DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE - 18 DECEMBER 2017
Case No: 17/02233/S73 (RENEWAL OF CONSENT/VARY CONDITIONS)
Proposal: MINOR MATERIAL AMENDMENT TO 16/02007/FUL : REPLACE APPROVED SITE LOCATION PLAN 16/59/1C WITH PLAN 16/59/1D
Location: 59 THRAPSTON ROAD, BRAMPTON
Applicant: MR & MRS G STEEL
Grid Ref: 520980 271153
Date of Registration: 24.10.2017
Parish: BRAMPTON
RECOMMENDATION - APPROVE
This application is referred to the Development Management Committee (DMC) as Brampton Parish Council's recommendation of refusal is contrary to the officer recommendation of approval.
1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION
1.1 This application relates to the site of 59 Thrapston Road, Brampton.
1.2 The application site lies on the south side of Thrapston Road, Brampton with a pedestrian crossing and bus stop lay by in the vicinity. The site does not fall within or adjacent to a Conservation Area. The nearest listed building is located approx. 49m to the west.
1.3 Residential units are positioned on both sides of the road. Whilst a grouping of six pairs of semi-detached dwellings to the north provides a small section of Thrapston Road with a relatively uniform arrangement, the majority of plots do not follow a rhythmical arrangement. Positioning within individual plots is also varied.
1.4 This S73 application seeks to replace the site plan previously approved under 16/02007/FUL (16/59/1C) with 16/59/1D. This revision would entail the repositioning of the dwelling by approx. 3m further toward the north boundary of the site, closer to the highway. The scale, massing and overall design of the dwelling remains as previously approved.
2. NATIONAL GUIDANCE
2.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (2012) sets out the three dimensions to sustainable development - an economic role, a social role and an environmental role - and outlines the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Under the heading of Delivering Sustainable Development, the Framework sets out the Government's planning policies for: building a strong, competitive economy; ensuring the vitality of town centres; supporting a prosperous rural economy; promoting sustainable transport; supporting high quality communications infrastructure; delivering a wide choice of high quality homes; requiring good design; promoting healthy communities; protecting Green Belt land; meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change; conserving and enhancing the natural environment; conserving and enhancing the historic environment; and facilitating the sustainable use of minerals.
3. PLANNING POLICIES
3.1 Saved policies from the Huntingdonshire Local Plan (1995) • EN25: General Design Criteria • H31: Residential Amenity and Privacy Standards • H32: Sub-division of Large Curtilages • T18: Access requirements for new development
3.2 Saved policies from the Huntingdonshire Local Plan Alterations (2002) • HL5: Quality and Density of Development • HL10: Housing Provision
3.3 Adopted Huntingdonshire Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2009) • CS1: Sustainable Development in Huntingdonshire • CS3: The Settlement Hierarchy • CS10: Contributions to Infrastructure Requirements
3.4 Huntingdonshire's Local Plan to 2036: Consultation Draft 2017 • LP1: Strategy for Development • LP5: Spatial Planning Areas • LP10: Design Context • LP11: Design Implementation • LP13: Amenity • LP15: Sustainable travel • LP16: Parking Provision • LP24: Housing Mix
3.5 Supplementary Planning Documents: • Huntingdonshire Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document 2017
For full details visit the government website https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities- and-local-government
4. PLANNING HISTORY
4.1 16/02007/FUL - Erection of two semi-detached dwellings with associated car parking, following demolition of existing bungalow and double (tandem) garage. Approved - 23.12.2016
5. CONSULTATIONS
5.1 Brampton Parish Council: "In response to the planning application for a minor material amendment to the planned build at 59 Thrapston Road we are providing a strong and detailed recommendation for refusal. Firstly, the application documentation has been compiled by the developer in what can only be classified as an underhand and deceitful manner. The 'amended' diagram does NOT actually show the new location of the new-build house with measurements: all it states on the replaced plan is that: "Revision D = 23/08/17 - Amended to as-built Alternative Layout". So you then look closely at the measurements the original plan has a 5.3m distance to the front face of the house: however and importantly, this amended diagram has the same dimension quoted BUT the measurement on the plot is just 2.1m. So the whole house has in effect been moved 3.2 metres forward of the original line. As a Parish Council we contend that this significant change