Coombe cottage due to windows open during the heatwave could have affected background noise levels -Wind direction changes and noise indicators in one direction only is not a good indication -More than one property should be sampled -The survey is not in accordance with national guidelines and did not assess the impacts on people using the Tarka trail -No noise survey data was undertaken at properties along Upcott to the North -The data is inaccurate and seems too high for rural Devon and is well above the CPRE general rural level of 29dB -The survey was not in accordance with ETSU or IOA guidance - No data provided at higher wind speeds - If this survey is accepted then the Council will be failing in their duty of care - This assessment should have been undertaken prior to the submission not following its submission retrospectively so as to inform eh design etc. - 3dB inaccuracy/uncertainty figures should be included which would result in a breach
Of these 1 was a letter of support raising the following:
-The noise report proves that the turbine levels are not a concern and are acceptable and in line with government guidelines.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
Relevant Planning History None relevant
ANALYSIS There are several planning issues associated with this proposal; these are predominantly renewable energy targets and policy aims, landscape character and visual impact, residential amenity including noise and shadow flicker, biodiversity and highways. EIA The LPA deemed that the proposed wind turbine would not, in accordance with the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2011, constitute EIA development based upon the selection criteria in Schedule 3 of the regulations. This opinion was formed upon receipt of the planning application; a screening request was not submitted to the LPA. Landscape Visual Impact Much of the background and issues relating to landscape are discussed above in the Landscape Officer’s comments. The current document at consultation stage ‘Accommodating Wind and Solar PV Development in Devon’s Landscape’ sets out a method of how to assess the sensitivity of a site to wind turbines. The document advises that larger scale landforms are likely to be less sensitive than smaller scale landforms. The presence of human scale features can also create a more sensitive landscape whereas an area containing existing roads and tracks can be less sensitive. Prominent skylines that are undeveloped are likely to be sensitive as turbines may detract from this. Areas that have increased movement and human activity will be much less sensitive than areas with a wild landscape and little sign of human activity. Areas that have a historic landscape can be sensitive to wind turbines. The assessment of the landscape impact aspect of turbines is generally a balanced one. There have been a high number of objections from residents, and objections from the parish and CPRE who have raised strong objections to the proposals and the reasons for these concerns are outlined above. The main landscape concerns relate to the potential widespread impact of the turbine, its visibility form the Tarka Trail and from the properties to the north. All of these objections are material planning considerations and raise significant points. The proposed structure will be located on a high area of land. It is acknowledged that the wind turbine will be visible from quite some distance away and will have an impact the landscape character due to its height, verticality and movement. However, this impact on the landscape must be fully assessed to weigh up whether the impact is significant enough to warrant refusal. The fact that a turbine is visible in a landscape does not result in an automatic reason for refusal. In more widespread landscape terms it is evident from the Landscape Officer’s comments above that this turbine is considered smaller scale with a hub height of 30m and that overall it is a considered that any landscape detriment is localised and not over-riding. The landscape is considered to be able to absorb this turbine. This is an opinion shared by the original case officer on his site visit and the subsequent case officer who also conducted a site visit on Louis’ departure from the Authority. In addition with regards to the more localised views, particularly from the North, the
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______turbine will be visible from the properties set to the North and around Upcott, and at present they do have panoramic landscape views as they are set on a ridge, however although this turbine would feature in views from these properties it would not be the dominant feature and it would not be overbearing in views from these private properties. As such although it is not disputed that these views from the north would be interrupted by the presence of the turbine, it is not considered that this alone warrants refusal. Due to the proximity to Torridge District Council, they were consulted and their officers have sent a very detailed response which provides an excellent summary of the landscape considerations and they TDC have also concluded that the proposal would have no significant detrimental effect upon residential views or landscape value or character: ‘The site is adjacent to Landscape Character Type (LCT) 3A, Upper Farmed Wooded Valley Slopes... the study also states that parts of the LCT may be able to accommodate "large" size turbines (defined as between 76-110m). A lower sensitivity to small (15-50m to tip) turbines is assessed, in particular where the turbine forms part of a farm complex or business (normally within 250m of existing buildings).
The scale of the proposed turbine would have a hub height of 30m with a rotor diameter of 29m giving an overall height to blade tip of 44.5m. This would bring the turbine into the "small" category. The application site is located close to the top of a hill and would introduce a vertical structure into a skyline which is currently relatively free of substantial pylons and other man made vertical features. Residential properties sited to the north are located at a significantly higher level than the application site, in effect the properties would be looking down onto the proposal. The landscape of the area is generally of an undulating character, and there are copses of trees and high banks along the rural roads which would screen many views of the turbine, but there would be intermittent views of the turbine on the horizon in a number of locations. Where the turbine would be seen on the skyline, it would generally be viewed as part of a wide vista formed by an area of well defined landscape features with a strongly undulating landform of rolling hills and farmland. At the scale proposed for the wind turbine, and in this location below the highest point of the hill, it would not form such a dominant feature within this large scale landscape that it would have a defining and harmful effect on its fabric or quality. Nor would it seriously intrude or cause obstruction in views of the landscape so as to affect visual amenity. As a result I consider that the proposal would not significantly change the character or appearance of the landscape, or cause harm to visual amenity when viewed within the wider landscape context.
Guidelines for the Devon Landscape Character Area state that important local views and vistas should be protected and intrusive development should be screened where possible. From the site it is clear that there would be direct views of the turbine from a number of dwellings on the edge of the district in the nearby village of Dowland, and screening of the turbine is unlikely to be achievable in these views. However, such views would be over a distance of about 0.5km and more, and the turbine would in many instances be seen in the context of the working farm at Coombe Farm rather than as an isolated structure in the open countryside. The sensitivity of the receptors of these views would be high. However, the turbine would not obstruct any
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______views, and having regard to its location on the farm, and the distance over which it would be seen, I find that it would not be so intrusive as to form a significantly dominant and overpowering feature in the landscape when viewed from the vicinity of Dowland.’
In addition to the consideration of these local public and more residential views, the case officer walked the Tarka trail from Upcott down through to the site and to the site access way adjacent to Coombe Cottage on a very clear day. From upcott the Trail is down a very heavily vegetated track where the continuous trees on either side which curve over the track prevent any views out for the length of the Trail until a stile to the east takes the route into and across an open filed to the point where the trail emerges near to Coombe Farm on its access drive. It is from this open field only that the turbine could be experienced to any significant degree. It will be visible as walkers cross this open field and in the distance beyond the turbine the grey lines of Dartmoor’s silhouette could be made out, however this is not a significant and unbroken view of the DNP and although it is a view of interest along the Trail at this point it is not considered that the inclusion of the turbine within this view would significantly detract from the experience of the trail or the landscape viewed from it at this point. Once across this field which only takes a matter of a few minutes to cross, the Trail picks up the access drive to Coombe Farm which is again heavily treed with a high Devon bank to the south and mature trees within this so it was officer view that apart from when passing a gateway and experiencing a possible glimpsed view of the turbine, no lengthy views of the turbine would be experienced along this section. It is on leaving this access way next to Coombe Cottage that real panoramic views of Dartmoor begin to be experienced along the Trail as the land falls and the trial goes south.
Cumulative Impact The PPS22 Companion Guide has recently been revoked and the guidance within the document which referred to cumulative impact has been changed. The new guidance ‘Planning proactive guidance for renewable and low carbon energy’ advises:
Cumulative landscape impacts and cumulative visual impacts are best considered separately. The cumulative landscape impacts are the effects of a proposed development on the fabric, character and quality of the landscape; it is concerned with the degree to which a proposed renewable energy development will become a significant or defining characteristic of the landscape.
Cumulative visual impacts concern the degree to which proposed renewable energy development will become a feature in particular views (or sequences of views), and the impact this has upon the people experiencing those views. Cumulative visual impacts may arise where two or more of the same type of renewable energy development will be visible from the same point, or will be visible shortly after each other along the same journey. Hence, it should not be assumed that, just because no other sites will be visible from the proposed development site, the proposal will not create any cumulative impacts.
The guidance goes on to outline the level of information required to assess cumulative impact. The level of information submitted with the application is considered acceptable to assess the proposal.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
Cumulative effects may arise where two or more of the same type of renewable energy development are visible from the same point, or are visible shortly after each other along the same journey’. There have been many applications for wind turbines in West Devon and the surrounding Districts in recent years and in this location it has reached a point at which it is considered there are cumulative impacts from certain viewpoints and along certain journeys. Both the Case Officer and landscape officer do not consider cumulative impact to be a problem in this location, the turbine is of a smaller scale and the nearest approved turbines either in West Devon or Torridge are a significant distance away with sizeable separation distances. Similarly this particular site is a significant distance form the nearest heavily trafficked routes minimising any cumulative impact experienced on journeys. Torridge District also assessed cumulative impact as follows and concluded that this proposal was acceptable: ‘Planning permission has been granted for a number of wind turbine developments in the wider area, and I have considered the cumulative impact of all these developments together with the current scheme. In the ALS the strategy for LCT 3A is "a landscape with occasional wind energy developments of single or small wind clusters (up to and including large size - turbine size will depend on landscape scale which varies across the LCT). There is adequate separation distance between the various schemes and the application site to ensure that whilst the proposal may be seen in certain views with other turbines, the proposed and existing turbines would not collectively have a defining and harmful effect on the overall experience of the landscape.’
Overall then in Landscape terms the relatively small scale of this turbine is not considered to have such a significant detrimental effect in the immediate locality, in the wider landscape or cumulatively as to warrant with holding planning permission. The landscape is considered to be capable of accommodating this feature in this location and it would not harm the overall character of, or people’s experience of, the landscape. Historic Environment The nearest listed buildings are the Grade II Coombe Cottage 388m away to the south west and grade II Pewson Barton in Dowland 577 metres north east of the application site. Other nearby Listed Buildings are Winscott Farm Grade II Listed at 633 metres north; Dartmoor Cottage Grade II Listed is sited north at 594 metres; Ridges Farm Grade II Listed and 598 metres north; and Iddesleigh church 1294m to the South west (grade I).
Initially no detailed heritage assessment was submitted with the application, as a result English Heritage objected on lack of suitable assessment and information. The conservation officer, Torridge DC and DCC Archaeology also had concerns as a result of this lack of assessment. As a result a formal heritage assessment was undertaken by SW archaeology on behalf of the applicant and submitted. This was considered by consultees and the consequent comments are as set out in consultation above, however to summarise the report was the result of a desk-study, walk over study and visual impact assessment and assessed heritage assets such as listed buildings, churches, registered landscapes and archaeology. It concluded
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______that the overall impact of the proposed turbine could be assessed as negative/minor to negative/moderate largely on the basis of its relatively small size. The report itself though presents a very thorough assessment of many aspects of the proposal on many and varied potential receptors and makes some useful summaries such as: ‘A relatively large number of listed buildings, almost all grade II, will have views to the proposed turbine, but the nature of those structures – mostly farms and associated structures – makes them far less sensitive to the visually intrusive turbine, especially since many working farms will be surrounded by visually unappealing and historically unsympathetic additions…the primary heritage asset under consideration here must be the late medieval landscape of which Coombe Farm forms a part…the apparent antiquity of the of the immediate fieldscape – taken together with the older listed buildings, lends the landscape a certain timeless quality. This is of course, a misleading impression as the landscape is constantly evolving and home to many very modern buildings and agricultural practices. However this is the context in which the impact of a small and obviously modern intrusive visual element needs to be considered.’ The report goes o to discuss that the ZTV is misleading as a high level of ‘local blocking’ of views by trees and hedges could be expected due to its relatively low height.
