Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
DONCASTER METROPOLITAN BOROUGH COUNCIL PLANNING COMMITTEE - 19th July 2011 Application 03 Application 11/00665/COU Application 1st June 2011 Number: Expiry Date: Application Change of Use Type: Proposal Change of use of land to domestic curtilage including retention of portal Description: framed outbuilding. At: 188 Cadeby Road Sprotbrough Doncaster South Yorkshire For: Mr D Perry Third Party 0 Parish: Sprotbrough And Cusworth Reps: Parish Council Ward: Sprotbrough Author of Report Gareth Stent MAIN RECOMMENDATION: GRANT 1.0 Reason for Report 1.1 The application is being presented to committee as it represents a departure from the Unitary Development Plan. Also, an almost identical application was considered by planning committee in 2009 for the adjacent property (No.190), who also sought to include land within its curtilage. 2.0 Proposal and Background 2.1 This application seeks permission to retain use of land as residential curtilage, and to retain a portal framed building at 188 Cadeby Road Sprotbrough. Both properties i.e. No.188 and No.190 Cadeby Road have been the subject of various enforcement enquires/action over the past few years with No.190 regularising land beyond its curtiliage for use as garden back in 2009. Since then, officers have been working with the owners of No.188 to do the same. This resulted in a certificate of lawfulness application being submitted in 2010 under reference 10/01619/CPE, to certify the use of the land as garden. This however, was refused as the evidence within the application was inconclusive. 2.2 Following the refusal, the applicant was advised to submit an application to retain the use of the land and to retain the building. The application was encouraged in order to regularise all of the outstanding enforcement matters relating to this site. 2.3 The site lies within the Green Belt to the north east of the village of Cadeby. To the north of the land is Scabba Wood and quarry to the west. The site consists of 1 pair of semi detached bungalows situated off Cadeby Lane. Number 188 is the application site and the adjoining property is known as No.190. 2.4 No.188 has a front parking area, then the land slopes away from the bungalow towards the field. A formal garden exists immediately around the bungalow, and the land in question is roughly grassed and has seen significantly tree removal over recent years. The photographs in appendix 1 show the condition of the land sought for use as garden. In the northern corner of the land is the portal framed building. This is currently being used as a domestic store and is open fronted. 3.0 Relevant Planning History 3.1 An application to extend No.188 by way of a single storey pitched roof extension to side and construction of new pitched roof to replace flat roof on existing extension to rear was granted on 06.11.2007 under reference 07/02961/FUL. Following this a certificate of lawfulness was refused under reference 10/01619/CPE on the 17.01.2011 to certify the use of the land as garden. 3.2 Adjoining the site is 190 Cadeby Road. The most relevant application which has direct similarities to this case is application 09/00484/RET ‘Retention of use of land as residential curtilage’ granted by committee on the 14.05.2009. 4.0 Representations 4.1 The application was publicised by direct neighbour notification and more recently by a site notice due to it being a departure. No third party representations were received. 5.0 Parish Council 5.1 No observations. 6.0 Relevant Consultations 6.1 No further consultation other than with the Parish Council was deemed necessary. 7.0 Relevant Policy and Strategic Context 7.1 The site falls within the Green Belt, therefore Policies ENV 1 and ENV 3 are applicable. These policies seek to control all inappropriate development within the Green Belt unless very special circumstances are demonstrated. The thrust of this policy is taken from the national planning policy guidance outlined in PPG 2 ‘Green Belts’. Generally development in the Green Belt allows for agricultural, and leisure type uses. 8.0 Planning Issues and Discussion 8.1 The main issue surrounding this application is whether the use of the land as curtilage to No.188 represents inappropriate development within the Green Belt. If inappropriate, then members must consider if there are any very special circumstances that would outweigh the inappropriateness and justify the use. Green Belt Policy 8.2 Green Belt Policy is of fundamental importance in Doncaster because nearly 50% of the Borough is covered by Green Belt designation. The application site is clearly located within the approved Green Belt where there is a strong presumption against new development, unless it falls within one of the restricted categories of appropriate development as defined by the policies. The commitment to protecting the Green Belt, is a key feature of the adopted Unitary Development Plan. 8.3 Policy ENV1 designates and reaffirms the designation of a Green Belt in the Borough, the boundaries of which are shown on the proposals map. Policy ENV3 entitled ‘Control of Development in the Green Belt’ states that the Council will not permit development in the Green Belt except in very special circumstances for purposes other than agriculture, forestry, sport, recreation, cemeteries, reuse of buildings and limited infilling. 8.4 The inclusion of garden/curtilage into Green Belt land does not fall within the list of appropriate uses within the Green Belt and as such applications are not encouraged, especially when there is a clear Green Belt boundary. This case is not as clear cut as no such Green Belt boundary exists, as the land is completely ‘washed over’ by Green Belt. In this case, officers consider the harm created by the use is limited and there would be no real benefit to the Green Belt by withholding the permission. Very special circumstances 8.5 The very special circumstance in this case for granting the use of the land as curtilage, is that an almost identical application was approved next door at No.190. Therefore, it would be unreasonable to withhold permission especially given the similarities of the issues and enforcement history of the site. 8.6 The introduction and history section of this report shows how permission was granted by the planning committee in 2009 for No.190, because of historical maps and evidence were at odds with each other. The UDP maps show the curtilage as being very small in comparison with adjoining gardens to the east of the site. The applicant at No 190 successfully demonstrated with evidence that for the best part of ten years, the land in question had actually been used as garden. The council were unwilling to progress the matter to appeal and therefore encouraged an application to retain the use of land as garden, which then automatically authorised an outbuilding within the land. The applicant at No.190 reduced the height of the outbuilding to bring it in line with permitted development limitations. The approval resolved the outstanding enforcement case. 8.7 In this case at No.188, the applicant has less evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the land had been used as garden for the last ten years, however in the interests of fairness, an application was encouraged to retain the use. The only differences between the two cases are that the outbuilding at No.188 is more readily visible and larger than that at No.190. 8.8 If this application is not supported, then the council would have to serve an enforcement notice requiring the cessation of the use of the land and a separate notice requiring the removal of the outbuilding. The removal of the outbuilding would improve the openness of the Green Belt; however the cessation of the use would have no real benefit visually. The risks attached to this route are high especially given the history at No.190. Visual Amenity 8.9 Following on from the above paragraph it is important to quantify what visual impact the use and building has on the character and openness of the Green Belt. The buildings sheer presence ultimately harms the openness of the Green Belt, and its untidy appearance could be improved and mitigated by repainting. From the roadside, the land slopes away from the road, making the building less visually prominent, however it can still be viewed from the north east when travelling in a south westerly direction along Cadeby Road and by the residents across the field. The building is 9.14 x 9.14 m in area and has a block work plinth and then Yorkshire boarding on the frontage. The sides are more irregular with profile sheeting being used, which are a variety of colours and the roof is a pale grey. The appearance of the building could be improved if painted green. Should members support the retention of the buildings, then a condition is suggested to allow for the building to be painted a dark green in colour (within 3 months of the approval) to minimise its visual impact. 9.0 Summary and Conclusion 9.1 In conclusion, whilst being a departure from the development plan, there is sufficient justification to allow for the land to be used as garden and the building retained. The use has little impact on the character and openness of the Green Belt and the building whilst having some visual harm, can be mitigated by the imposition of conditions requiring it to be repainted. Approval of the application will tie up all outstanding enforcement matters on this site and will be consistent with the approach taken at No.190 Cadeby Road.