in layout on the site cannot be classified as a "minor material amendment". Secondly, the Parish Council would like to know exactly what the developer submitted to the District Council as this "minor material amendment" - were you aware at the time that the house was to be moved by 3.2 metres? Or were you deceived by the lack of the appropriate measurements and descriptors on the diagram? This is an important point that deserves an answer - and we will be expecting one. Thirdly, we are left with an eyesore of a building position as you approach the site from the west along Thrapston Road. It is not in keeping with the rest of the street scene, which is exacerbated by its type of design when seen alongside its neighbours. And here too their considerations have been ignored in the view they have from their own frontages. Finally, and just as importantly, we have a regulated set of planning procedures for such developments: if this is allowed to go unchallenged and the house is not moved back to its original position then what is the purpose of said planning procedures? [The proposal] will set an extremely poor precedent and [Brampton Parish Council] would not be at all surprised if letters to the Huntingdon paper were to follow. In conclusion Brampton Parish Council strongly disagree with this proposal and the way it has been undertaken (ie build first and ask for approval later). It is NOT recommended for approval".
Officer response to Brampton Parish Council comment: At the time of writing, the Case Officer has not had the opportunity to undertake specific measurements on site. An update will be provided in the Late Reps document.
The NPPF outlines that the purpose of planning is to help achieve sustainable development, ensuring positive growth which takes into account economic, environmental and social factors and the planning system provides the opportunity for previously approved plans to be amended, in order to avoid the delay, cost and uncertainty which may arise from a further application for planning permission. Planning Practice Guidance states that "there is no statutory definition of a 'minor material amendment', but it is likely to include any amendment which is not substantially different from the one which has been approved". As such, a determination as to whether an amendment is 'minor' must be based on the unique circumstances presented with individual applications. The subject application was discussed at length with senior officers who unanimously confirmed that the minor material amendment process is appropriate in this instance. It is unclear as to the precedent which the Parish Council's comment refers. All applications are considered on their individual planning merits taking account of the particular circumstances. As outlined above, the planning system affords the opportunity for approved plans to be amended and the LPA has a statutory duty to decide each application in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Given the distinct circumstances which surround this application, it is considered that the risk of creating any precedent is relatively low.
The dimensions on the revised site plan (16/59/1 D) are considered to scale correctly. This plan is considered to adequately demonstrate that the dwelling is positioned approx. 3m closer to the boundary to the north than the previously approved dwelling (16/59/1 C).
Design considerations and the impact upon the street scene are addressed in the relevant section below. An impact upon view is not a material planning consideration.
5.2 Cambridgeshire County Council Highways: "…the proposed replacement site plan will still allow two way movement in and out of the site…therefore [there are] no objections to that proposed…the lack of one of the pedestrian splay is minimal in nature given the driver position and could not be objected to given the minimal number of vehicle movements associated with the increase of a single dwelling…append conditions to any consent granted".
6. REPRESENTATIONS
6.1 Six representations have been received, objecting to the proposal and highlighting concerns relating to: *Visual impact of the dwelling - not in keeping with the street scene; *Loss of light *Feeling of enclosure *Planning application makes a mockery of the whole process; *No room for vehicles to be parked at the property - impact on highway *Neighbours should be allowed full consultation - amendment renders the original neighbour consultation redundant *Revision is not a minor material amendment *Amendment will invalidate landscaping conditions *LPA should discharge Planning Enforcement responsibilities and insist on a rebuild *Development continues whilst application is determined *Original application was cynical and disingenuous - a smoke screen for another development *Was situation caused by a gap in the planning process, i.e. the discovery of a deep sewer on site?