As a result of this submitted report Officers and consultees, namely DCC Archaeology and English Heritage raised no objections to the proposal on heritage grounds and overall it was considered acceptable with respect to heritage.
Residential Amenity The proposed wind turbine is to be sited in the open countryside. Whilst in a relatively isolated location, there are two main groups of dwellings close to the proposal site, those to the North in Torridge DC along Upcott and those close to the access point to the south. Officers have measured the distance of the rear walls of properties from the proposal site they are as follows: Coombe Farm itself is the nearest residential property (215 m away) Whitemoor ~309 m Whitemoor Farm ~ 347m Coombe cottage ~ 390m Pewson Barton ~568 m
Noise and Impact on Health The most appropriate way to control the noise impacts of wind turbine development is to set noise limits, usually based on the existing background noise level at the nearest noise-sensitive properties. The Guide endorses the use of a report entitled, ‘The Assessment and Rating of Noise from Wind Farms’, which has been produced by The Energy Technology Support Unit for the DTI (commonly referred to as ETSU- R-97), when assessing the potential noise impacts of wind turbine developments. Additional guidance has also recently been published form the Institute of Acoustics (IOA) on this subject. The National Planning Policy Framework advises that when determining applications for wind energy developments the decision maker should follow the approach set out in NPS EN-3. This in turn advises that the assessment of noise should use ETSU-R- 97. Concerns have been raised by objectors with this method of assessment; however, this is the accepted assessment process recommended by up to date
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______government guidance in planning policy. The additional background noise surveys required have now been undertaken by an appropriately qualified person and the information has been provided to the LPA and consulted on with the public and consultees for a further 14 days.
This assessment was undertaken by Peter Ashford of Ian Sharland ltd. Environmental Health officers were initially approached regarding which properties the assessment should be undertaken at. Using EH calculation along with the representation from MAS, 4 properties (which did not have a financial interest in the turbine) were identified as being predicted to be affected by higher than 35 dB LA90 noise. Peter Ashford was informed by EH that there were no objections to any of the properties being used and because the 4 properties where close together one assessment site would be appropriate (which is not uncommon in single turbine applications). The only stipulation made by EH was that it needed to be in compliance of the recent IOA guidance on ETSU. For properties outside of the 35 dB LA90 area the simplified ETSU condition could be used, so it would therefore be a simple condition based on predicted noise levels rather than the standard ETSU limits or 5 dB above the background.
The report submitted by Peter Ashford is in broad compliance with the IOA guidance. However there are some failings in the report. The candidate turbine is stall regulated - the IOA guidance states that the minimum wind speed range for this type of turbine is between cut in speed and 12 m/s. Due to the short period of the assessment (albeit in compliance with the time frame required by the guidance) wind speeds of 11 and 12 m/s did not occur, and thus could not be assessed. The amount of data particularly at night showed that there was very little wind at the higher wind speeds during the time of assessment. In addition this is very evident in the noise data and should have been removed from the data.
Wind speed v Background level noise condition.
There was use by Peter Ashford of a Polynomial line to plot background levels against wind speed. There is a lack of data in the amenity hours at the 7-8 m/s but sufficient data at higher windspeeds, so EH consider that the lack of this data is not critical.
Peter Ashford has confirmed that night time background noise and amenity hours are linked to windspeeds, which Officers agree with, however there was an assumption made by Peter Ashford that day and night levels are similar, but the night time levels included the dawn chorus. Removing the dawn chorus data will lower the night time background noise level. There will still be an increase with wind speeds, but the IOA guidance does not allow an extended polynomial line beyond the actual data points.
The noise report has recommended a planning condition for wind speeds up to 10 m/s. It is understood that the night time noise has been linked in with the daytime. The condition would give protection to properties to 10 m/s however the suggested condition in the IOA guidance does go to 12 m/s however in this particular survey data set there is no data to confirm the background levels at those windspeeds.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
It is believed to counter some of the unmeasured data the condition recommended in the report is tighter than would have been suggested if done in strict accordance with ETSU, see table below.
Wind Predicted Background Background Ian ETSU Speed Turbine (day time) (Night) Sharland condition m/s Level (inc dawn condition chorus 5 34 34 35 39 39 6 35 35 37 40 40 7 36 38 43 43 8 37 40 43 45 9 39 42 43 47 10 40 43 43 48
There were discussions with Peter Ashford regarding 11 and 12 m/s and it was suggested that 43 dB limit at 10 m/s in the condition can be extended to 11 and 12 m/s. This would give protection to residents at those wind speeds, however it would not be based on any measured data. It is our experience that at those wind speeds background levels do exceed turbine noise levels. However we cannot definitively state this would be the case in this application.
Therefore if we extend the conditioned noise limit of 43dB to wind speeds of 11m/s and 12 m/s, then this would comply with the guidance in ETSU-r-97 and therefore planning guidance, the applicants technical expert is satisfied that they can meet this stricter limit and has confirmed in writing that they are in agreement with this condition being applied.
Representations
There have been a number of representations, including from MAS acoustic consultants.
MAS are correct in their report that the assessment should have included 11 to 12 m/s wind speed. We also agree with their first point that in line with the IOA guidance the dawn chorus should have been removed. However these issues are discussed above along with the EH officers’ rationale.
With regards to other issues raised, Officers do not agree with some of these as they are simply opinion. MAS have continued to use values (for example ground roughness of 0, when it is not clear whether the data they used is from an IEC64100 report) this is different to the values in the IOA guidance. The standard ETSU condition is quite clear on what is an appropriate noise limit for night time noise, so for arguments sake if the dawn chorus is removed and the night time level is reduced to around 20 dB; the standard ETSU condition for night time is 43 dB or 5 dB above background whichever is the greater, so in this case the 43 dB limit stipulated by national guidance would be used.
With regards to the daytime background levels, EH are not in agreement with MAS,
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______or a number of the public, that two events of agricultural activity during the assessment should be removed. It is our opinion that this is to be expected in an agricultural area. It was highlighted by one objector that the area is extensively farmed and agricultural activity will be commonplace. It is our opinion that agricultural activity should not be removed as it would be fairly typical of this area and happens throughout the year in varying forms.
We do understand and appreciate MAS arguments that with a low background level and a noise limit set around 20 dB above it, the turbine will be heard, however current planning national guidance does not allow us to consider this.
Parish Council Response
There are a number of points which needs addressing
The Council does not recommend specific consultants, three local consultants names was given to the applicant, however it was understood Ian Sharland Ltd had already been approached. Ian Sharland Ltd is listed on the Institute of Acoustics website.
The point regarding consultation/choosing the measurement location has been addressed in the first paragraph of this report.
Response from residents
There are a number of representations from residents concerned about the noise impact, Environmental Health understands and appreciates those concerns. Most of the questions have already been addressed above. We have taken on board the technical comments when we agree with it or has been confirmed by an acoustic consultant.
Conclusion
There is a lack of data particularly at night and wind speeds of 11 & 12 m/s. EH cannot definitively recommend a condition to 12 m/s second wind speeds linked to background noise at 12 m/s. However the simplified condition 35 dB LA90 to 10 m/s wind speed could be used to protect properties, further than 500m. It has been predicted by both applicant and residents consultants that the nearest dwellings to the north/East will not be affected by levels of above 35 dB LA90.
It is the opinion of Environmental Health that using the predicted noise levels from both consultants (Peter Ashford and MAS) that the turbine is unlikely to cause a significant noise problem as defined by the National Planning Policy (NPPF) Framework. To put into context both consultants who looked at the application have predicted noise levels outside at the nearest neighbouring property (at 10m/s wind speed) of between 38-40 dB LA90 or an average of 40-42 dB, this can be compared to what we would expect at a library or domestic living room (Bruel & Kjaar). There will be a further reduction for inside the properties. We are in agreement with MAS that the turbine will be on occasion heard, however our understanding of ETSU/NPPF is, that it does not look to protect tranquillity. We appreciate the importance of tranquillity however protection of it may be seen as going above and
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______beyond government guidance.
Therefore whilst the Environmental Health department feels that there are parts of the submitted report that diverge from national good practice, the outcome of the protection offered by the proposed condition in the report is in accordance with the national planning guidance. Therefore we would suggest imposing the condition suggested by Peter Ashford and extend the noise limit of 43dB to wind speeds of 11 m/s and 12 m/s.
To add further protection to neighbours EH also requested a further section to the proposed condition proposed condition to protect properties further than 500m away.
Shadow Flicker Shadow Flicker is a term used to describe the shadowing effect of the blades of a wind turbine. The movement of the blades can create intermittent shadowing effects upon properties. This is an important consideration as dependent upon the amount of shadow flicker created it can create significant impacts upon habitable rooms of properties. Shadow Flicker is usually only considered to be an issue if the turbine is sited within 10 x rotor diameter of a private property or public area which lied within 130 degrees either side of north. The nearest property (excluding the applicant’s property at Coombe Farm which is 215m) is Whitemoor at 309m to the south of the site. The proposed wind turbine is to have a rotor diameter of 29 metres so the flicker sensitive area is that within 290 metres of the turbine. There is no residential property other than that of the applicant within 290 metres of the proposal and Coombe Farm itself is side on to the turbine so its main windows lie NW to SE rather than to the SW where the turbine lies. There are also a number of large mature trees between the two and Coombe Farm is set low to the application site with these features in between. As such it is not considered that the proposal would have a significant detrimental impact in terms of residential amenity. Torridge District council also assessed this as part of their consultation response and reached the same conclusion: ‘National Policy Statement EN-3 identified shadow flicker from wind turbines as a potential impact on nearby residential properties. In relation to shadow flicker a calculation can be used to demonstrate the distance of properties which may be affected by shadows from the movement of the turbine blades. The calculation is based on the distance of 10 times the rotor diameter and the position of the nearest dwelling in a 130 degree zone either side directly north of the turbine. The zone for shadow flicker of the proposed turbine would extend to 290 metres therefore at present there are no residential properties within this distance. ‘
Impact upon outlook and Dominance There have been a high number of objections in relation to this aspect of the proposal. The proposed wind turbine is still a relatively high structure despite being categorised as a small turbine and will be visible to the immediate properties and those in the surrounding area. An assessment must be made as to whether the outlook of the nearest residents would be so significantly impacted upon as to create a dwelling that would be overwhelmingly unacceptable to be occupied. The pertinent
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______length of the roads to the immediate north and south were travelled as part of the site visits and open views through properties combined with field entrances gave a clear insight into the existing and proposed views from those properties.
Views from private residential properties have been covered to an extent by the discussion on Landscape above. However to reiterate there is no protection of a private view through planning, and in this instance it is considered that the views from the nearest properties to the north on Upcott and those to the south from Coombe Cottage along would not be significantly affected such that the turbine was overly dominant in views or over the properties. Occupiers of those properties to the north will see the turbine but it will be at quite a distance and they are set higher than the turbine giving views up and over it. Those properties to the south are nearer but it will not interrupt their southern views and all have a high number of mature trees and field boundaries behind them to screen views as well as the turbine being sited a little way down the field ridge so that the remaining rising ground would also help lessen the views of the turbine from the south. Torridge DC also included a discussion on amenity in their consultation response and concluded that the nearest properties in Torridge would not be unduly adversely affected in their outlook:
‘I note representations have been received that refer to a policy for wind turbines in Torridge. To clarify, this is a Council policy not a Planning Policy, the contents of the policy did not conform with current government guidance and therefore could not be adopted as a Supplementary Planning Document. Residential properties, located in the Torridge area, are sited over 500 metres from development and at a higher level than the application site. This is considered adequate distance to ensure no significant harm would occur on the outlook from these properties.’