Officer response: The potential impact on the amenity of neighbours is addressed in the relevant section below.
The planning system provides the opportunity for previously approved plans to be amended, in order to avoid the delay, cost and uncertainty which may arise from a further application for planning permission. Making an application for an amendment is the developer's prerogative.
Four parking spaces are provided to the rear of the dwelling.
Seven neighbours were consulted on this S73 application, including those consulted on the previous application.
A determination as to whether an amendment is 'minor' must be based on the unique circumstances presented with individual applications. The subject application was discussed at length with senior officers who unanimously confirmed that the minor material amendment process is appropriate in this instance.
A revised landscaping scheme can be secured by condition.
HDC's Planning Enforcement team must conclude whether a case is expedient to pursue. This S73 application seeks to regularise the situation.
The LPA is not responsible for the actions of individual developers.
7. ASSESSMENT
7.1 The previously approved application (16/02007/FUL) established the principle of development as acceptable. As such, the main issues to consider are: • Design and the impact upon the character/appearance of the area; • Impact upon residential amenity; and • Accessibility, parking and the impact upon highway safety.
Design and the impact upon the character/appearance of the area:
7.2 The previously approved application determined that the street facing elevation retained the appearance of a single dwelling and the scale and form of the proposed structure was considered to reflect the existing built form in the vicinity. Accordingly, the assessment to be made relates to the impact arising from the repositioning of the dwelling approx. 3m closer to the north boundary of the site.
7.3 The application site does not lie within or adjacent to a Conservation Area, and the nearest listed building (located approx. 49m to the west of the application site) is not considered to be affected by the development. Views into, out of and across the Conservation Area (the boundaries of which are located approx. 64m to the west and 30m to the south of the application site), are not considered to be negatively impacted.
7.4 The street scene is characterised by the variety of architectural forms and styles, the assortment of construction/finishing materials and the absence of a definitive, uniform building line on either side of Thrapston Road. It is noted that the front elevation of the repositioned dwelling is proposed to sit upon the same line as the bay windows of the recently demolished dwelling, approx. 5.3m into the application site.
7.5 Whilst the repositioned dwelling may be prominent in the street scene by virtue of its position in relation to the highway and through the introduction of a new, sand coloured brick, a clear distinction must be made between what is different and what is harmful. For the reasons outlined above with regard to the character of the area, the repositioned dwelling is not considered to result in an unacceptable detrimental impact upon the interpretation of the street scene, or upon the character and appearance of the wider area.
7.6 Following discussion with the Agent regarding the visual impact of the repositioned dwelling, the introduction of a render finish to wrap around the front of the dwelling is considered to reduce the prominence of the brick. Revised plans were yet to be submitted at the time of writing - an update will be included in the Late Reps document. This detail can be secured by condition.
Impact upon residential amenity:
7.7 Despite the revised position of the dwelling, the scale and form of the structure are such that when the layout of the existing built form is taken into account the development is not considered to create an unacceptable detrimental impact in terms of a loss of light/overshadowing or by way of being overbearing.
7.8 The previously approved application determined that the development would not result in an unacceptable detrimental impact in terms of overlooking of neighbouring properties to the south. The revised position of the dwelling would increase the separation distance between the fenestration at first floor level on the south elevation of the proposed dwelling and the existing dwelling to the south (2 Walnut Tree Grove) from approx. 34.4m to approx. 37.4m. As such, the revised position of the dwelling is considered to represent an improvement in this regard and is acceptable. It is noted that the internal layout of the dwelling remains unchanged and the proposed fenestration at first floor level on both side elevations are to serve non-habitable rooms.
Accessibility, parking and the impact upon highway safety:
7.9 Cambridgeshire County Council raised no objection to the revised location of the dwelling with regard to the impact on highway safety, subject to the imposition of a number of conditions. The revised position of the dwelling will remove a vehicle parking space to the front of the property, with four vehicle parking spaces provided to the rear.
7.10 It must be noted that following consultation on the previously approved application (16/02007/FUL), HDC Transportation raised no objection to this parking space being removed.
7.11 With the imposition of the conditions suggested by CCC Highways, the proposed development is considered to be acceptable.
8. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL subject to conditions to include the following
• Time limit • Development in accordance with plans • Hard and Soft Landscaping scheme • No gates across access • 5m minimum access width • Access laid out in accordance with CCC specification • On-site parking area provided prior to occupation • Pedestrian visibility splays as per site plan • 2m x 43m highway visibility splays prior to occupation • Scheme for addition of render to front/side of dwelling
If you would like a translation of this document, a large text version or an audio version, please contact us on 01480 388388 and we will try to accommodate your needs.
CONTACT OFFICER: Enquiries about this report to James Lloyd Senior Development Management Officer 01480 388389
Huntingdonshire D I S T R I C T C O U N C I L Pathfinder House St Mary’s Street Huntingdon PE29 3TN Head of Planning Services Pathfinder House St. Mary’s Street Huntingdon Cambridgeshire PE 29 3TN
APPLICATION NUMBER: 17/02233/S73 CASE OFFICER: James Lloyd
Application Reference Number: 16/02007/FUL. Date of Decision: 23/12/2016. Condition Number: 1. Minor material amendment. Replace PROPOSAL: approved plan Site Location Plan 16/59/1C 22.11.2016 with plan 16/59/1D
LOCATION: 59 Thrapston Road, Brampton, Huntingdon
OBSERVATIONS OF BRAMPTON PARISH COUNCIL
RECOMMEND REFUSAL
In response to the planning application for a minor material amendment to the planned build at 59 Thrapston Road we are providing a strong and detailed recommendation for Refusal. Firstly, the application documentation has been compiled by the developer in what can only be classified as an underhand and deceitful manner. The 'amended' diagram does NOT actually show the new location of the new-build house with measurements: all it states on the replaced plan is that: "Revision D = 23/08/17 - Amended to as-built Alternative Layout". So you then look closely at the measurements the original plan has a 5.3m distance to the front face of the house: however and importantly, this amended diagram has the same dimension quoted BUT the measurement on the plot is just 2.1m. So the whole house has in effect been moved 3.2 metres forward of the original line. As a Parish Council we contend that this significant change in layout on the site cannot be classified as a “minor material amendment”.
Secondly, the Parish Council would like to know exactly what the developer submitted to the District Council as this “minor material amendment” – were you aware at the time that the house was to be moved by 3.2 metres? Or were you deceived by the lack of the appropriate measurements and descriptors on the diagram? This is an important point that deserves an answer – and we will be expecting one.
Thirdly, we are left with an eyesore of a building position as you approach the site from the west along Thrapston Road. It is not in keeping with the rest of the street scene, which is exacerbated by its type of design when seen alongside its neighbours. And here too their considerations have been ignored in the view they have from their own frontages.
Tel 01480 388388 Fax 01480 388099 [email protected] www.huntsdc.gov.uk
Finally, and just as importantly, we have a regulated set of planning procedures for such developments: if this is allowed to go unchallenged and the house is not moved back to its original position then what is the purpose of said planning procedures? It will set an extremely poor, if not Huntingdonshiredisgusting, precedent. And I would not be at all surprised if letters to the Huntingdon paper were to follow. D I S T R I C T C O U N C I L Pathfinder House St Mary’s Street Huntingdon PE29 3TN In conclusion the Brampton Parish Council strongly disagree with this proposal and the way it has been undertaken (ie build first and ask for approval later). It is NOT recommended for approval.
………………………………….. Assistant Clerk to Brampton Parish Council.
Date: 15 Nov 2017
Failure to return this form within the time indicated will be taken as an indication that the Town or Parish Council do not express any opinion either for or against the application.