There are other dwellings located further away from the site at Iddesleigh and in the surrounding locality as isolated dwellings. Whilst the turbine will be visible, merely a change in outlook from any of these properties is not a reason for refusal. Having carefully assessed the surrounding sites, it is officer opinion that the outlook of these dwellings will clearly not be so overwhelmingly and oppressively affected as to result in any of the dwellings being unacceptable to occupy. Tourism Concern has been raised regarding potential tourism impacts upon the area, particularly with regard to the Tarka Trail and the War Horse aspect of the area which is now promoted. Potential impacts upon the Tarka Trail are discussed in detail above under Landscape but in summary it is not considered that the turbine would have significant impacts upon the Trail or people’s enjoyment of it or willingness/desire to visit and use it. With reference to general tourism within the area, in discussions surrounding tourism and economy in wind turbine appeals, there is a degree of uncertainty as to the impact of turbines upon tourism. This is noted and it seems unclear from studies whether, if tourism is negatively affected, whether a period of recovery after such development is temporary or if it could have longer term effects. It is undisputed that the majority of those who holiday in this area do so for the countryside, views and
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______landscape. However, that does not necessarily mean that the presence of a relatively small scale turbine such as this would prevent tourists visiting the area. Turbines are subjective and some find their appearance attractive whilst others do not. In addition those visiting the nearby tourist destinations may consider that although the turbine would be visible from certain points, the advantages of the facilities in the wider area outweigh the presence of a turbine. The Scottish Government have undertaken a survey of tourists to investigate whether wind turbines affect tourism. The conclusions drawn were that renewable energy would have a minimal effect on tourism and tourists would not resist visiting the area. Although this is not site specific, the study is worthy of noting. There has been insufficient evidence provided to arrive at a clear conclusion as to the implications upon tourism and impact of the turbine upon the wider economy, however it is acknowledged as a concern that must be weighed against the benefits of providing renewable energy. Traffic and Highways There has been no objection from Devon County Council Highways. The site is located 328 metres from the highway and therefore is a sufficient distance from the highway to prevent the turbine causing a danger should it topple in winds as has been seen in recent events. Concerns have been raised by the Parish Council and residents about the proximity of the turbine to the Tarka Trail however the turbine is over 80m from the nearest point of the Tarka Trail so even in the unlikely even that it were to fail in some way, it were to fail it is nearly twice its height away from the Trail. With regards to the concern of flicker effect on the road, Planning for Renewable Energy; A companion Guide to PPS22 advises the following: ‘Under certain combinations of geographical position and time of day, the sun may pass behind the rotors of a wind turbine and cast a shadow over neighbouring properties. When the blades rotate, the shadow flicks on and off; the effect is known as ‘shadow flicker’. It only occurs inside buildings where the flicker appears through a narrow window opening.’ Therefore, it is not considered that drivers will be affected by this. Drainage In terms of drainage due to the relatively small footprint of the site and works and distance from the trafficked highway, there are not considered to be any concerns regarding drainage or flood risk. Biodiversity There have been concerns raised regarding the potential impact upon protected species in the area as a result of the development and the information submitted regarding this aspect of the proposal. The Countryside Officer and Natural England have provided consultation responses outlined above. Ultimately the proposal is located with its swept blade area over 50m from the nearest linear feature, in this instance the hedge, and this is in accordance with Natural England’s guidance. Only a small area of hedge is to be altered as a result of the access need to the site and this has been assessed by an ecologist and recommendations made. It is not considered that this would trigger an offence under the Habitats Regulations and thus the need for an EPSL and the methodology for the works including the removal,
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______gapping up a bank translocation would be secured through condition. Air Traffic No objections have been received from the MOD or NATS. The MOD have not requested that the turbine be fitted with lighting in this case. An informative is attached as the MOD would like to be informed of the start of construction, height of any construction plant and latitude and longitude of the turbine. Other Considerations Reference has been made in objections to the agricultural occupancy clause on Coombe Farm. This has been considered and investigated in accordance with the Council’s procedures, however the use of a turbine to provide secondary income to a farm is not unusual and whether this would lead to a greater income from the turbine than the agricultural enterprise is not a material planning consideration here. In any case the turbine would require little or no farmer labour whereas the majority of the farmer’s time would still be involved in agricultural activities – mainly/solely employed in agriculture. The issue of the efficiency or real carbon reduction of turbines has been raised in objections, however it has been made very clear by Government that a contribution to green energy, however small, must be considered beneficial and that the contribution that wind turbines do and could make is significant. This has been most recently enshrined in the NPPF the relevant paragraphs from which are included above.
The latest Ministerial statement by the Department of Energy and Climate Change dated 6th June 2013 identifies that there should be a stronger role for communities is the consideration of wind turbines. This guidance has not yet been adopted, but it must be given weight and assessed when considering this application. The application received significant objections from local people and Parish Council. The statement identifies that the guidance will set out that the need for renewable energy does not automatically override environmental protections and planning concerns of local communities; Decisions should take into account the cumulative impact of turbines on the landscape and local amenity; local topography should be a factor; great care should be taken to ensure heritage assets are conserved in a manner appropriate to their significance, including impact on their setting. The LPA considers this guidance to be of significance and it and the areas it highlights have been considered in this application.
A query has been raised regarding the capacity of the grid in this location and the potential need for additional poles and/cables. The case officer queried this with the applicant who responded that ‘Prior to my application an enquiry was made to Western Power regarding spare capacity at the site, I can confirm that there is some 280kw available, as regards upgrades are concerned I have to pay for a transformer and switchgear.’
Conclusion Addressing the needs of renewable energy and sustainable development is a core principle through local and national policy. As outlined above there is strong support throughout policy for this proposal especially given the aims of the Climate Change Act, 2008 and the Renewable Energy Directive (directive 2009/28/EC). The
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______application would contribute towards providing renewable energy locally and nationally and this carries great weight. However the planning practice guidance for renewable and low carbon energy issued in July 2013 advises that ‘increasing the amount of energy from renewable and low carbon technologies will help to make sure the UK has a secure energy supply, reduce greenhouse gas emissions to slow down climate change and stimulate investment in new jobs and businesses’. This level of benefit for providing renewable energy must be weighed against the impacts of the turbine. The guidance issued in the ministerial Statement on 6th June 2013, is clear that ‘meeting our energy goals should not justify the wrong development in the wrong location’.
So the benefits of the scheme must be weighed against the impact upon the landscape, neighbour and community amenity, tourism, the highway, biodiversity and the historic environment. In this instance the impact of the proposal upon these issues is not considered to outweigh the benefits and is therefore recommended for approval.
This application has been considered in accordance with Section 38 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and, where relevant, with Sections 66 and 72 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas).
Planning Policy All standard policies listed (delete where not relevant, add others as relevant, including NPPF):
National Planning Policy Framework Determination of planning applications Paragraph 11 states that “Planning law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.” Paragraph 12 states that “This National Planning Policy Framework does not change the statutory status of the development plan as the starting point for decision making. Proposed development that accords with an up-to-date Local Plan should be approved, and proposed development that conflicts should be refused unless other material considerations indicate otherwise. It is highly desirable that local planning authorities should have an up-to-date plan in place.” Sustainable development Paragraph 14 states that “At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking. For decision- taking this means approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay; and
- where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of- date, granting permission unless:
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
- any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or - specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted.
Sustainable development has been made a core principle underpinning government planning guidance which is considered to be central to the economic, environmental and the social success of the country. These three principles are to be pursued in an integrated manner to provide for solutions and deliver multiple goals. The Framework considers that there need not be an inherent contradiction between achieving increased levels of development and protecting and enhancing the environment, provided that development is planned and undertaken responsibly and the planning system is expected to take an active role in guiding development to sustainable solutions. Climate change & renewable energy Paragraph 93 states that “Planning plays a key role in helping shape places to secure radical reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, minimising vulnerability and providing resilience to the impacts of climate change, and supporting the delivery of renewable and low carbon energy and associated infrastructure. This is central to the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development.” Paragraph 97 states that to help increase the use and supply of renewable and low carbon energy, local planning authorities should recognise the responsibility on all communities to contribute to energy generation from renewable or low carbon sources. They should: ● have a positive strategy to promote energy from renewable and low carbon sources; ● design their policies to maximise renewable and low carbon energy development while ensuring that adverse impacts are addressed satisfactorily, including cumulative landscape and visual impacts; ● consider identifying suitable areas for renewable and low carbon energy sources, and supporting infrastructure, where this would help secure the development of such sources; Paragraph 98 states that, when determining planning applications local planning authorities should not require applicants for energy development to demonstrate the overall need for renewable or low carbon energy and also recognise that even small- scale projects provide a valuable contribution to cutting greenhouse gas emissions. Conserving and enhancing the natural Environment Section 11 of the guidance relates to conserving and enhancing the natural environment. Paragraph 109 states that “the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by:-
- Protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, geological conservation interests and soils;
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
- Recognising the wider benefits of ecosystem services; - Minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity where possible, contributing to the Government’s commitment to the halt of the overall decline in biodiversity, including establishing coherent ecological networks that are more resilient to current and future pressures; Paragraph 115 deals with designated areas stating that great weight should be given to protecting landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. The conservation of wildlife and cultural heritage are important considerations in all these areas, and should be given great weight in National Parks and the Broads. Residential amenity Paragraph 123 deals with the issue of noise. The paragraph states that planning policies and decisions should aim to:
avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life as a result of new development; mitigate and reduce to a minimum other adverse impacts on health and quality of life arising from noise from new development, including through the use of conditions; identify and protect areas of tranquillity which have remained relatively undisturbed by noise and are prized for their recreational and amenity value for this reason.
Conserving and enhancing the historic environment Section 12 of the Framework deals with conserving and enhancing the historic environment. Para 131 states – “In determining applications, local planning authorities should take account of:-
- The desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of the heritage assets and putting them to viable uses consistent with their conservation; - The positive contribution that conservation of heritage assets can make to sustainable communities including their economic vitality; and - the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness”
Para 132 states – “When considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification. Substantial harm to or loss of a grade II listed building, park or garden should be exceptional.” National Energy Policy National Energy Policy contained within the National Policy Statement (NPS) EN-1 and EN3 have been subject to public consultation and Parliamentary scrutiny and
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______published as national policy in respect of renewable energy infrastructure since July 2011. National Policy Statements form part of national planning policy and are a material consideration. Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy (EN-1): NPS-EN1 (para 3.4.1) The UK has committed to sourcing 15% of its total energy (across the sectors of transport, electricity and heat) from renewable sources by 2020 and new projects need to continue to come forward urgently to ensure that we meet this target. Projections suggest that by 2020 about 30% or more of our electricity generation – both centralised and small-scale – could come from renewable sources, compared to 6.7% in 2009.
Whilst off-shore wind is expected to provide the largest single contribution to the 2020 target, on-shore wind is highlighted as, the most well established and currently the most economically viable source of renewable energy available for future largescale deployment. NPS-EN1 sets out five key principles which are: • If the development contributes to meeting the need and is in accordance with the NPS, then consent should be given; • Regard should be had to local impact reports (produced by local authorities) and other matters considered relevant and important; • National, regional and local benefits (environmental, social and economic) should be taken into account; • Adverse impacts should be considered within the context of longer term and cumulative impacts together with proposed mitigation; and; • If the adverse impacts (after mitigation) outweigh the benefits, then consent should be refused. EN-3 reiterates the important role of on-shore wind and deals with issues including landscape, visual impact, noise, heritage assets recognising that there will always be significant landscape and visual impacts. West Devon Borough Council Core Strategy 2011 SP1 – Sustainable Development SP3 – Renewable Energy SP17 – Landscape Character SP18 – The Heritage and Historical Character of West Devon SP19 – Biodiversity SP21 – Flooding SP1 – all development in West Devon should be undertaken in a sustainable manner SP3 - West Devon Borough has set out its commitment to encouraging appropriate renewable energy developments through proactive renewable energy policies as Core Strategy policy SP3: Renewable Energy states;
‘‘Proposals for development involving the provision of renewable and/or low carbon technologies, including micro-generation technologies, together with ancillary
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______buildings and additional infrastructure will be supported and encouraged except where the proposal would have unacceptable adverse effects which are not outweighed by the local and wider environmental, economic, social and other considerations of the development.
Permission will only be granted if the developer has satisfactorily addressed the following on an individual case by case basis:
The use of the most appropriate technology; Measures to mitigate any adverse impacts on the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction, operational lifespan and decommissioning of the equipment/infrastructure; The provision for the protection, preservation, and/or mitigation for any features of strategic, cultural, agricultural, ecological, historic and/or archaeological importance, including landscape character…..’’
However whilst assessing applications for renewable energy development officers must be mindful of this proactive and encouraging policy approach and of energy targets both nationally and more locally, all such policies and documents emphasise the importance of achieving the right type of development in the right location, and that where such development may have a detrimental impact, this will need to be outweighed by its environmental benefits if it to be found acceptable.
SP17 - On sites outside Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and the Dartmoor National Park, particularly on the fringe areas of designated landscapes, development will not be permitted which would damage their natural beauty, character and special qualities or prejudice achievement of their designated purposes. SP18 - Historic features and areas of historic importance, and other elements of the historic environment, including their settings will be protected and where appropriate enhanced.
SP19 - Appropriate considerations will be given to nationally protected species, with special consideration to European protected species. The biodiversity and geological interest of the Borough will be maintained and, where appropriate, conserved and/or enhanced through new development. Opportunities to enhance the connectivity of biodiversity will be sought where possible.
SP21 - Development should avoid flood risk where possible, ensure protection from and not worsen flooding, and provide betterment where possible.
West Devon Borough Council Local Plan Review 2005(as amended 2011) NE10 – Protection of the Countryside and Other Open Spaces BE3 – Listed Buildings BE10 – Archaeology and Sites of Local Importance T3 – Protection of Existing Footways, Cycleways and Bridleways T4 - Footpath Links to Okehampton Town Centre T5 – Public Transport T7 – Railways T8 – Car Parking
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
T9 – The Highway Network PS2 – Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems
West Devon Renewable Energy Potential Study 2008 Planning practice guidance for renewable and low carbon energy
Considerations under Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 The provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report.
Notes of a meeting of the SITE INSPECTION PANEL held on THURSDAY 18th JULY 2013 at 12 noon.
Present: Cllr C Marsh – Chairman Cllr M Benson – Vice-Chairman Cllr R Baldwin Cllr W Cann OBE Cllr C Hall Cllr L J G Hockridge Cllr J Sheldon Cllr D Whitcomb
Area Planning Officer (North) Committee & Ombudsman Link Officer
In attendance: Cllr J Moody – Substitute for Cllr T Pearce Mr E Sweet – Chairman, Iddesleigh Parish Council
Apologies for absence were received from the Ward Member, Cllr T Hill and from Cllr T Pearce (Substitute Cllr J Moody) and from Cllr D Wilde.
The Panel viewed the field in which it was proposed to erect the wind turbine. The applicant had placed a 10m high anemometer on the site where the turbine would be situated; the turbine would be 30m high to the hub. The Panel viewed the locality of the wind turbine and noted that it would not be visible in Iddesleigh nor to the properties at the entrance to Coombe Farm lane.
In the opposite direction there were clear views across the valley to the Upcott ridge which was in Torridge District Councils area. The Panel also noted the route of the Tarka Trail and the location of Pewson Barton, a Grade II listed building on the Upcott Ridge. The Panel was further advised that Torridge District Council had given approval for one turbine on the ridge and permission was pending for a second turbine to be located near to Winkleigh aerodrome.
The Chairman of Iddesleigh Parish Council said his Council was very concerned about the visual amenity of those properties along the Upcott ridge particularly with two additional wind turbines in the offing. The Parish Council objected to the proposal.
The Panel then walked down the farm lane towards the applicant’s dwelling. This lane formed part of the Tarka Trail and it was noted that, in general, the turbine would not be visible from the lane, however, it was likely that blade noise would be
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
audible.
When returning to their vehicles the Panel noted and commented on two helium balloons flying above nearby hedgerows.
Cllrs W Cann and D Whitcomb left the site meeting at 12.19 pm.
The Panel then left the site and travelled to the Upcott ridge and viewed the site from the opposite side of the valley from three locations including the Tarka Trail and Pewson Barton. ______
WARD NAME Tavistock North (Cllrs S Bailey; J Moody; J Sheldon) APPLICATION NUMBER 00768/2013 LOCATION Land to rear of 18, Watts Road, Tavistock APPLICANT NAME Mr and Mrs R Baker
Site Address: Land to rear of 18, Watts Road, Tavistock
Development: Erection of a detached dwelling
Reason item is being put before Committee This application is reported to Planning Committee for decision as the applicant works as a Building Control Officer for Devon Building Control Partnership (Teignbridge, West Devon, South Hams & Mid Devon) and, for the purposes of assessing his application is to be treated as a council employee
Recommendation: REFUSAL
Reasons for refusal 1. The proposal would introduce an undesirable pattern of development into an open area of garden land between West Street and Watts Road, to the determinant of the character of the conservation area and wider townscape. As such it is contrary to policies H28 and BE1 of the West Devon Borough Council Local Plan Review 2005, as amended by the adopted Core Strategy 2011 and Strategic Policies 17, 18 and 20 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy DPD.
2. The proposal, by virtue of its elevated back land position, would result in an unacceptable degree of overlooking of neighbouring property. As such it would encroach upon the privacy of neighbours contrary to policy H28 of the West Devon Borough Council Local Plan Review 2005, as amended by the adopted Core Strategy 201.
3. The proposal for a three bedroom house attracts an off-site contribution towards provision of affordable housing. In the absence of a Section 106, or similar unilateral, agreement, to secure this provision the proposal is
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
contrary to Policies SP4 and SP9 of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy DPD.
Key issues for consideration: Principle of residential development on the site The design and appearance of the proposed house including impact upon the conservation area The impact upon the amenities of neighbouring property Adequacy of access arrangements
Financial Implications: None
Site Description: The application site is an irregular shaped piece of land, approx. 0.09ha in size, located on the western slope of the Tavy River valley in central Tavistock. It comprises part of former upper rear gardens of Nos. 48, 49 and 50 West Street and a strip of land, approx. 4m wide, between Nos.18 and 20 Watts Road, which, it is claimed, provides an existing vehicular access to the site. The site falls away steeply, 1:3 gradient, from the north west towards the south, south east in a series of tiered platforms. There is a difference in levels of approximately 9m across the site from the south east to north-west. Currently the site comprises of stone strewn ground and is used for chickens and informal storage.
The surrounding area is predominantly established residential in character comprising terraced properties on West Street, to the south west, and larger semi detached nineteenth century villas, in Watts Street, to the north-west. The site occupies a prominent position within the townscape.
The Proposal: Full planning permission is sought for the erection of a new two storey detached house. The proposed house is shown in the southern part of the site, roughly in alignment with the rear of No. 48 West Street, the principal ‘donor’ house whose garden would be most reduced by the proposal.
The house is shown built into the bank, set into the steeply rising land. This allows a ‘reverse’ internal arrangement with the upper ground floor comprising: porch entrance hall, WC, kitchen, dining room and lounge and the lower floor a bathroom, three bedrooms (one with en-suite), and a conservatory. Externally the house has been designed to resemble a nineteenth century villa when viewed from the south east and a bungalow when viewed from the north west. It features a natural slate roof, overhanging eaves, sash windows and decorated quoins.
Access is shown off Watts Road, to the north, between nos. 18-20 Watts Road. It utilises an ‘existing drive’. It would lead to a parking area for 4 vehicles. The remaining undeveloped space around the house, and a raised area to the north east, would provide amenity garden space fro the new house.
The Design and Access statement which accompanies the application includes the following justification:- ‘8. The previous 4 storey ultra modern proposal was robustly supported by the planning department, but refused at committee. The refusal was upheld at appeal which has prompted and informed the complete re-design herein. The
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
Planning Inspectorate has insisted that ‘It is a fundamental principal that every application is dealt with under its own merits, even following appeals decisions.’ There is no basis therefore for a planning decision to be dictated by previous Inspectorate decisions or comments. All matters raised by the Appeals Case Inspector have been addressed within the new design.’
The application was the subject of pre-application advice
Consultations: County Highways Authority – No highway objection.
Environmental Health – No objections, conditions recommended
Tavistock Town Council – Object to the proposal. Feel the development will not maintain the current spaces between buildings of West Street and Watts Road,
Local Residents/Interested Parties 15 letters of representation have been received, 14 raising objections to the proposal and 1 raising concerns. The grounds of objection can be summarised as follows:-
Impact upon the character of the conservation area The original appeal was dismissed mainly on the grounds that the swathe of gardens and considerable spaces between them and around the buildings being an important characteristic of the area. The only thing that has changed with this proposal is the design of the house, not the effect it will have in the area. The proposal represents an unacceptable blot on the landscape which would ruin the visual effect of the unique nature of the south facing gardens. Would set an unwelcome precedent for ‘back land’ development Detrimental to the character of the area, contrary to Local Plan Review Policy H50
Impact upon the amenities of neighbouring properties The position of the proposed house is directly behind my house and will affect the privacy of my property. Gross intrusion on our privacy overlooking virtually our entire garden The position of the house which will be on a line with the centre of my long south facing garden will affect the privacy of and right to enjoy my property, the building being approximately 15m from my fence. The proposed dwelling does not look like a Victorian house. It is essentially a modern house.
Access The ‘established accesses claimed was formed by the applicant and involved the demolition of part of the stone wall bordering Watts Road. Other residents have had applications to widen gateways refused on the grounds that it would be out of keeping
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
Drainage & sewage The proposed house will create a serious problem with water flow on the hillside as at present we have water pouring into our back yards from the gardens above us and up to Watts Road. Placing a building into the hillside will divert the extra water to either side of the property and increase the flow of water into the neighbouring houses back yards. Add to this the sewage problem which I understand will be pumped up to Watts Road. Any fault or failure and neighbours will also be affected by this
Other matters Probity – As one of the applicants is an employee of the WDBC Planning & Building Regulations Dept we feel that any decision regarding this application must be from neutral qualified persons from outside their department, Seven years ago the applicant deceived me into selling him part of the site for less than its real value on the pretext he wanted to use it to grow vegetables. Disputes the description of the site location as being land to the rear of no. 18 Watts Road. Argues that it is part of the rear garden of nos.48, 49, 50 West Street and 20 Watts Road. Questions that claim that the proposal forms part of the solution to the current housing crisis are risible. The suggestion that a single dwelling... can solve the national housing crisis are risible. The proposal would set a precedent to further development in the vicinity
Letter raising concerns Letter raising concerns that ‘it will be like a sandwich between Watts Road and West Street, thus affecting the symmetry of the hillside in this conservation area. No matter how good a design the house is, it will stick out like a sore thumb. Other concerns are drainage and landslips. Letter makes clear that these are concerns, not objections.