PLANNING SERVICES dcparish.rtf
Tel 01480 388388 Fax 01480 388099 [email protected] www.huntsdc.gov.uk
Development Management Committee
Scale =1:1,250 Application Ref: 17/02233/S73
Date Created: 04/12/2017 © Crown copyright and database rights 2017 o Location: Brampton Ordnance Survey HDC 100022322
Ponds Track
!
Pp Ho
THRAPSTON ROAD
102
MS 17 92
19 88
78 67
24 B 1514 12 Shelter
32
57 55
10
2
198 GROVE LANE
6 53 51a
1 4 GROVE 3 El Sub Sta
2 TREE 10 4
88 WALNUT
5 84 80 ORCHARD LANE 76 Shelter GP 16 18 Key 70
107 The Brampton Listed Building Day Nursery
20 The Site 13 El Conservation Area 105 Sub Sta
GREEN PAPERS FOLLOW
Application Number: 16/02007/FUL
TOWN & COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990
Planning Permission
Nutwood Ventures Ltd (FAO Mr C Campbell) PO Box 580 Huntingdon PE29 9EB
Huntingdonshire District Council in pursuance of powers under the above Act, hereby GRANT PERMISSION for:
Proposal: Proposed erection of two semi-detached dwellings with associated car parking, following demolition of existing bungalow and double (tandem) garage.
Site address: 59 Thrapston Road Brampton Huntingdon PE28 4TB
Applicant: Mr W R Tatman And Mrs M J Bergin in accordance with your application received on 11th October 2016 and plans (listed below) which form part of the application
Plan Type Reference Version Date Received Roof Plan 16/59/7 22.09.2016 Section 16/59/8 22.09.2016 Elevations 16/59/6 22.09.2016 Elevations 16/59/5 22.09.2016 Elevations 16/59/4A 22.09.2016 Floor Plan/s 16/59/3 A PROPOSED 22.09.2016 Floor Plan/s 16/59/2 PROPOSED 22.09.2016 Floor plans and 16/59/9 11.10.2016 Elevations Site location Plan 16/59/1 C 22.11.2016
Subject to the following condition/s.
1. Condition.
Andy Moffat Head Of Development Page 1 of 5
Date 23rd December 2016
Pathfinder House, St Mary's Street 01480 388388 Huntingdon. PE29 3TN [email protected] www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans listed in the table above.
1. Reason. For the avoidance of doubt to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the approved plans.
2. Condition. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.
2. Reason. To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, as amended.
3. Condition. Notwithstanding the submitted details, no development above slab level shall take place until full details of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the dwellings hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
3. Reason. In the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policy En25 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan, 1995.
4. Condition. No development shall take place until full details of both hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved.
(a) Soft landscape works shall include planting plans, written specifications (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment) schedules of plants noting species, plant sizes and proposed numbers and densities where appropriate. (b) All trees, shrubs and hedge plants supplied shall comply with the requirements of British Standard 3936, Specification for Nursery Stock. All preplanting site preparation, planting and post-planting maintenance works shall be carried out in accordance with the requirements of British Standard 4428 (1989) Code of Practice for General Landscape Operations (excluding hard surfaces). (c) All new tree plantings shall be positioned in accordance with the requirements of Annex A of British Standard BS5837: 2012: Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction - Recommendations and the NHBC Standards Chapter 4.2 (14)
4. Reason.
Andy Moffat Head Of Development Page 2 of 5
Date 23rd December 2016
Pathfinder House, St Mary's Street 01480 388388 Huntingdon. PE29 3TN [email protected] www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk
In the interests of visual amenity in accordance with Policy En25 of the Huntingdonshire Local Plan, 1995.
5. Note to applicant. The LPA positively encourages pre-application discussions and makes clear that applications will then normally be determined as submitted. Details of the 'Pre-Application Advice' process can be found on the Planning pages on the Council's website www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk. If, as proposed, a development is considered unacceptable and it is apparent how it can be revised to make it acceptable, the LPA will set out how it can be amended to make it acceptable as part of its response to a pre-application enquiry. When an application is received, conditions will be used where they can make a development acceptable. A clear reason for refusal identifies the specific reasons why the development is unacceptable and helps the applicant to determine whether and how the proposal can be revised to make it acceptable. In relation to this application, it was considered and the process managed in accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the NPPF.