Disagrees with, and disputes the relevance of a large number of opinions expressed by the architect in the supporting information. The letter states that the applicants appear to be using their knowledge and influence with the council to manipulate the system to their advantage and can continue to submit applications until they are successful. Questions the use of taxpayers’ money as the first appeal was rejected and expresses concern that the application will not be dealt with fairly.
Relevant Planning History 6399/2004/TAV Erection of a dwelling withdrawn 02/12/2005 8329/2005/TAV Erection of dwelling Refused Appeal dismissed 11/01/2007
ANALYSIS
Principle of Development/Sustainability: The application site is located within the defined Tavistock settlement area where Policy H28 ‘Settlements with defined limits’ of the West Devon Borough Council Local Plan Review 2005 (WDBC LPR)
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
‘Within defined settlements limits shown on the Proposals Maps small scale residential development will be permitted that is consistent with other policies in the Plan, and where: (i) The scale, design, proportions, materials, character and size of plot of the development is compatible with the surrounding sites and the settlement; (ii) The development would respect the form of the settlement and would not introduce or reinforce undesirable patterns of development; (iii) The development can be safely and adequately accessed; (iv) The amenities of adjacent residents are not adversely affected; (v) The site is not an important open area within the settlement of historic or townscape importance nor is it of nature conservation value; (vi) The development would not represent a visual intrusion of buildings into the landscape beyond the curtilage of existing adjacent development; (vii) The development would provide a satisfactory standard of residential amenity; and (viii) It would not prejudice the development potential of an adjacent site.’
Whilst all planning applications are assessed on their merits, a previous appeal refusal, particularly if it is recent and for a similar development proposal, is a relevant material planning consideration.
In relation to the principle of developing upon this land the appeal Inspector commented as follows in his decision notice:
‘I consider that the swathe of gardens and considerable spaces between and around the buildings are an important characteristic of the area. In contrast, the new dwelling would appear squeezed between existing boundaries and carve into the established pattern of development.’
The proposed dwelling is significantly smaller and of a different design to that dismissed at appeal, it will be less conspicuous within the townscape. But this does not, and cannot, alter the principle of developing on this back-land, upper garden location. A new house in this location would introduce an undesirable pattern of development into an open area of garden land between West Street and Watts Road, which would detrimentally alter they townscape.
Neither Policy SP5, which requires an appropriate level of new housing within the Borough, nor the fact that the standard of residential accommodation proposed is adequate for a new three bed dwelling outweigh these considerations. The proposal leaves the main donor house, no. 48 west Street, with a small, but usable sized rear garden. Arrangements are considered acceptable in an urban context.
Design/Landscape The site is located in the Tavistock conservation area where Policy BE1 (WDBC LPR) Applied. Policy BE1states:- ‘Development will be permitted in a Conservation Area where the proposal will preserve or enhance the area’s character or appearance: and (i) The scale, design including materials and finishes, and proportions of the proposals are sympathetic to the characteristic from of buildings in the Conservation Area.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
(ii) The proposals are compatible with adjacent buildings and spaces, in terms of scale, height , massing and alignment , regardless of whether they are listed or not; and (iii) The siting of the proposals respects the existing open spaces, trees. Building line and form of the area; and (iv) Historically significant boundaries or other elements contributing to the established pastern of development are retained; and (v) The landscaping and boundary treatment should complement the character of the conservation area.’
The previous appeal proposal was for a larger (87.5sqm) house in a more northerly position within the site, closer to houses in Watts Road, than the current proposal. Plans showed a three storey round building with cedar walls and mono-pitch roof. The appeal inspector agreed with the views of the Planning Committee that that ‘the design pays little respect to its surroundings’ in his decision to dismiss that appeal.
In this application the architect has gone to considerable trouble to design a property with an external appearance that resembles a mid Victorian villa. The design incorporates features of natural slate roof, overhanging eaves, sash windows and decorated quoins which reference the original Victorian villas in the locality. It is, therefore a pure pastiche. There are important discontinuities between an authentic Victorian era villa, built in the nineteenth century, and a modern, twenty first century imitation. The most important of these discontinuities is the location of the site itself, in a ‘back land’ position, set into the hill, between West Street and Watts Road, but there are others that relate to the reverse internal arrangements, with bedrooms on the ground floor level and main habitable rooms on the first floor level, and construction details.
On the narrow issue of the visual appearance of the building itself, the proposal is not considered to be incompatible with the conservation area. Para. 60 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) makes clear that planning control is not an arbiter of architectural styles and taste. ‘Planning policies and decisions should not attempt to impose architectural styles or particular tastes and they should not stifle innovation, originality or initiative through unsubstantiated requirements to conform to certain development forms or styles. It is, however, proper to seek to promote or reinforce local distinctiveness.’ The proposed appearance of the property is pleasant and many will consider it a significant improvement on the four storey, cylindrical dwelling, which was dismissed at appeal.
However, as para 61 of the NPPF makes clear ‘..., securing high quality and inclusive design goes beyond aesthetic considerations. Therefore, planning policies and decisions should address the connections between people and places and the integration of new development into the natural, built and historic environment.’
The un-developed, steep upper gardens of properties in West Street are a strong feature of this part of the conservation area. They provide an important ’visual break’ between the smaller, higher density, properties in West Street on the lower part of the valley, and the larger Victorian villas, on higher ground to the west. Infilling in this
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______location will remove that visual break and weaken the character of the conservation area. The proposal is therefore incompatible with Policy BE1 which recognises and seeks to protect, the contribution that spaces between buildings and historically significant boundaries make to the character of the conservation area.
This application does not seek permission for a new access. The proposal relies upon an existing access and drive. The status of the existing access has been questioned in several representations’. The access and drive was formed approximately nine years ago, in 2004, by the removal of a section of stone boundary wall adjacent to Watts Road.
The removal of a section of stone wall adjacent to a road within a conservation area, and the removal of stone walls, of over 2m in height, within the conservation area requires specific conservation consent. The passage of time does not confer conservation consent, or offer immunity from future enforcement action.
Nevertheless, in this case, the conservation officer, at the time, took the view that the removal of this section of wall did not require conservation area consent and confirmed his opinion to the applicants in writing. The applicant’s agent has provided a copy of a letter dated simply ‘2004’ which states: ‘...I confirm that Conservation Area Consent is not required for the demolition of the wall in question as it forms part of a larger structure and therefore demolition will only be partial’ The letter was not qualified with a ‘without prejudice’ disclaimer. Furthermore, the status of the existing access, and removal of these stone walls, associated with site assembly, was accepted by the Council or the Planning Inspector at the time of the previous appeal. It is the opinion of your officers that it would be quite difficult to revisit the issue and conclude actionable harm to the character of the conservation area from the removal of these stone walls.
Neighbour Amenity: Policy H28(iv) requires that the amenities of adjacent residents are not adversely affected by small scale residential development.
The proposed plot is sufficiently distant from neighbouring properties not to result in any overshadowing or have an overbearing impact. However, the elevated position of the plot, and the reverse internal layout, with the main habitable rooms such as living room and kitchen located at first floor level, means that the upper gardens of neighbouring properties would be overlooked. Whist some degree of overlooking, at a distance, is a feature of an urban environment, the close proximity of the proposed windows – within 3-4m of the boundary – is such that the proposal would result in an unacceptable intrusion into the privacy of neighbouring gardens.
Highways/Access Policy H28 (iii) requires that: - The development can be safely and adequately accessed;
The applicant’s agent has confirmed that permission for a new access is not being sought in this application. The proposal is reliant on the existing access. The Highway Authority has confirmed that the proposed access arrangements, utilising
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______the existing 4m wide drive and crossover, is acceptable. An application for a vehicle crossover was made to Devon County Council who gave permission in 2004.
The proposed access arrangements were not challenged by the Council or Planning Inspector at the time of the previous appeal. It appears to have been accepted that the access was formed as ‘permitted development’ under the provisions of Class B Part 2 Minor Operations Schedule 2 The Town & Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, which allows:- ‘The formation, laying out and construction of a means of access to a highway which is not a trunk road or a classified road, where that access is required in connection with development permitted by any Class in this Schedule (other than by Class A of this Part)’. [Class A states the erection, construction, maintenance, improvement or alteration of a gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure].’ The applicant’s agent has been asked to confirm what permitted development was undertaken.
Other Matters: A single three bedroomed house attracts a requirement for a contribution of £7,875 towards affordable housing. The absence of this contribution forms a further reason for refusal, albeit on one that can easily be overcome.
Planning Policy This application has been considered in accordance with Section 38 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and, where relevant, with Sections 66 and 72 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas).
Planning Policy All standard policies listed (delete where not relevant, add others as relevant, including NPPF):
West Devon Borough Council Core Strategy 2011 SP1 – Sustainable Development SP2 – Decentralised and Renewable Low Carbon energy to Supply New Developments SP4 – Infrastructure Provision SP5 – Spatial Strategy SP6 –Density of Housing Development SP7 – Strategic Distribution of Housing SP8 – Inclusive Communities SP9 – Meeting Housing Needs SP15 – Traffic Management SP16 – Safer Communities SP17 – Landscape Character SP18 – The Heritage and Historical Character of West Devon SP20 – Promoting High Quality Design SP21 – Flooding
West Devon Borough Council Local Plan Review 2005(as amended 2011) BE1 – Conservation Areas
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
BE2 – Conservation Areas BE5 – Important Open Space within Settlements BE13 – Landscaping and Boundary Treatment H26 – Open Space Provision in New Residential Developments H28 – Settlements with Defined Limits H39 – Redevelopment of Single Residential Plots H40 - Residential Extensions T1 – Walking and Cycling T2 – Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety T5 – Public Transport T8 – Car Parking T9 – The Highway Network PS2 – Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems PS3 – Sewage Disposal
Considerations under Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 The provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report. ______
WARD NAME Drewsteignton (Cllr P Ridgers)
APPLICATION NUMBER 00638/2013 LOCATION Martins Park, Exeter Road, Whiddon Down, Okehampton, Devon, EX20 2QL APPLICANT NAME Mrs J Ross
Site Address: Martins Park, Exeter Road, Whiddon Down, Okehampton, Devon, EX20 2QL
Development: Replace mobile home with timber framed and clad chalet style dwelling for agricultural worker.
Reason item is being put before Committee: The application is called before committee by Cllr Marsh due to Member concerns regarding the need for the dwelling on the holding and the size of the dwelling.
Recommendation: Conditional Consent
Conditions 1. Standard time limit 2. Occupancy limited to agricultural/forestry/horticultural worker 3. Landscaping 4. Contaminated land condition 5. First floor windows to be obscurely glazed. 6. Permitted development rights removed for any extensions, outbuildings and new windows in the first floor.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
7. Existing mobile home to be removed from site within one month of occupation of the new dwelling. 8. Foul and surface water drainage.
Key issues for consideration: The proposal lies outside of a settlement boundary, in the open countryside. Therefore local and national guidance states that there must be a demonstrated need for a dwelling which is located in an unsustainable location. This should be based upon the need for a rural worker to be resident on site. The application has demonstrated that there is a need for a dwelling based upon the needs of the holding and not the personal needs of the applicant.
Site Description: Martins Park is located to the west of Whiddon Down and is on the edge of the Dartmoor National Park Boundary. To the south east of the site is a dwelling; Moorlands and there is a group of dwellings to the north. Dartmoor View Holiday Park is located to the west. The site is within a large field with established hedgerows to the south, east and west. The land is open to the north. There are additional agricultural buildings immediately to the east of the site.
The Proposal: Replace mobile home with timber framed and clad chalet style dwelling for agricultural worker.
Consultations: County Highways Authority: No highways issues
Environmental Health Section – Request a contaminated land condition
Drewsteignton Parish Council – ‘It is the policy of Drewsteignton Parish Council to support local sustainable agriculture. Workers presence is important to the viability.’
Dartmoor National Park – Do not wish to comment
Representations There have been 13 letters of support received and one letter of objection. The letter of objection has raised the following concerns: - That there is not much agricultural activity on the land to justify the dwelling. - That the dwelling is for commercial gain and not for the needs for the agricultural use. - The site is host to noisy events at the weekend and there are other enterprises other than agriculture. - Loss of amenity. The landscaping proposed with previous consents has not been implemented. The letters of support raised the following points: - The applicant needs to be on site to ensure the welfare of the animals. - The site causes no disruption to anyone. - The enterprise provides milk for businesses over a wide area. - Local residents purchase eggs and milk from the site. - The dwelling is in keeping with the other local properties and would enhance the area. - The site provides business for other local enterprises. - The NPPF supports this type of application. - The applicant needs support to continue the business
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
- There is an increase in theft from farms.
Relevant Planning History 11085/2007/OKE – Change of use for siting of mobile home for 3 years –
11965/2008/OKE – Temporary agricultural dwelling and erection of agricultural building.
ANALYSIS The application seeks consent for a new dwelling in the open countryside. The main considerations of this application are the principle of this new development in the open countryside, the need for dwelling for the holding, amenity, design and the impact upon the landscape.
Principle of development New residential dwellings outside of settlements and in isolated locations are strictly managed from National down to Local Policy. The NPPF advises in paragraph 55:
Local planning authorities should avoid new isolated homes in the countryside unless there are special circumstances such as: - The essential need for a rural worker to live permanently at or near their place of work in the countryside;
Policy H31 of the Adopted Local Plan offers similar advice and is considered to conform with this national policy. H31 states:
Residential development, outside the defined limits of settlements and where Policy H29 does not apply will not be permitted unless all the following criteria are met: (i) There is written independent evidence that of a genuine and sustained need for the dwelling, that need being based upon an essential agricultural, forestry or horticultural requirement for a full time worker to be resident on the holding; (ii) The local planning authority has no reason to believe that the need for an additional dwelling has arisen primarily due to the recent sub-division of the holding and/or the recent disposal of a dwelling from the holding; (iii) There is no building on the holding suitable for conversion to a dwelling; (iv) The dwelling is sited close to existing agricultural buildings unless it can be clearly demonstrated that a more isolated location is essential for the operation of the holding; and (v) The dwelling is in keeping with the character of the area in terms of scale, design and materials.
The applicants have provided additional information of the enterprise which has been assessed by an independent agricultural assessor. The assessment has identified that a full time worker is required to be readily available and on hand at most times and during the night. The business has been established and viable during the last three years. The assessment did identify if there was a dwelling which was available and acceptably close, this could provide the supervision required for the holding. There is one dwelling which is nearby; Moorlands. This dwelling was available for a short letting purpose and did become available earlier this year. However, at the point of application, the dwelling was let and not available to the applicant. In addition, the applicant requires only a one bed dwelling and Moorlands is considered
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______larger than that required for the workers needs. Initially the report considered that the dwelling was too large for the functional requirements.
Since this point the size of the proposed dwelling has been reduced from a three bed to a one bed dwelling. Overall the application is considered to have demonstrated the agricultural need for a rural worker to be resident on the holding and this need is based upon the needs of the holding and not the needs of the applicant.
Design: The proposed dwelling is simple in design. The building is proposed to be timber clad with a natural slate roof and timber windows and doors. The materials are considered acceptable. The design is simple and the size is limited to 102 square meters and 6.8 metres high. The amount of available floor space has been reduced and the first floor accommodation removed. A condition will be attached to ensure that there are no further openings created in the first floor and also that the existing windows are obscurely glazed and fixed shut which the applicant has agreed to. This will prevent occupation of the first floor and consent will be required to assess this element should the site pass to another party or be required in the future. Overall the design and size is considered acceptable.
Landscape: The site is well screened from the road as there are established large trees along the southern boundary of the site. During winter months the building would be more prominent but would not significantly impact on views through the site. The building is not considered to affect the setting of the National Park given the size of the dwelling and screening along the southern boundary. There have been concerns raised from a neighbour to the north. The site is open to the north and would be more prominent in long landscape views into the site from the north. A landscaping condition will be required to ensure that these views are softened. Overall the site is not considered to significantly affect the landscape character of the area.
Neighbour Amenity: The nearest neighbour to the site is Moorlands, approx. 90 metres to the south east. This dwelling is not considered to be affected by the proposal. The site will be screened by existing vegetation and will not cause any undue loss of amenity. There are further dwellings to the north which are between 250 metres and 325 metres from the site. Given this considerable distance between the dwellings and the proposal, it is not considered that there will be a loss of amenity. The site will be visible from the north; however, officers cannot take into account views from private dwellings when assessing applications. The landscaping condition will aid additional screening of the site from the north.
Highways/Access: The access is considered to be acceptable for the proposed use. The access is currently used for access to the site including the existing mobile home and agricultural buildings on site.
Other Matters: Concerns have been raised that there are other non-agricultural uses taking place on occasion at the site. This has been investigated and no breach of planning was
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______identified; however, this would be dealt with under enforcement proceeding and does not affect the issuing of a decision on the application.
Planning Policy This application has been considered in accordance with Section 38 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and, where relevant, with Sections 66 and 72 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas).
Planning Policy National Planning Policy Framework
West Devon Borough Council Core Strategy 2011 SP1 – Sustainable Development SP17 – Landscape Character SP19 – Biodiversity SP20 – Promoting High Quality Design SP21 – Flooding
West Devon Borough Council Local Plan Review 2005(as amended 2011) NE10 – Protection of the Countryside and Other Open Spaces H31 – Residential Development in the Countryside H32 - Residential Development in the Countryside H33 - Residential Development in the Countryside T9 – The Highway Network PS2 – Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems PS3 – Sewage Disposal
Considerations under Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 The provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report. ______
WARD NAME Buckland Monachorum (Cllrs P Sanders; D Wilde) APPLICATION NUMBER 00743/2013 LOCATION Uppaton Bungalow , Buckland Monachorum, Yelverton, PL20 7LL APPLICANT NAME Mrs J Halsall
Site Address: Uppaton Bungalow , Buckland Monachorum, Yelverton PL20 7LL
Development: Demolition of garage and construction of granny annexe
Reason for item at Committee: Cllr Sanders has referred this item to committee as a result of the representations received from both the public and parish council raising concern that extending this agriculturally tied property would make it unaffordable for agricultural workers.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
Recommendation: Conditional Consent
Conditions: Time limit (3 years) In accordance with approved plans Ancillary use to Uppaton Bungalow Unexpected Contamination Condition
Informatives: Standard proactive Biodiversity Agricultural tie applies to annex also
Key issues for consideration: The proposal due to its location raised no residential amenity concerns and there is adequate on-site parking provision that the loss of the garage is judged to be acceptable. The main issue for consideration is the principle of extending this property which is an agriculturally tied property. Concern has been raised in the representations received about the acceptability of extending the agriculturally tied property, due to concern that the increase in volume of the property would result in the dwelling being out of reach financially for agricultural/forestry workers should the property be put on the market; concern has been raised about the acceptability of the proposal as a granny annex given that the property has a number of stairs to negotiate; concern has also been raised about whether this application is the first step in applying to remove the agricultural tie and concern has been raised that the land hasn’t been used for agricultural use for around 12 months.
The proposed extension is to a modest sized bungalow and the proposal is judged to not result in an excessively large agriculturally tied property to justify a refusal of planning consent on this ground. In addition, the living accommodation provides some flexibility should internal alterations need to be made in the future as the applicants health needs require and as this application is for the extension to the property, the concerns about the potential for the agricultural tie to be lifted cannot be taken into account under the current application and would require a separate application for consideration in any event.
Financial Implications: None
Site Description: Uppaton Bungalow is an agriculturally tied property with land within the Tamar Valley AONB.
A public footpath runs adjacent to the site.
The Proposal: Demolition of garage and construction of granny annexe. The proposed granny annexe retains a link with the existing dwelling and is proposed to be used ancillary to the existing dwelling.
The applicant has advised that the applicant and her late husband farmed the land
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______together. However, on his passing the applicant was unable to farm the land and so retired. The reason given for the planned extension is so that the applicants’ daughter and her family can move and farm the land again.
Consultations: County Highways Authority – No objection raised minor unclassified road serves the site.
Environmental Health Section – Unsuspected Contamination Condition
Buckland Monachorum Parish Council - Object as the property in its current state (with its agricultural tie) is suitable and affordable local housing for agricultural workers and it is important to retain such low cost housing. The proposed development would see the property substantially expanded to become incompatible with its intended use and beyond the financial reach of key land based workers.
Countryside Officer - Evidence of previous use of the loft void by long-eared bats was recorded. The use of the void was not considered to be recent, but was considered to have been a previous temporary night/feeding roost. It was considered likely that the historic access point to the void was on the northern gable end (above the garage proposed to be demolished).
The ecologist has considered the submitted plans and concluded that the access points into the loft and potential roost space will not be blocked by the proposed development (as the new roof will be lower than the main bungalow), and as such no Habitats Regulations offence would be committed.
It is important to note that this assessment is based on the current plans, should plans change and the former access point be blocked (i.e. if the height of the new roof was raised to match the existing bungalow), then the ecologist has advised that an offence would result and the scheme would require further surveys and a EPS Licence.
Give the modest scale of the extension, and low roof height I have not suggested a condition for inclusion of bat enhancements, however there is some opportunity to create access behind some of the hanging tiles on the proposed north elevation by leaving a gap behind a couple of hanging tiles and cutting corresponding small gaps in the battens behind the tiles.
Should you be minded to approve, I would suggest the following informative:
- The applicants attention is drawn to the suggestions within section 5.2 of the Ecology Survey regarding precautionary working measures. If bat/s are discovered before or during works within the building, work should stop immediately and advice should be sought from a suitably qualified ecologist or from the Bat Helpline (0845 1300 228). It is a criminal offence to deliberately kill, injure or capture bats, or to deliberately disturb them or to damage or destroy their breeding sites and resting places (roosts). On discovering bats, further works may require an European Protected Species Licence to proceed and failure to stop may result in prosecution.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
Representations Two representations have been received both objecting to the proposal, raise the following issues:
Further development of Uppaton Bungalow does not seem to be necessary as the property has not been used for agricultural purposes for around 12 months and consequently, the house does not need extension for further workers.
No sign of the land being used agriculturally.
Little seems to have been done regarding the maintenance of the property; a barn has been pulled down as it was sited in the site of the proposed extension. .
Mrs Halsall is a very able person who commutes to at least one place of work in Tavistock.
A granny annex tends to be built over a single floor, but plans for Uppaton Bungalow clearly shown an inordinate number of stairs which lead not only to the bedrooms but also back to the main house. Anyone needing family on site for full-time care would surely struggle with such obstacles on a daily basis.
It is curious how planning has been put in after the house was recently taken off the market.
Recent actions seem to suggest that this is an attempt to have the agricultural tie raised from the property.
At present, even with its attached land, it does present an affordable purchase for someone in agricultural/forestry employment because of the limited size of the property.
A large 4 bedroomed property with two bathrooms, two kitchens and extensive living areas would no longer be an affordable property for someone in agricultural/forestry employment.
Why is it developed over two floors; why does it need two bedrooms, why are there several steps, not ramps, why does it need such a massive kitchen in the annex, why does it need extra independent external access into a hall/stairwell with 5 doors?
“All indicators here are consistent with the applicants wish to turn this property into a lovely 3G living space worth ‘alot of money’ (her words not mine) and possibly in due course to get the tie lifted.”
“I urge you to refuse this application thereby showing the authority’s support for the maintenance and sustainability of affordable agriculturally tied properties for the workers in this area who need them.”
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
Relevant Planning History OA/3/32/933/1978/4264 Erection of an agricultural worker’s bungalow. Conditional Consent 04/09/1978.
D/3/32/120/1979/4264/1 Erection of an agricultural worker’s bungalow. Conditional Consent 02/04/1979.
RC/3/32/1192/1999/4264/00/3 Removal of agricultural tie. Refusal 12/08/1999.
ANALYSIS
Principle of Development/Sustainability: The main issue for consideration is the principle of extending this property which is an agriculturally tied property. Concern has been raised in the representations received about the acceptability of extending the agriculturally tied property, due to concern that the increase in volume of the property would result in the dwelling being out of reach financially for agricultural/forestry workers should the property be put on the market; concern has been raised about the acceptability of the proposal as a granny annex given that the property has a number of stairs to negotiate; concern has also been raised about whether this application is the first step in applying to remove the agricultural tie and concern has been raised that the land hasn’t been used for agricultural use for around 12 months.
Firstly, this application has to be judged on the current application and the removal of the agricultural tie has not been applied for under this application. Should the applicant have a desire to remove the agricultural tie they would need to apply for permission to do so and this would be assessed under such an application.
Therefore, under the current application the only issue that can be taken into account is whether the principle of extending the agriculturally tied property is acceptable.
The applicant has stated that in the past she and her late husband farmed the land together but since his passing she was unable to farm the land so has retired. The reason given for the planned extension is so that her daughter and her family can move and farm the land again.
The proposal is therefore for an extension to the property to provide accommodation for the applicant, to enable her daughter and family to move into the existing bungalow. The plans show a link between the existing bungalow and the proposed extension and between the proposed extension and the land.
The existing property is a modest 2 bedroom bungalow with a small kitchen and lounge/diner. The proposal involves demolishing the existing garage and constructing an extension with living accommodation in the roof space.
Whilst, this would result in living accommodation being provided on two floors given that this is the only property, and given the modest size of the existing dwelling which provides accommodation on one floor the proposal whilst a substantial extension, is not judged to result in an overly large property or a significantly large living accommodation for an agricultural occupancy dwelling to justify a refusal of planning permission. A condition would need to be attached to ensure that the extension is
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______used ancillary to Uppaton Bungalow and the agricultural tie would remain in place. With this condition in place, the proposal is not judged to increase the bungalow to such a scale that a refusal on the volume of the dwelling would be justified as it is not considered that this extension to the main/sole modest bungalow on the holding would price it out of a farm owner/workers reach.
With regard to concern raised about the use of the extension as a ‘granny’ annex given the number of stairs. Whilst, this is not ideal. The living accommodation in the bungalow and granny annex combined provides some flexibility internally to be adapted should the applicants health require it in later years.
Design/Landscape: The extension is of simple design which is compatible with the existing bungalow in design and materials. The extension is set down this combined with the width of the proposed extension will ensure it reads as a subservient addition to the existing bungalow.
Neighbour Amenity: Due to the siting of the property and the proposed extension the proposal would not result in harm to the residential amenity of any neighbouring properties due to the distance to the nearest residential property from the site.
Highways/Access: No alterations are proposed to access arrangements, whilst the proposal would result in the loss of the existing garage there is adequate parking provision on the hard standing to the front of the existing property.
Ecology: Evidence of previous use of the loft void by long-eared bats was recorded in the report submitted. The use of the void was not considered to be recent, but was considered to have been a previous temporary night/feeding roost. It was considered likely that the historic access point to the void was on the northern gable end (above the garage proposed to be demolished).
The ecologist has considered the submitted plans and concluded that the access points into the loft and potential roost space will not be blocked by the proposed development (as the new roof will be lower than the main bungalow), and as such no Habitats Regulations offence would be committed.
An informative will be attached to ensure the applicants attention is drawn to the suggestions within section 5.2 of the Ecology Survey regarding precautionary working measures. If bat/s are discovered before or during works within the building, work should stop immediately and advice should be sought from a suitably qualified ecologist or from the Bat Helpline (0845 1300 228) and to ensure that they are aware that it is a criminal offence to deliberately kill, injure or capture bats, or to deliberately disturb them or to damage or destroy their breeding sites and resting places (roosts).
Planning Policy This application has been considered in accordance with Section 38 of the Planning
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
& Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.
Planning Policy
National Planning Policy Framework
West Devon Borough Council Core Strategy 2011 SP1 – Sustainable Development SP17 – Landscape Character SP19 – Biodiversity SP20 – Promoting High Quality Design
West Devon Borough Council Local Plan Review 2005(as amended 2011) H40 - Residential Extensions
Considerations under Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 The provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report.
Conclusion The proposal due to its location raised no residential amenity concerns and there is adequate on-site parking provision that the loss of the garage is judged to be acceptable. The main issue for consideration is the principle of extending this property which is an agriculturally tied property. Concern has been raised in the representations received about the acceptability of extending the agriculturally tied property, due to concern that the increase in volume of the property would result in the dwelling being out of reach financially for agricultural/forestry workers should the property be put on the market; concern has been raised about the acceptability of the proposal as a granny annex given that the property has a number of stairs to negotiate; concern has also been raised about whether this application is the first step in applying to remove the agricultural tie and concern has been raised that the land hasn’t been used for agricultural use for around 12 months.
The proposed extension is to a modest sized bungalow and the proposal is judged to not result in an excessively large agriculturally tied property to justify a refusal of planning consent on this ground. In addition, the living accommodation provides some flexibility should internal alterations need to be made in the future as the applicants health needs require and as this application is for the extension to the property, the concerns about the potential for the agricultural tie to be lifted cannot be taken into account under the current application and would require a separate application for consideration in any event.
Therefore, for the reasons detailed in the report, conditional consent is recommended. ______
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
WARD NAME Tavistock North (Cllrs S Bailey; J Moody; J Sheldon) APPLICATION NUMBER 00764/2013 LOCATION 20 Plymouth Road, Tavistock, Devon, PL19 8AY APPLICANT NAME Mrs E Baker
Development: Change of use of office to beauty therapy room.
Reason item is being put before Committee: Site is owned by the Borough Council.
Recommendation: Conditional Approval
Conditions: 1. Standard Time Limit 2. Restriction on hours of opening (9am – 5pm Monday to Friday, 9am – 5pm Saturdays and no Sunday or bank holiday working- as copied from application form) 3. The proposed use shall be restricted to beauty therapy only and shall be used for no other purpose.
Key issues for consideration: The key issue for consideration is whether the change of use of an additional office within the building to a beauty therapy room, following consent given by Planning Committee in December 2012 for another office in the building to be changed to a beauty therapy room is acceptable. The proposed change of use, which is small in scale and within a town centre location, is considered to contribute to its vitality and viability. The proposal is sited adjacent to both the bus station and public car park. The proposal is considered to be acceptable in planning policy terms.
Financial Implications: WDBC own the building, there is a prospective tenant (the applicant) for this office and therefore the change of use would result in a tenant for the unit.
Site Description: The application site is located within the settlement of Tavistock and forms part of 20 Plymouth Road which has been subdivided into a number of modest business units.
20 Plymouth Road is sited immediately to the east of the bus depot and to the south of the Anchorage Centre. It is attached to 18 Plymouth Road which is sited to the east. There is some parking to the front of 20 Plymouth Road which serves the existing offices within the building.
The site is located within the Conservation Area and World Heritage Site.
Planning permission was granted by Planning Committee on 4th December 2012 for a change of use of another office on the first floor within the building to a beauty therapy room. This current application seeks permission for a further office in the building to be converted to a beauty therapy room for the same applicant.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
The Proposal: The proposal is for the change of use of an office room on the first floor of the existing building, to be used for beauty therapy.
Consultations: County Highways Authority – Highways do not wish to comment
Conservation Officer – No objection raised
Tavistock Town Council – Support the proposal
Environment Agency – None (standing advice would apply)
Representations – None received.
Relevant Planning History 03106/2012 Change of use of office to beauty therapy room. Granted Conditional Approval 04/12/2012.
1600/01 Change of use of existing garage to a retail grocery, ground floor of 20 Plymouth Road to storage and ancillary accommodation, and existing hard standing to car parking, 20 Plymouth Road, and part of the Bus Depot, 20 Plymouth Road. Conditional Consent 06/12/1976.
1600/0 Use of existing premises for office purposes at Bus Station site. Granted Consent 23/05/1975
ANALYSIS
Principle of Development: The proposal is for the change of use of one room of the building to a beauty therapy room. The applicant has previously gained consent in December 2012 for the change of use of another office in the building to a beauty therapy room. These two modest scale rooms combined are not considered to give rise to any intensification of use within the building that would justify a refusal of planning consent.
The site is located within a town centre location and there are no policy restrictions that would prevent such a use within this location.
The proposal will comply with the Core Strategy which advises that support will be given to the provision of business in the main towns and the development of small businesses. The fact that the applicant is submitting an application for the change of use for an additional room so soon after the last consent was granted last year demonstrates the success of the business. The proposal within a town centre location is considered to contribute to its vitality and viability.
Impact upon Heritage: The proposal does not include any alterations to the building and the use is not considered to harm the character or appearance of the Conservation Area or the Outstanding Universal Value of the World Heritage Site.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
The nearest Listed Building is Grade II 16 Plymouth Road located further to the east and 19 and 21 Plymouth Road across the road to the south of the application site. Their settings will not be affected by the proposal.
Parking: Whilst 20 Plymouth Road has some parking to the front, this proposal will not be allocated any of these parking spaces. However, the site is located immediately adjacent to the bus station within a town centre location and within close proximity to a public car park. Given the small scale and siting of the proposed use, the lack of allocated on site parking is not considered to give rise to any highway issues and there is no objection on this basis.
Any misuse of parking cannot be controlled by planning condition and is not a material planning consideration.
Noise: The conversion to a beauty therapy room is not considered to give rise to any impact upon amenity such as noise. It is not considered that the beauty therapy room would give rise to any significant noise nuisance, and as an example, any music would be no different to an office with a radio on.
In terms of the public visiting the building, the use in terms of visitors would not be significantly different to the current office uses or the beauty therapy room granted consent in December 2012.
Planning Policy This application has been considered in accordance with Section 38 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and, where relevant, with Sections 66 and 72 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas).
Planning Policy NPPF
West Devon Borough Council Core Strategy 2011 SP1 – Sustainable Development SP10 – Supporting the Growth of the Economy SP18 – The Heritage and Historical Character of West Devon
West Devon Borough Council Local Plan Review 2005(as amended 2011) BE1 – Conservation Areas BE3 – Listed Buildings T8 – Car Parking
Considerations under Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 The provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report.
Conclusion The proposed change of use, which is small in scale and sited adjacent to both the bus station and public car park, is considered to be acceptable in planning policy terms.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
______
WARD NAME Milton Ford (Cllr R Baldwin) APPLICATION NUMBER 00089/2013 LOCATION Endsleigh Hotel, Milton Abbot, Tavistock, PL19 0PQ APPLICANT NAME Endsleigh Hotel Ltd
Development: Application for new planning permission to replace extant planning permission granted under planning consent 12381/2008/TAV for change of use from stables to hotel accommodation.
Reason for item being at Committee: This application has been called to Planning Committee by Cllr Baldwin for as he believes that this is a sensitive and sustainable redevelopment of a listed building situated within an AONB and that measures have been and are being taken to protect wild life, especially bats. By permitting this development not only will a heritage asset be restored for future generations, but the business viability of the hotel will be enhanced, thus continuing to provide much needed local employment.
Recommendation: Refusal
Reasons for refusal 1. Notwithstanding the submitted Ecological Assessment, insufficient information has been submitted to demonstrate that the application would not unfavourably impact upon the ecological interests of the site, or that it would enhance those interests. The proposed development therefore fails to comply with the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 - Section 11, Policy SP19 of the Devon County Structure Plan 2001 – 2016, Policy CO9 of the West Devon Borough Local Plan Review 2011, the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006, Circular 06/2005 'Biodiversity and Geological Conservation - Statutory Obligations and Their Impact Within the Planning System' and the Conservation of Habitats and Species (Amended) Regulations 2012.
Key issues for consideration: Changes to relevant planning policy/ case law, changes to the site and surrounding area (inclusive of other developments granted or implemented) that may be impacted by the proposal and any other material maters that may differ from those previously assessed such as changes to the highway network, landscape, ecology, flood risk, etc.
Financial Implications (Potential New Homes Bonus or other as relevant): None
Site Description: The site consists of a grade I listed building located approximately 12.5m to the north of Endsleigh House (currently in use as a hotel).
The building’s list description is as follows:
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
“Stables. Designed in circa 1810 by Sir Jeffrey Wyatville for the 6th Duke of Bedford. Stone rubble brought to course with hipped slate roofs. Approximately U- plan, built against the slope of the land to the north and consisting of 3 ranges round a pitched stone courtyard. The south range faces Endsleigh House across a forecourt. 1 storey and attics. Deep eaves, casement windows with timber mullions and transoms in chamfered stone openings, the doorway and window to the grooms' accommodation have segmental arches with keystone. Full dormers with hipped roofs.
The south side of the south range is symmetrical with a plinth and a massive central coach entrance under a separate hipped roof carried on chamfered stone cheeks with a chamfered lintel with mason's mitres. Timber spandrels with Gothick cusping form a triangular arch on the north and south sides of the coach entrance. A clock turret on the ridge has louvred sides, 4 diagonally-set clock faces and a hipped slate roof crowned by a weathervane. The south side of the range has 6 large entrances. The west range has 1 entrance with windows on either side. The east range, partly used for accommodation has diagonally set chimney shafts and 2 entrances. On the east side it is built into the slope of the land at the north allowing direct access to the first floor. A 2-bay gabled projection at the south end has a half-hipped roof. On the north side of the courtyard, opposite the coach entrance is a fountain set in a round-headed alcove in a tall battered stone surround terminating in a cornice. A stone trough is set in front of the alcove, and above the alcove is an inscription panel: "Endsleigh Cottage was built and a residence created in this sequestered valley by John Duke of Bedford the spot having been previously chosen from the natural and picturesque beauties which surround it by Georgiana, Duchess of Bedford.
The first stone of the building was laid by her 4 eldest sons Wriothesley Edward, Charles, James Fox and ...... September 7 1810" (parts illegible). Hussey suggests that the Duchess of Bedford was the driving force behind the creation of Endsleigh House”.
The site is situated within the open countryside and within the Tamar Valley AONB. The building is not located adjacent to any residential properties.
The site is accessed by way of a private drive leading onto the road connecting the site to the wider rural road network situated to the east of the application site approximately 1.1Km from the stable building and hotel (Endsleigh House).
The Proposal: The proposal is an application for new planning permission to replace extant planning permission granted under planning consent 12381/2008/TAV for change of use from stables to hotel accommodation.
Consultations: County Highways Authority – No objection
Milton Abbot Grouped Parish Council – Support
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
Countryside Officer – Objects on the basis of insufficient information.
Natural England – Comments that further information in relation to ecology should be sought before decision is made.
Conservation Officer – No objection
Representations – None received
Relevant Planning History 7969/2005/TAV – withdrawn 12027/2008/TAV – LBC for this current scheme, approved 27/11/08 12381/2008/TAV for change of use from stables to hotel accommodation. Approved.
ANALYSIS The previous assessment of the application is as follows;
“The issues associated with this application are the effect of the proposal upon the special historical and architectural value of the listed building, the listed park, AONB, highway network and countryside.
In relation to the listed building, the general principle of the change of use of the stable building was considered acceptable by our Conservation Officer some time ago, however extensive negotiations between the Conservation Officer, Planning Officer, Agent and Francis Kelly of English Heritage have since occurred in order to negotiate an improved scheme in terms of preserving the special historic and architectural details and regarding the formulation of suitable and comprehensive conditions.
It is now considered acceptable by English Heritage, the Conservation Officer and Planning Officer as it is not consider that this proposal will have a significant detrimental effect upon the historical and architectural value of the listed building. Suitable conditions and an archaeological condition requested by DCC archaeology and EH have been applied. (The LBC for these works has been approved and issued).
It is not considered that this development would have an undue negative impact upon the special landscape characteristics which made this area worthy of AONB designation. Neither do the Garden History Society consider they need to comment in relation to its impact upon the listed garden. Likewise due to the screening on site, the topography and the nature of the proposal (and the condition tying the building’s use to the existing hotel use), it is not considered that this proposal will have an undue negative impact upon the rural character of the countryside. In relation to residential amenity, there are no immediately adjacent residential properties. The nearest is approximately 150 m away but is completely screened from the application site by vegetation and by the topography caused by the nearby river. It is not therefore considered that the proposal will have a significant detrimental effect upon residential amenity.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
The DCC highway engineer has no objection on the grounds that he notes the existing use on-site. As this application is being considered as an extension to the existing hotel use on site, condition have been applied to tie the use of this building to the hotel use so as to ensure that, were this to alter, the impact upon the garden, AONB and highway network etc. could be reconsidered”.
The previous application was assessed against the following Local Plan Policies;
BE3 – Listed buildings BE9 – archaeology BE6 – listed gardens NE8 – Tamar valley AONB T9 – highway safety T8 – parking TLS1 – extension to existing holiday accommodation in the countryside
It should be noted that policy NE8 has been replaced by Core Strategy Policy SP17 and that the NPPF is now in effect.
Having reviewed the previous application and checking against the site at present it is evident that the NPPF and policy SP17 still afford protection to designated landscapes such as the AONB. Whilst this is the case, it is clear that the impact of the development upon the designated landscape remains as it did previously.
Ecology The main issue that has arisen in respect of this application as compared with that previously granted is in relation to a bat roost and the impact of the development upon it and the protected species.
As background the LPA wrote to the agent during the validation process on 20/10/11 to request 3 copies of a bat and barn owl survey before the application could be validated.
The agent responded (28/10/11) stating that the survey could not be undertaken until April 2012. The agent asked for the LPA to review its stance on validating the application.
The LPA consulted with officers in respect of ecology on 02/11/11 and confirmed that a second opinion was being sought. The agent acknowledged receipt of that update on the same day (02/11/11).
The LPA then confirmed by letter on 19/12/11 that an up to date survey including bat emergence/re-entry surveys was required. The letter also advised that a European Protected Species Licence would likely be required. The letter also stated “it is therefore advisable to consider the requirements of an EPSL application including ‘method statement’ and ‘3 tests’ at an early stage. The results of the bat survey which will advise on method, timing, mitigation and/ or compensation will inform the EPSL application”.
In a further letter dated 08/08/12 advised that unless information was provided within 14 days then the application would be returned.
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______
A letter from the agent dated 20/05/12 informed the LPA that a survey would be undertaken on 03/11/12 and the report would be produced on 07/09/12 and forwarded directly to the LPA.
Letter from LPA then sent to agent on 22/08/12 confirming that in its view permission under 12381/2008/TAV had lapsed.
Letter received from agent dated 15/11/12 providing bat, barn owl and nesting bird survey.
Letter sent form LPA to agent on 22/11/12 confirming that permission had lapsed and that information as set out in LPA correspondence of 19/08/11 was still required if only to support a full application.
Letter from agent seeking registration of application and arbitration in respect of non- validation by Natural England (NE) (04/02/13)
The application was validated shortly after, but no consultation with Natural England had taken place.
The consultation yielded comments from NE which confirmed that;
The submitted survey confirmed suitable features for bat roosting within the application site. Also that detailed inspections had been undertaken and found evidence of a roost.
Furthermore the survey work confirmed the species and roost status.
NE concluded that mitigation has not been provided which is appropriate and proportionate to the scale of impact, that is, like for like in terms of roost size, aspect, temperature etc.
The conclusions of NE are that the LPA should request further clarification from the applicant.
The Countryside Officer also concludes that the current level of information submitted with the application is not sufficient to positively determine the application (Comment provided 22/02/13)
The agent was sent an email confirming NE’s request as well as the Countryside Officers comments and requests on 19/03/13 which was acknowledged by the agent. A further email was sent and again on 12/04/13 to the agent re-confirming the content of that of 19/03/13. No response has been received since that time.
In reference to the above matter it should be noted that Wildlife legislation in the UK filters down from the EC Habitats Directive 1992. The UK implemented the Directive by introducing The Conservation (Natural Habitats etc) Regulations 1994 (now superseded by the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010) which contains two layers of protection, 1) a requirement on Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) to have regard to the Directive's requirements above, and 2) a licensing
WEST DEVON BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING AND LICENSING COMMITTEE 1 October 2013 ______system administered by Natural England. Circular 6/2005, paragraph 116, advises LPAs to give due weight to the presence of European protected species on a development site to reflect EC requirements, in reaching planning decisions, and this may potentially justify a refusal of planning permission. The LPA also has a duty under Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 to have regard to biodiversity and protected species in exercising its functions. This duty includes the requirements to have regard to protected species.
Furthermore, as is suggested in the NPPF, and local plan policies, applications should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity; without sufficient information it is not possible to assess whether an application can achieve this.
It is therefore concluded that despite insufficient information has been submitted, despite repeated requests from the LPA to positively determine this application and as such it should be refused.
Planning Policy This application has been considered in accordance with Section 38 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and, where relevant, with Sections 66 and 72 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas).
Planning Policy NPPF
West Devon Borough Council Core Strategy 2011 SP1 – Sustainable Development SP10 – Supporting the Growth of the Economy SP11 – Rural Regeneration SP17 – Landscape Character SP18 – The Heritage and Historical Character of West Devon SP19 – Biodiversity SP20 – Promoting High Quality Design
West Devon Borough Council Local Plan Review 2005(as amended 2011) NE10 – Protection of the Countryside and Other Open Spaces BE3 – Listed Buildings BE4 – Features and Artefacts of Local Importance BE6 – Historic Parks and Gardens RB1 – Conversion and re-use of rural buildings for business TLS1 – Holiday Accommodation T8 – Car Parking T9 – The Highway Network
Considerations under Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 The provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report. ______