6. Note to applicant. Huntingdonshire District Council became a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Charging Authority on the 1st May 2012. The Council is obliged to collect the levy from liable parties once development that received planning permission on or after the 1st May 2012 commences. It is important that liable parties (usually developers or landowners) are correctly identified to the Council as early as possible. For more details on CIL, the developments the charges will apply to, how much the charge will be and the process involved, including the developers or landowners legal responsibilities, the CIL pages on the Council's website at www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk should be referred to. It should be noted that all development which creates one or more dwellings will be liable to be charged irrespective of the floor space charge. However, developments which create less than 100 square metres of new floor space and do not involve a dwelling or dwellings, will be exempt from CIL and will not be charged.
7. Note to applicant. In order to obtain an official postal address, any new buildings should be formally registered with Huntingdonshire District Council. Unregistered addresses cannot be passed to Royal Mail for allocation of postcodes. Applicants can find additional information, a scale of charges and an application form at www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk/streets-parking-transport/street-naming-and- numbering/ Alternatively, applicants can contact the Street Naming and Numbering Team on 01480 388353 or email at [email protected]. Please note new address cannot be assigned by the Council until the footings of any new buildings are in place.
Andy Moffat Head Of Development Page 3 of 5
Date 23rd December 2016
Pathfinder House, St Mary's Street 01480 388388 Huntingdon. PE29 3TN [email protected] www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk
NOTES
Rights of Appeal under the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990 Section 78
If the applicant is aggrieved by the decision of the Local Planning Authority to refuse permission for the proposed development or to grant permission subject to conditions, he/she may appeal to the Secretary of State responsible for planning within;
• Six months from the date of this decision notice.
Appeals must be made on a form which is obtainable from the Planning Inspectorate, Customer Support Unit, Temple Quay House, 2 The Square, Temple Quay, Bristol BS1 6PN. Alternatively all forms can be downloaded from their website www.planning-inspectorate.gov.uk. The Secretary of State has power to allow a longer period for the giving of a notice of appeal but he will not normally be prepared to exercise this power unless there are special circumstances, which excuse the delay in giving notice of appeal. The Secretary of State is not required to entertain an appeal if it appears to him that permission for the proposed development could not have been granted by the Local Planning Authority, or could not have been so granted otherwise than subject to the conditions imposed by them, having regard to the statutory requirements, to the provisions of the Development Orders and to any directions given under the Orders. He does not, in practice, refuse to entertain appeals solely because the decision of the Local Planning Authority was based on a direction given by him.
If permission to develop land is refused or granted subject to conditions, whether by the Local Planning Authority or by the Secretary of State responsible for planning and the owner of the land claims that the land has become incapable of reasonably beneficial use by the carrying out of any development which has been or would be permitted, he may serve on the Council of the County District in which the land is situated a purchase notice requiring that Council to purchase his interest in the land in accordance with the provision of Part VI of the Town and Country Planning Act, 1990.
Claiming Compensation
In certain circumstances, a claim may be made against the Local Planning Authority for compensation where permission is refused or granted subject to conditions by the Secretary of State on appeal or on a reference of an application to him. The circumstances in which such compensation is payable are set out in Section 114 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
Andy Moffat Head Of Development Page 4 of 5
Date 23rd December 2016
Pathfinder House, St Mary's Street 01480 388388 Huntingdon. PE29 3TN [email protected] www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk
General Notes
This decision notice does not convey any approval or consent which may be required under any enactment, bye-law or regulation other than Section 57 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
Andy Moffat Head Of Development Page 5 of 5
Date 23rd December 2016
Pathfinder House, St Mary's Street 01480 388388 Huntingdon. PE29 3TN [email protected] www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk