Park North, North Street, Horsham, West Sussex, RH12 1RL Tel: (01403) 215100 (calls may be recorded) Fax: (01403) 262985 DX 57609 HORSHAM 6 www.horsham.gov.uk
Chief Executive - Tom Crowley
Personal callers and deliveries: please come to Park North
E-Mail: [email protected] Direct Line: 01403 215465
Development Control (South) Committee TUESDAY 19th FEBRUARY 2013 AT 2.00p.m. COUNCIL CHAMBER, PARK NORTH, NORTH STREET, HORSHAM
Councillors: David Jenkins (Chairman) Sheila Matthews Vice-Chairman) Roger Arthur Ian Howard Adam Breacher Liz Kitchen Jonathan Chowen Gordon Lindsay Philip Circus Chris Mason George Cockman Brian O’Connell David Coldwell Roger Paterson Ray Dawe Sue Rogers Brian Donnelly Kate Rowbottom Andrew Dunlop Jim Sanson Jim Goddard
Tom Crowley Chief Executive
AGENDA
1. Apologies for absence
2. To approve as correct the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 15th January 2013 (attached)
3. To receive any declarations of interest from Members of the Committee – any clarification on whether a Member has an interest should be sought before attending the meeting.
4. To receive any announcements from the Chairman of the Committee or the Chief Executive
5. To consider the following reports and to take such action thereon as may be necessary
Head of Planning & Environmental Services Appeals Applications for determination by Committee - Appendix A
Paper certified as sustainable by an independent global forest certification organisation
Item Ward Reference Site No. Number
A1 Chanctonbury DC/12/1975 Penn Retreat Rectory Lane Ashington
A2 Steyning DC/12/1857 Nash Manor Horsham Road Steyning
A3 Chanctonbury DC/12/1629 Steeton Rock Road Storrington
A4 Chanctonbury DC/12/2258 Calluna Nyetimber Lane West Chiltington
A5 Chanctonbury DC/12/2138 Dennis Marcus Farm Gay Street Pulborough
A6 Chantry DC/12/2317 Land East of Sawyards Manleys Hill Storrington
6. Items not on the agenda which the Chairman of the meeting is of the opinion should be considered as urgent because of the special circumstances
DCS130115
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL (SOUTH) COMMITTEE 15th JANUARY 2013
Present: Councillors: David Jenkins (Chairman), Sheila Matthews (Vice- Chairman), Roger Arthur, Adam Breacher, Philip Circus, George Cockman, David Coldwell, Ray Dawe, Brian Donnelly, Jim Goddard, Chris Mason, Brian O’Connell, Sue Rogers, Kate Rowbottom, Jim Sanson
Apologies: Councillors: Jonathan Chowen, Andrew Dunlop, Ian Howard, Liz Kitchen, Gordon Lindsay, Roger Paterson
DCS/95 MINUTES
The minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 18th December 2012 were approved as a correct record and signed by the Chairman.
DCS/96 INTERESTS OF MEMBERS
There were no declarations of interest.
DCS/97 ANNOUNCEMENTS
There were no announcements.
DCS/98 APPEALS
Appeals Lodged Written Representations/Household Appeals Service
Ref No Site Appellant(s)
DC/12/1573 Thistleworth Farm, Worthing Road, Mr Mitchell Dial Post DC/12/1575 Thistleworth Farm, Worthing Road, Mr Mitchell Dial Post DC/12/0133 Barn, Rackham Street, Rackham Ms Jane Claxton
DCS/99 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/12/1891 – NEW INDUSTRIAL BUILDING WITH ACCESS, LANDSCAPING, PARKING AND ANCILLARY WORKS SITE: LAND EAST OF TESLA ENGINEERING COMPANY LIMITED WATER LANE STORRINGTON APPLICANT: TESLA ENGINEERING LTD
The Head of Planning & Environmental Services reported that this application sought permission for the erection of an industrial building for B2 use. The proposal included the creation of a new vehicular access, landscaping, parking and ancillary works. The proposed steel portal frame construction was 66 metres by 30 metres, with a ridge height of 11.6 metres. Development Control (South) Committee 15th January 2013
DCS/99 Planning Application: DC/12/1891 (cont.)
A two storey office area, with a ridge height of 7.3 metres, would be located on the western side of the building.
A total of 55 car parking spaces would be provided together with 15 cycle parking spaces. The building would provide employment for up to 75 full-time employees.
The site was located on the north east side of Water Lane, opposite the existing Water Lane Industrial Estate. It was a greenfield site outside the defined built-up area of Storrington, although the western part of the site was within an area which had previously been subject to landfilling and comprised rough scrubland bounded by shrubs and trees. The remainder of the site had recently been used for arable production and included a group of mature trees. The site sloped in an east-west direction and the western part was within a flood plain.
The northern boundary of the site crossed both the former landfill site and an arable field. The eastern site boundary avoided a high pressure water main which ran north-south along the eastern edge of the adjoining field. A stream ran parallel to Water Lane just inside the site boundary and was culverted beneath an existing access track to the site. The area to the north and east of the site was open countryside, comprising large arable fields bounded by mature trees and hedgerows.
There were residential developments approximately 115 metres to the south and 250 metres to the south-east of the site, with some residential properties located to the north-west of Water Lane Industrial Estate. There was a public footpath approximately 60 metres to the north of the site.
The National Planning Policy Framework 2012; Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policies CP1, CP2, CP3, CP13, CP15 and CP19; and Local Development Framework General Development Control DC1, DC2, DC7, DC8, DC9, DC25 and DC40 were relevant to the determination of this application.
There was no planning history relevant to this application.
The responses from statutory internal and external consultees were considered by the Committee. The Parish Council raised no objection to the application but had expressed a number of concerns relating to the location and details of the application. Eight letters of objection and one of comment had been received. The applicant addressed the Committee in support of the proposal.
Members noted that the applicant was a long established company that employed 280 staff, including highly skilled positions, 80% of whom lived within 15 miles of the existing facility. The business needed to expand their premises and, whilst alternative options had been considered, the company’s preferred option would be to expand adjacent to their existing site, thus securing existing employment and providing up to 75 additional jobs.
2
Development Control (South) Committee 15th January 2013
DCS/99 Planning Application: DC/12/1891 (cont.)
It was noted that the proposed location of the building would be visually prominent from the public footpath to the north and could be perceived as an isolated industrial building in open countryside. For practical and financial reasons the applicant had declined to relocate the building. It was noted that building materials would be sympathetic to the surrounding area. The impact of the ridge height would be mitigated by sinking the building four metres below ground level.
Members considered that the proposal would help to resolve the on-street parking situation in Water Lane. It was also requested that the financial contribution secured through the legal agreement be ring-fenced to ensure that it was committed to improvements close to the site. Further conditions relating to flood lighting, the sighting of the compressor within the building and an amended landscape condition were considered appropriate.
Members considered the benefits that the proposal would bring to the local economy by retaining one of the largest and highly respected employers in the District, and agreed that the proposal was acceptable in principle, subject to the completion of a planning agreement to secure transport contributions.
RESOLVED
(i) That a legal agreement be entered into to secure the financial contribution of £60,402 in respect of transport, to be ring-fenced for projects to benefit the local area.
(ii) That subject to the completion of the legal agreement in (i) above, application DC/12/1891 be determined by the Head of Planning & Environmental Services. The preliminary view of the Committee was that the application should be granted.
DCS/100 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/12/1590 – CONSTRUCTION OF STABLE BARN AND RETENTION OF ACCESS TRACK AND MENAGE, MOBILE HOME AND CHANGE OF USE FROM AGRICULTURAL TO AGRICULTURAL AND EQUESTRIAN USE SITE: PULBOROUGH FARM STORRINGTON ROAD THAKEHAM APPLICANT: MISS JO JONES
The Head of Planning & Environmental Services reported that this application sought permission for the erection of a stable barn and retention of an access track and sandschool, mobile home and change of use from agricultural to agricultural and equestrian use. The stable barn would measure 25 metres by 16.5 metres with a ridge height of 4.8 metres, and provide 14 stables, rug room, tack room, toilet, trailer store, hay and feed store and young stock loose stabling.
3
Development Control (South) Committee 15th January 2013
DCS/100 Planning Application: DC/12/1590 (cont.)
The existing sandschool measured 60 metres by 25 metres. The proposal sought to plant a mix of trees as a copse around the sandschool along with hedgerow mix planting along the northern boundary of the main field and further planting along the western and eastern boundaries.
A 15 metre wide access, access track, sandschool, lunging ring, hardstanding, mobile home and 12 temporary stables have been erected on site without the benefit of planning permission.
It was proposed that the access track, measuring 215 metres, would be laid with a hardcore surface 2.5 metres wide. A new native hedgerow would be planted on the northern side of the access track. The applicant had advised that the access point, which was currently 15 metres wide, would be reduced to 6 metres, as permitted under DC/10/0220, once construction works were completed.
The unauthorised mobile home currently on site would be re-positioned further south within the site approximately two metres from the southern boundary.
The site was located to the east of Storrington Raod in a countryside location to the north of Storrington and to the south of Thakeham and comprised two fields.
The National Planning Policy Framework 2012; Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policies CP1, CP2 and CP15; and Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies DC1, DC2, DC9, DC25, DC27 and DC29 were relevant to the determination of this application.
Relevant planning history included:
DC/09/1247 Private stables and exercise school Withdrawn facilities for four horses DC/10/0220 Private stables and exercise school Granted facilities for four horses DC/11/1392 Prior notification of erection of an Prior approval agricultural farm building not required DC/11/1862 Temporary siting of a caravan for use Refused during construction works and for overnight site security. The decision had been appealed and dismissed. DC/11/1971 Erection of an agricultural farm building Withdrawn
4
Development Control (South) Committee 15th January 2013
DCS/100Planning Application: DC/12/1590 (cont.)
DC/11/1992 Erection of a stable block and hay barn to Refused replace existing approval for four stables, tack and feed room granted under DC/10/0220. Relocation and enlargement of sand school permitted under DC/10/0220 from 20 x 40 m to 25 x 60 m. New rolled stone track and hard standing area EN/3/2012 Enforcement Notice: ‘Without planning To be complied permission, the change of use of the land with by 2nd from agriculture to mixed use for the February 2013 stationing of a mobile home for residential unless planning use in the approximate position shown permission edged green on the Plan and for secured equestrian use, and the erection of a close boarded wooden boundary fence in the approximate position marked blue and shown on the photograph attached to this notice, which is an integral part of the unauthorised equestrian use’ EN/2/2012 Enforcement Notice: ‘Without planning To be complied permission, the construction of a track, with by 2nd hardstanding and sandschool in the area February 2013 marked blue on the plan’ unless planning permission secured
The responses from statutory internal and external consultees, as contained within the report, were considered by the Committee. In particular, the comments of the Arboricultural Officer and the independent report supplied by Reading Agricultural Consultants were noted.
The Parish Council objected to the application. Five letters of objection and an objection from Thakeham Village action had been received, and thirteen letters of support had been received. Two members of the public spoke in support of the application and the applicant’s agent addressed the Committee in support of the proposal. A representative of the Parish Council spoke in objection to the application.
This current application sought to address concerns with DC/11/1992 (Minute No. DCS/139 (17/01/12) refers) which had been refused because it would have represented an unacceptable form and scale of development, and constitute an undesirable element of sporadic development in this countryside location. Members considered that the current application still incorporated many of the unacceptable elements which had been identified in application DC/11/1992, including the size and siting of the barn.
5
Development Control (South) Committee 15th January 2013
DCS/100 Planning Application: DC/12/1590 (cont.)
Members also considered the appeal history of the site in relation to the temporary siting of a caravan for use during construction work (DC/11/1862) where the elements of that application had been similar to the current application. The current application had been submitted in response to the appeal decision and the applicant had to comply with two enforcement notices by 2nd February 2013 or secure planning permission.
The applicant had resided in the mobile home since December 2011 and advised of an essential need to live on site due to the horse-breeding enterprise. The proposed relocation of the mobile home to the edge of the site was still considered to constitute sporadic development and an intensification of activity in the countryside. Members noted that the business plan provided was not soundly based and failed to demonstrate that the enterprise could achieve long-term sustainability.
Members noted the proposed planting of hedgerow to replace the laurel hedge and other additional planting and considered that it would not overcome the effect of the development on the landscape character of the area.
Members considered that the proposal would constitute sporadic development in the rural area and that the cumulative impact of the size, design and siting of the barn, access track, hard standing, mobile home, sandschool and the mixed equestrian and agricultural use would represent an unacceptable form and scale of development that would have a detrimental impact on the rural character and visual amenities of this countryside location.
Members therefore considered that the proposal was unacceptable.
RESOLVED
(i) That application DC/12/1590 be refused for the following reasons:
01 The proposed barn and the retention of the sandschool, access track, hard standing, mobile home and use by reason of their size, siting and design and level of activity would represent an unacceptable form and scale of development that would have a detrimental impact on the rural character and visual amenities of this countryside location. Furthermore the proposal would constitute an undesirable element of sporadic development in the rural area. The proposal thus conflicts with policies DC1, DC2, DC9 and DC29 of the Horsham District Council Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007), policies CP1 and CP15 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2007) and the aims of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.
6
Development Control (South) Committee 15th January 2013
DCS/100 Planning Application: DC/12/1590 (cont.)
02 The proposal is unacceptable on the basis of the financial information submitted as the Local Planning Authority considers that there is insufficient agricultural justification for a temporary dwelling at this present time. The proposal therefore conflicts with Government advice in the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 and Policy DC27 of the General Development Control Document 2007.
03 It has not been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority that the hedgerow and trees along the southern boundary of the site will be protected from damage and from the information submitted the new hardcore area which would abut the southern site boundary, the base of one tree, and would completely surround another tree is unacceptable and is in conflict with BS 5837 [2012] and policy DC9 of the General Development Control Policies Framework Document (December 2007).
(ii) That enforcement action be authorised to secure the removal of the unauthorised development.
DCS/101 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/12/2024 – REPLACEMENT OF KENNEL BUILDINGS WITH A DETACHED SINGLE DWELLING AND DOUBLE GARAGE AND NEW VEHICULAR ACCESS AND REVERSION OF OTHER COMMERCIAL KENNEL BUILDINGS TO PURPOSES ANCILLARY TO THE DWELLING SITE: ST ANDREWS FARM, COOLHAM ROAD, BROOKS GREEN, HORSHAM APPLICANT: MS A SILVER
The Head of Planning & Environmental Services reported that this application sought permission to demolish seven kennel buildings and build a detached chalet bungalow and a detached double garage. The proposed dwelling would face eastwards towards the proposed parking area and single-storey double garage building. The dwelling would measure 17 metres by 13.5 metres, with a height of 6.5 metres and include four bedrooms within the roof space.
A new vehicular crossover on Coolham Road, between two large oak trees, leading to an 140 metre access driveway to the south-east of the proposed dwelling, was also proposed.
The application site was located outside the built up area and was at an elevated level above the road. It was currently accessed from Coolham Road via a narrow steep shared access with the westerly neighbouring dwellings at St Andrews Farm and St Andrews Lodge. The existing kennels site could incorporate up to 60 dogs and 40 cats.
7
Development Control (South) Committee 15th January 2013
DCS/101 Planning Application: DC/12/2024 (cont.)
The surrounding area was predominantly rural and the grassed paddock to the south had previously been used for the exercising of dogs. To the east of the site there was a single storey animal crematorium that was run separately from the kennel business. To the north of the application site there was a public right of way and to the north-west the neighbouring dwelling at Chilvers Farm.
The National Planning Policy Framework 2012; Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policies CP1, CP2, CP3, CP4, CP13 and CP15; and Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies DC1, DC2, DC6, DC9, DC24 and DC40 were relevant to the determination of this application.
Relevant planning history included:
SP/9/96 Demolition of existing kennel block and Granted erection of a boarding block for cats SP/12/89 Erection of a bungalow, garage and new Refused vehicular and pedestrian access SP/1/88 Demolition of existing outbuildings and Granted erection of 24 additional boarding kennels SP/20/83 20 quarantine kennels Granted
SP/45/73 Use of existing building for breeding & Granted boarding of cats and dogs
The responses from statutory internal and external consultees, as contained within the report, were considered by the Committee. In particular, the comments of the Arboricultural Officer were noted.
The Parish Council raised no objection to the application. Five letters of support had been received. Two members of the public spoke in support of the application and the applicant’s agent addressed the Committee in support of the proposal.
Members noted that the failure of the business had been largely caused by the change in law regarding quarantine for pets. Whilst Local Members had seen the business’ accounts and been advised that the property had been unsuccessfully marketed for two years, the applicant had not supplied detailed information in relation to the viability of the site for alternative commercial uses. Members noted that the proposal would result in the removal of an established commercial business. It was considered that any reduction in neighbouring noise disturbance and traffic levels, which had not been assessed, would not outweigh the fundamental planning policy concerns relating to the loss of a commercial business and the erection of a new dwelling in the countryside.
8
Development Control (South) Committee 15th January 2013
DCS/101 Planning Application: DC/12/2024 (cont.)
Members noted the Highway Authority’s comments regarding the current point of access, which also served two neighbouring dwellings. Whilst the proposed access point was considered more satisfactory by the Highway Authority, it was noted that the existing point of access would need to be retained, and the root protection area of the two oak trees of high amenity value adjacent to Coolham Road would be adversely affected by the proposal.
The proposal would result in the loss of a commercial employment site and the creation of a new isolated residential dwelling in the countryside and would therefore fundamentally conflict with local planning policies and National planning guidance.
Members therefore considered that the proposal was unacceptable.
RESOLVED
That application DC/12/2024 be refused for the following reasons:
REASON
01 The site is outside the limits of any existing town or village and the development, if permitted the proposed dwelling, garage building and associated access would consolidate an undesirable element of sporadic development in a rural area which would result in visual intrusion into the countryside to the detriment of the rural character of the area. Therefore the proposal is contrary to Policy DC1 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007), Policies CP1, CP5 and CP15 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: Core Strategy (2007) and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.
02 The proposed development would result in the loss of a commercial employment site within a rural location which would conflict with policy CP15 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: Core Strategy (2007) and guidance within the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 which seeks to promote economic growth in rural areas.
03 The proposed access would be likely to result in the damage to the root protection area of two Oak trees which have landscape and public amenity value and the likely loss of trees would cause significant harm to the rural character of the area.
9
Development Control (South) Committee 15th January 2013
DCS/101 Planning Application: DC/12/2024 (cont.)
The proposal would therefore conflict with policies DC1, DC6 and DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007) and Policies CP1 and CP15 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: Core Strategy (2007).
04 The proposed development makes no provision for contributions towards improvements to transport and community facilities infrastructure and is thereby contrary to Policy CP13 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: Core Strategy (2007) as it is not been demonstrated how infrastructure needs for the development would be met.
DCS/102 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/12/1629 – ERECTION OF NEW DWELLING TO REAR OF STEETON, INCLUDING NEW ACCESS DRIVEWAY AND GARAGE TO SERVE EXISTING HOUSE SITE: STEETON ROCK ROAD STORRINGTON APPLICANT: MR AND MRS L REINECK
The Head of Planning & Environmental services reported that this application sought planning permission for the erection of a new three bedroom chalet bungalow with an integral garage to the rear of the existing dwelling. The proposed dwelling would replace the existing double garage. The building would be constructed in materials similar to those of the existing dwelling of Steeton. A new access driveway from Rock Road, which ran along the north-west boundary, was also proposed.
The proposed building would be 18 metres wide and between 9.5 metres and 6.3 metres in depth, with a ridge height of 6.8 metres. It would be set back from the front of the site and the existing vegetation would screen it from the two neighbouring dwellings along the south west boundary.
The site was located within the built-up area of Storrington and Sullington and was adjacent to Hillside Walk which included predominately single storey buildings or larger chalet style bungalows. The main vehicular access from the application site led onto Hillside Walk.
The National Planning Policy Framework 2012; Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policies CP1, CP3, CP5 and CP13; and Local Development Framework General Development Control Policy DC9 were relevant to the determination of this application.
10
Development Control (South) Committee 15th January 2013
DCS/102 Planning Application: DC/12/1629 (cont.)
Relevant planning history included:
DC/07/1319 Demolition of existing dwelling and Granted outbuildings and erection of replacement dwelling and garage
The responses from statutory internal and external consultees, as contained within the report, were considered by the Committee.
The Parish Council had not commented on the application. Six letters of objection had been received. Three members of the public spoke in objection to the application and the applicant’s agent addressed the Committee in support of the proposal.
It was noted that the Highways Authority had been concerned by the new access point onto Rock Road but, following the submission of a speed survey and further detail of the visibility splays, the Highways Authority had considered the proposal to be acceptable in highway terms. It was noted that a legal agreement had not been considered for this application.
Members were concerned that the proposal could be an overdevelopment of the site and contrary to national government’s policy on ‘garden grabbing’. It was noted that the size of the existing garden was sufficient to allow the plot size to dwelling size ratio of the proposal to be in keeping with the surrounding dwellings. Members also noted that the Council’s Core Strategy permitted infill development in Category 1 areas.
Members noted that the proposed dwelling was not out of character with neighbouring properties in terms of style, but they were concerned that it was larger in scale than some of its immediate neighbours. The ridge height would rise to 6.8m, though it would appear higher in places due to varying ground levels. There was some screening by existing trees and vegetation and the property would be set back from the front of the site. Members considered that insufficient consideration had been given to the impact of the proposal on the street scene.
Members therefore agreed that the proposed new dwelling along with new access and garage would require further assessment to ensure that they were not detrimental to the street scene or neighbouring dwellings.
Members therefore agreed that the application should be deferred for one Committee cycle.
11
Development Control (South) Committee 15th January 2013
DCS/102 Planning Application: DC/12/1629 (cont.)
RESOLVED
That application DC/12/1629 be deferred to seek agreement for appropriate financial contributions, to give the Parish Council the opportunity to comment on the proposal, to receive plans showing the street scene and cross-section, and to seek a reduction in ridge height if considered necessary.
DCS/103 PLANNING APPLICATION: DC/12/2221 – DEMOLITION OF EXISTING SINGLE STOREY DWELLING AND THE ERECTION OF A 3 BEDROOM CHALET WITH DETACHED GARAGE AND GARDEN/BIKE STORE SITE: BEEHIVE BENTONS LANE DIAL POST HORSHAM APPLICANT: MR AND MRS PETER SCROGGS
The Head of Planning & Environmental Services reported that this application sought permission for the replacement of the existing two bedroom dwelling with a new three bedroom dwelling and double garage.
The site was located off London Road in a private road, which led to dwellings of varying size and design, and included a single storey dwelling consisting of two bedrooms, and a number of outbuildings and carport. The dwelling was located within a large plot formed of residential curtilage and further land to the rear of the application site, which was owned by the applicant. Dial Post was located outside any defined built up area boundary.
The National Planning Policy Framework 2012; Local Development Framework Core Strategy Policies CP1 and CP3; and Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies DC9 and DC28 were relevant to the determination of this application.
Relevant planning history included:
DC/05/2732 Replacement dwelling Granted
DC/12/1332 Replacement dwelling and double garage Withdrawn
The Parish Council raised no objection the application. One letter of objection had been received, and a petition in support of the proposal including 46 signatories had been received. One member of the public spoke in objection to the application and one member of the public spoke in support. The applicant’s agent addressed the Committee in support of the proposal. A representative of the Parish Council spoke in support of the application.
Members noted that, under current policy, replacement dwellings outside the built up area should not be disproportionate to the size of the existing dwelling.
12
Development Control (South) Committee 15th January 2013
DCS/103 Planning Application: DC/12/2221 (cont.)
The applicant had submitted amended plans which reduced the size of the porch, ridge height and depth of the proposed dwelling. The existing dwelling measured 10.3 metres in width with a varying depth of between 7.3 metres and 8 metres. The proposed replacement dwelling was 15.6 metres in width with a varying depth between 8.3 metres and 14.3 metres. Members noted that the scale and mass of the amended proposal was significantly greater than the existing dwelling. It was also noted that the ridge height was increased from 5.2 metres to 6.8 metres
Members noted that there were several substantial dwellings in Bentons Lane of similar character to the proposed dwelling and that it would not have an adverse impact on the street scene. Members considered that the repositioning of the building should be investigated in order to further reduce the impact of the building on neighbouring dwellings.
The proposed garage would replace dilapidated outbuildings on the north-west boundary and it was considered this would have a minimal impact on the neighbouring dwellings.
Members considered that, whilst the proposal would not reflect the scale and character of the existing dwelling, it would be more in keeping with the street scene and improve the appearance of the site and was therefore acceptable in principle.
RESOLVED
That application DC/12/2221 be determined by the Head of Planning & Environmental Services, in consultation with the Chairman of the Committee and Councillors Jim Sanson, Brian O’Connell, and the two Local Members, to ascertain whether the proposal is contrary to policy and to seek possible amendments to the scheme in terms of its scale. The preliminary view of the Committee was that the application should be granted.
The meeting closed at 4.18pm having commenced at 2.00pm.
CHAIRMAN
13
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL (SOUTH) COMMITTEE 19TH FEBRUARY 2013 REPORT BY THE HEAD OF PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
APPEALS
1. Appeals Lodged
I have received notice from the Department of Communities and Local Government that the following appeals have been lodged:-
2. Written Representations/Householder Appeals Service
DC/12/1431 Erection of one detached four-bedroom house with attached double garage. Old Oaks, Spinney Lane, West Chiltington, Pulborough, RH20 2NX. For: Mr Patrick Shaw
DC/12/0791 Erection of 5 dwellings (3 x 2 bed chalet bungalows and 2 x 3 bed bungalows), garages and access to land at rear of Rose Cottage, Springfield and Windrush with retention of Heatherdene modified to facilitate internal access road realignment (Revised application further to permission granted under DC/06/0633). Heatherdene, Shoreham Road, Small Dole, Henfield, BN5 9YG. For: Mr and Mrs S Bailey
3. Appeal Decisions
I have received notice from the Department of Communities and Local Government that the following appeals have been determined:-
DC/12/0527 Retrospective permission for allotment shed. Plots 5 and 6, Bramblefield, Crays Lane, Thakeham, West Sussex For: Mr and Mrs Barry Knight Appeal: DISMISSED (Delegated)
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 1
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT
TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services DATE: 19th February 2013 Erection of 15 dwellings comprising 6 x 3-bed, 3 x 2-bed, 5 x 2-bed flats DEVELOPMENT: (social), I x 1-bed flat (social) and improvement of existing access (Outline Planning) SITE: Penn Retreat Rectory Lane Ashington West Sussex WARD: Chanctonbury APPLICATION: DC/12/1975 APPLICANT: Messrs John and Joseph Smith
REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Major Application
RECOMMENDATION: To grant planning permission subject to completion of a S106 legal agreement securing contributions towards community facilities and transport infrastructure and to define the occupancy requirements for the proposed affordable housing.
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
To consider the planning application.
DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION
1.1 The application seeks outline consent for the erection of 15 dwellings comprising 6 x 3-bed, 3 x 2-bed, 5 x 2-bed flats (social), 1 x 1-bed flat (social) and improvement of existing access. The 6 x 3 bed dwellings are in three blocks of semi detached houses. The 3 x 2 bed dwellings are in a row of three terrace dwellings and the 5 x 2 bed and 1 x 1 bed social flats are in one block.
1.2 Each house has two car parking spaces and the flats have a car parking space each with two additional disabled bays. The gardens to the houses measure 10.2 – 10.4m in depth by 5 – 10m in width. An area of communal grounds laid to lawn would be provided for the flats.
1.3 An area for cycles and for refuse and recycling bins has been provided for the flats. Pedestrian access has also been provided by the introduction of two lych gates onto Rectory Lane and Penn Gardens. Vehicular access would be achieved from Rectory Lane where an existing access is provided. The agent has requested that the access and layout be considered and that the scale, appearance and landscaping be considered at the reserved matters stage.
Contact Officer: Kathryn Sadler Tel: 01403 215175 APPENDIX A/ 1 - 2
DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
1.4 The site is situated outside the built up area of Ashington approximately 140 metres from the built up area boundary. However, the site is directly north of an existing housing development of 24 houses known as Penn Gardens.
1.5 The site is located to the west of Ashington and is accessed via Rectory Lane. The site has been used as a gypsy site in the past with the latest temporary consent for three gypsy pitches expiring in 2012. At present the site is vacant albeit with one burnt out caravan and one derelict caravan on site. The northern boundary of the site consists of hedging with a couple of mature oak trees, the eastern boundary borders the vehicular access to Penn Gardens and consists of a hedge. The southern boundary consists of a brick wall which defines the rear gardens of Penn Gardens and the western boundary consists of vegetation and a stream.
1.6 There is a pumping station near the entrance of the site which is via Rectory Lane. There is also a small outbuilding to the south west corner of the site. Four terrace houses in Penn Gardens back onto the site and one dwelling sides onto the application site. These dwellings are at a higher level due to the slope in the land.
2. INTRODUCTION
STATUTORY BACKGROUND
2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY
2.2 The National Planning Policy Framework 2012
RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY
2.3 The following policies of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (adopted February 2007) are relevant in the assessment of this application: CP1 – Landscape and Townscape Character, CP3 – Improving the quality of new development, CP5 – Built Up Areas and Previously Developed Land, CP12 – Meeting Housing Needs & CP15 – Rural Strategy.
2.4 The following policies of the Local Development Framework, General Development Control Polices Document (December 2007) are relevant in the assessment of this application: DC1 – Countryside Protection & Enhancement, DC2 – Landscape Character, DC9 – Development Principles, DC18 – Smaller Homes/Housing Mix, DC30 – Exception Housing Schemes, DC32 – Gypsies & Travellers & DC40 - Transport & Access.
2.5 The following policies of the South East Plan are relevant in the assessment of this application: CC1: Sustainable Development, CC6: Sustainable Communities & Character of the Environment, CO5: Transport & IW3: Rural Areas.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.6 AS/27/01 Retention of Mobile Home, Permitted 24/10/2001
DC/04/1989 Siting of mobile home (renewal of AS/27/01), Permitted 4/11/2004
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 3
DC/05/2640 Erection of 3 dwellings (outline), Withdrawn 9/12/2005
DC/06/0295 Replacement mobile home and erection of 2 mobile homes, Permitted 18/10/2006
DC/10/1288 Proposed stationing of 6 traveller / gypsy pitches and outbuildings and storage area. New access and hardstanding, Pending.
There is no other relevant planning history for the site.
3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS
INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS
3.1 Strategic & Community Planning has commented that “This application should be considered against policies in the Local Development Framework, in particular the Core Strategy (2007), and the General Development Control Policies (2007) DPD . The application needs to be considered against national policy; the National Planning Policy Framework, March 2012.
The application site lies in the countryside, outside of the built up area boundary of Ashington as defined on the Proposals Map (2007). This proposal for housing therefore would normally be contrary to Policy CP1 of the Core Strategy, which requires the landscape character of the District, including the settlement pattern to be maintained and enhanced, and Policy DC1 of the General Development Control Policies, which goes onto restrict development in the countryside to that which can be justified as being essential to the needs of agriculture, forestry, the extraction of minerals, disposal of waste or quiet informal recreational use, in order to ensure its protection and enhancement.
The Council’s policies do allow for ‘exceptions housing schemes’ (see Policy DC30) to be considered on small greenfield sites well related to the existing built up areas adjacent to rural villages; however, the proposal would need to be for 100% affordable housing, which is not the case here.
The fact that the site does not adjoin the built- up area boundary of Ashington also means that the proposal would not meet criterion 2 of the Facilitating Appropriate Development SPD. The FAD SPD offers guidance on dealing with planning applications on greenfield sites which adjoin defined settlement boundaries in circumstances where the Council is not meeting its 5 year housing land supply. For your information, the Council currently can not demonstrate a five year housing land supply in accordance with the most up- to- date Development Plan in terms of setting housing targets, the South East Plan.
It is noted in this regard that as the Council does not have a 5-year supply against the South East Plan, paragraph 49 of National Planning Policy Framework is relevant. It states: “Housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites.” The Ministerial Forward to the NPPF states that the purpose of planning is to help achieve sustainable development; with development meaning growth’. The ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’ theme runs throughout the NPPF document and is specifically highlighted in paragraph 14. This paragraph sets out what this means for decision-taking when the policy for housing supply is out-of-date; the position the Council is currently in with regard to five year housing land supply. It states:
‘For decision takers this means…granting permission unless: - any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably APPENDIX A/ 1 - 4
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.’
The later point relates to European and national designations, such as, National Park and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The former point is for you as the case officer to consider when balancing all the issues. In this regard you should assess the sustainability of the location in terms of proximity to the settlement and services it provides. If you were minded to consider recommending the grant of planning permission, Policy CP12, Meeting Housing Needs, of the Core Strategy sets a target of 40% affordable housing. I note that this application meets that target and would recommend that you seek further advice from the Housing Development & Strategy Manager.
I also note that Ashington Parish Council with Action in Rural Sussex have produced an up-to-date housing needs survey, which identifies a need for both affordable and open market housing in the village; and that the Parish Council is supporting this proposal. With this in mind, the approach to developing this site could be said to accord with the spirit of ‘localism’ and the principles behind ‘neighbourhood planning’; though again I would point out that this would not comply with the Council’s current adopted policies.
I am sure as case officer you will be addressing the other issues, such as impact on neighbours and design and layout (see Policy DC9) and renewable energy and climate change (Policy DC8). I would be happy to comment further on these issues should you wish.
Conclusion
This proposal for 15 dwellings in the countryside is contrary to the Council’s current adopted planning policy. However, I note the support of the local community through the Parish Council to the proposal and that the proposal would make some contribution, if limited, to the five year housing land supply, as well as meeting some of the housing needs of Ashington as identified in the recent needs survey.”
3.2 The Housing Development & Strategy Manager has commented that “Housing officers note the comments made by the Principal Planning Officer in Strategic Planning. Policy CP12 of the Core Strategy (Meeting Housing Needs) sets a target of 40% affordable housing. This application meets that target, as the development will consist of 15 dwellings comprising 6 x 3 bed houses, 3 x 2 bed houses for market sale, and 5 x 2 bed flats and 1 x 1 bed flat for social/affordable rent.
The Council’s Planning Obligations Supplementary Planning Document states that affordable housing should reflect, pro rata, the mix brought forward for market housing and that the affordable housing element should be integrated into the overall development, appear tenure neutral and be indistinguishable from the market housing. Although the affordable provision is in the form of flats and does not reflect the overall mix of the development, the Housing Options Team reports that a considerable majority of households on the Housing Register are in need of 1 and 2 bed homes. In the light of established need, officers support the inclusion of smaller affordable units on this development.
In addition, Action in Rural Sussex in partnership with Ashington Parish Council and Horsham District Council, carried out housing needs survey in July 2012, which identifies a need for both affordable and open market housing in the village.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 5
Single person households 30 Couple without children 15 Family with 1 child 3 Family with 2 children 5 Family with 3 children 4 Family with unspecified number of children 1
Total 58
It can be seen from the results table above from the Ashington Housing Needs Survey July 2012 that the majority of those in housing need locally require smaller units.
The Parish Council supports the proposed scheme ‘on the understanding that the ‘social’ housing element is such that it meets the village needs as identified in the Ashington Housing Needs Survey 2012)’.
Housing Officers would like to know whether the applicant has entered into discussion with an affordable housing provider. Housing Officers would urge the applicant to reach an agreement with a provider as soon as possible, in order to secure funding arrangements for the affordable homes and ensure the layout and specifications of the affordable units meet the provider’s requirements.”
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
3.3 Southern Water has commented that “Following initial investigation, there is currently adequate capacity in the local sewerage network to accommodate a foul flow of 0.7 l/s at manhole reference 3402. Please note that no surface water flows (existing or proposed) can be accommodated within the existing foul sewerage system.”
3.4 West Sussex Highway Authority has commented that “The scheme does propose 15 units along with a new vehicular access onto Rectory Lane. As such, it is current WSCC Policy to request that a Stage One Safety Audit and Designers Response is provided in support of the proposal. These documents must be signed and dated by the respective authors. Given that this information is missing, a holding objection would be raised pending the receipt of these documents.
Notwithstanding the above and whilst it is accepted that this scheme may be subject to alteration following the Safety Audit, the following comments would be offered. The scheme does include a new vehicular access onto Rectory Lane, the access does appear to be designed to meet current standards with kerb radii of 6metres provided and visibility splays of 2.4 by 215metres indicated. The principle of the access does therefore appear acceptable. Even so a more preferable arrangement would have been to form an access from Penn Gardens itself, which would then minimise the number of accesses onto Rectory Lane. It is noted that the Design and Access Statement is making reference to access from Penn Gardens, although this appears to be a ‘cut and paste’ error and appears to refer to the 2010 planning application submitted for this site. Providing the Safety Audit raises no significant concerns with the proposed arrangement however, this alternate arrangement could not be insisted upon.
The proposal does also include a short length of footway along Rectory Lane along with a pedestrian access from Penn Gardens. This combination is likely to satisfy all pedestrian desire lines. The application form indicates that the internal road will be offered for adoption. In principle, the layout would be acceptable subject to detailed design. Parking provision is stated as meeting the requirements of the WSCC Parking Demand Calculator, although the outputs from this are not provided. From checking and based on the proposed APPENDIX A/ 1 - 6
mix and tenure of the dwellings, the car parking provision is anticipated to satisfy the likely demands.
In principle, no significant concerns would be raised with this proposal. However prior to the Highway Authority making a formal recommendation, a Stage One Road Safety Audit and Designers Response is required. For that reason, a holding objection would be raised.”
3.5 West Sussex Highway Authority (additional comments to the submitted Safety Audit) has commented “A Stage One Road Safety Audit has now been completed in accordance with adopted WSCC policy. The Audit raises a number of points, the majority of which relate to the detailed design and as such can be addressed at a later stage. There are a couple of points pertinent at this stage, but these can be secured via condition (notably the footway provision along the Rectory Lane frontage and the need to incorporate access to the pumping station). The Audit is otherwise acceptable and I'd confirm that no highway objection would be raised to this proposal. The Applicant should be obtain the necessary consents from the Highway Authority prior to undertaking any works within the public highway. If the Planning Authority is minded to approve this application, there are a number of conditions that I would recommend be attached.”
Summary of Contributions Required by WSCC
Fire & Rescue £1,188 No. of Hydrants TBC Libraries £9,123 Waste No contribution required Education - Secondary £27,882 Education - 6th Form £6,531 S106 type Monies Due Education - Primary No contribution required. TAD £24,515
Total Contribution £69,239
3.6 Sussex Police have offered guidance on crime prevention measures associated with new developments.
PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS
3.7 Ashington Parish Council support the application on the basis that the ‘social’ housing element is such that it meets the village needs as identified in the Ashington Housing Needs Survey 2012.
3.8 1 letter of objection on the grounds of:
Residents were given the option by the applicant of either a traveller site or a housing site, neither was not an option; Its an ideal site for a children’s playground; The site is outside the built up area of Ashington.
3.9 Any comments in respect of the amended plans will be reported verbally at the committee meeting. No other representations have been received to public notification on the application at the time of writing this report.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 7
4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS
4.1 Article 8 (Right to respect of a Private and Family Life) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (Protection of Property) of the Human Rights Act 1998 are relevant to this application, Consideration of Human rights forms part of the planning assessment below.
5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER
5.1 It is not considered that the development would be likely to have any significant impact on crime and disorder.
6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS
6.1 The main issues in determination of this application are considered to be the principle of the development, the effect of the development on the amenity of nearby occupiers and the visual amenities and character of the area.
6.2 The application site lies in the countryside, outside of the built up area boundary of Ashington as defined on the Proposals Map (2007). This proposal for housing therefore would normally be contrary to Policy CP1 of the Core Strategy, which requires the landscape character of the District, including the settlement pattern to be maintained and enhanced, and Policy DC1 of the General Development Control Policies, which goes onto restrict development in the countryside to that which can be justified as being essential to the needs of agriculture, forestry, the extraction of minerals, disposal of waste or quiet informal recreational use, in order to ensure its protection and enhancement.
6.3 The Head of Strategic & Community Planning has advised at Para 3.2 that ‘exceptions housing schemes’ under Policy DC30 to be considered on small greenfield sites well related to the existing built up areas adjacent to rural villages. The Council currently can not demonstrate a five year housing land supply in accordance with the most up- to- date Development Plan in terms of setting housing targets, the South East Plan. It is noted in this regard that as the Council does not have a 5-year supply against the South East Plan, paragraph 49 of National Planning Policy Framework is relevant. It states:
“Housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the local planning authority cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites.” The Ministerial Forward to the NPPF states that the purpose of planning is to help achieve sustainable development; with development meaning ‘growth’. The ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’ theme runs throughout the NPPF document and is specifically highlighted in paragraph 14. This paragraph sets out what this means for decision-taking when the policy for housing supply is out-of-date; the position the Council is currently in with regard to five year housing land supply. It states:
‘For decision takers this means…granting permission unless: - 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.’
The later point relates to European and national designations, such as, National Park and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The former point is in relation to the sustainability of the location in terms of proximity to the settlement and services it provides. APPENDIX A/ 1 - 8
6.4 Policy CP12, Meeting Housing Needs, of the Core Strategy sets a target of 40% affordable housing. This application does meet that target. Policy DC30 also states that “In exceptional circumstances limited amounts of land may be released, in addition to the provision of Core Strategy Policy CP4, the development of homes solely for affordable housing on land which would not otherwise be released for general market housing.”
6.5 The Housing Development & Strategy Manager has also advised that Ashington Parish Council with Action in Rural Sussex have produced an up-to-date housing needs survey (July 2012), which identifies a need for both affordable and open market housing in the village. This survey identifies a need for both affordable and open market housing in the village.
Single person households = 30 Couple without children = 15 Family with 1 child = 3 Family with 2 children = 5 Family with 3 children = 4 Family with unspecified number of children = 1
Total = 58
Although the affordable provision is in the form of flats and does not reflect the overall mix of the development, the Housing Options Team reports that a considerable majority of households on the Housing Register are in need of 1 and 2 bed homes. In the light of established need, officers support the inclusion of smaller affordable units on this development.
It can be seen from the results table above that the majority of those in housing need locally require smaller units. The Parish Council supports the proposed scheme ‘on the understanding that the ‘social’ housing element is such that it meets the village needs as identified in the Ashington Housing Needs Survey 2012). Therefore, the approach to developing this site could be said to accord with the spirit of ‘localism’ and the principles behind ‘neighbourhood planning’ although does go against countryside policy.
6.6 This is an outline application where only layout and access is being considered. With regard to access, WSCC Highway Authority has stated that the Stage One Road Safety Audit has now been completed in accordance with adopted WSCC policy and it is considered acceptable and therefore no highway objection would be raised to this proposal. The vehicular access to the site would be via the existing point of entry off Rectory Lane with pedestrian access via Rectory Lane and Penn Gardens.
6.7 With regard to layout, the proposal consists of five blocks of dwellings. Three blocks consist of six semi detached dwellings, one block is a row of three terrace dwellings and the fifth block consists of six flats. The dwellings have rear gardens of 9.2 – 10.4m in depth by 5m – 12m in width which are considered acceptable for the size of the dwellings. A 1m wide gap is retained between the blocks of dwellings in order to give pedestrian access to the rear gardens. A distance of 8 – 9 m is retained between the flats and the dwelling to the east, 7.3 – 9.4m is retained between the flats and the southern rear boundary and 4 – 5m is also retained between the flats and the western side boundary of the site for soft landscaping. The existing landscaping to the northern, eastern and western boundaries is proposed to be retained as part of the development which will soften the development’s impact from surrounding viewpoints.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 9
6.8 In terms of the effect of the development on the residential amenity of neighbouring occupiers, a distance of 21m is to be retained between first floor windows of the proposed dwellings and those in Penn Gardens. The Council’s Guidance Note states that 21m should be retained between rear elevations with first floor windows with which this proposal accords. 20m is retained between the side elevation of no. 20 Penn Gardens and the block of flats, this distance is considered to be acceptable and would not have an adverse impact on the existing residents.
6.9 Not withstanding the separation distances, it is considered that there should be a substantial tree screen along the southern boundary of the site between the existing dwellings in Penn Gardens and the application site in order to screen the proposal. The plans do show soft landscaping along the southern boundary of the site which can be secured by condition.
6.10 It is acknowledged that application DC/10/1288 for 6 gypsy pitches is still pending consideration. However, the applicant has requested that this application be held in abeyance until this current housing application is determined. It is acknowledged that this is a countryside location, however the site does not currently enhance the character of the area given the extent of hard surfacing and the derelict and burnt out caravans currently on site. The re-development of this site is likely to improve the character of the area and is considered to relate well to the existing Penn Gardens housing development which consists of 24 dwellings.
6.11 This proposal for 15 dwellings in the countryside is contrary to the Council’s current adopted planning policy. However, the application does have support from the local community through the Parish Council and the proposal would make some contribution, to the five year housing land supply, as well as meeting some of the housing needs of Ashington as identified in the recent needs survey. Therefore, given the history of the site and the community support for this application, on balance it is considered that the application is acceptable as it would meet the needs of the local community and enhance the character of the site.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 It is recommended that the application is approved subject to the completion of a legal agreement to secure financial contributions towards community facilities and transport infrastructure and to define the occupancy requirements for the proposed affordable housing plus the following conditions:
1) A2 Full Permission 2) M1 Approval Of Materials 3) E3 Fencing 4) J10 Removal of permitted development – dwellings 5) L1 Hard and Soft Landscaping 6) G6 Recycling 7) O1 Hours of Working 8) H10 Cycling Provision 9) S4 Surface Water Details (Option A) 10) Deliveries, loading and unloading shall be restricted to 0800 hours and 1800 hours Mondays to Fridays inclusive, 0800 hours and 1300 hours on Saturdays and no deliveries, loading or unloading shall be undertaken on Sundays or public holidays. Reason – V2 reason 11) O2 Burning of Materials
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 10
12) No development shall take place until an initial design stage assessment by an accredited assessor for the Code for Sustainable Homes and an accompanying interim certificate stating that each dwelling has been designed to achieve Level 3 of the Code has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the local planning authority. No dwelling shall be occupied until it has been issued with a final Code certificate of compliance." Reason – To ensure the construction of a sustainable form of development and to take into account the impact of climate change in accordance with policy DC8 of the Horsham District LDF: General Development Control Policies. 13) D6 Finished Floor Levels 14) S2 Restriction on occupation (Sewage Disposal) 15) No development shall commence until the vehicular access serving the development has been constructed in accordance with plans and details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall include provision to accommodate vehicular access to the existing pumping station. Reason: In the interests of road safety.
16) No part of the development shall be first occupied until the car parking spaces have been constructed in accordance with plans and details submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These spaces shall thereafter be retained at all times for their designated use. Reason: To provide car-parking space for the use.
17) No part of the development shall be first occupied until the road(s), footways, and casual parking areas serving the development have been constructed, surfaced and drained in accordance with plans and details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To secure satisfactory standards of access for the proposed development.
18) No development shall take place, including any works of demolition, until a Construction Management Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the approved Plan shall be implemented and adhered to throughout the entire construction period. The Plan shall provide details as appropriate but not necessarily be restricted to the following matters:
the anticipated number, frequency and types of vehicles used during construction, the method of access and routing of vehicles during construction, the parking of vehicles by site operatives and visitors, the loading and unloading of plant, materials and waste, the storage of plant and materials used in construction of the development, the erection and maintenance of security hoarding, the provision of wheel washing facilities and other works required to mitigate the impact of construction upon the public highway (including the provision of temporary Traffic Regulation Orders), measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during demolition and construction, lighting for construction and security, details of public engagement both prior to and during construction works.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety and the amenities of the area.
APPENDIX A/ 1 - 11
19) No part of the development shall be first occupied until a new length of footway has been provided along the development frontage onto Rectory Lane and pedestrian dropped crossing points have been provided on Penn Gardens to serve the proposed development in accordance with plans and details submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason - In the interests of highway safety and to accommodate the movements of pedestrians.
20) H6 Wheel Washing
Note to Applicant
Section 278 Agreement of the 1980 Highways Act - Works within the Highway - The applicant is advised to enter into a legal agreement with West Sussex County Council, as Highway Authority, to cover the off-site highway works. The applicant is requested to contact The Implementation Team Leader (01243 642105) to commence this process. The applicant is advised that it is an offence to undertake any works within the highway prior to the agreement being in place.
8. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
ICTN1 The proposal would not be obtrusive in the landscape or harmful to the visual quality of the area.
Background Papers: DC/12/1975
Contact Officer: Kathryn Sadler
APPENDIX A/ 2 - 1
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT
TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services DATE: 19th February 2013 DEVELOPMENT: Change of use from bed and breakfast hotel to private residence SITE: Nash Manor Horsham Road Steyning West Sussex WARD: Steyning APPLICATION: DC/12/1857 APPLICANT: Mrs M Esler
REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Request from Councillor Cockman & Councillor Rogers.
RECOMMENDATION: To REFUSE planning permission.
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
To consider the planning application.
DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION
1.1 This application seeks planning permission to change the use of part of the building from Bed and Breakfast (Class C1) use to a single residential dwelling (Class C3). There are no internal of external changes proposed to the building and vehicular access will continue to be obtained from the existing access to the north-west of the building.
DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
1.2 The application site is located outside the built up area and comprises a large detached two storey building with accommodation within the roof space. The proposed change of use relates to the B&B accommodation on the ground floor which incorporates a sitting room, kitchen, office, utility room and dining room and six bedrooms at the first floor level. The submitted plans show that there are two one bedroom private residences located at the northerly and southerly ends of the building.
1.3 To the west of the building there is a hard standing area and there is a customer car park located to the north-west of the building. Beyond the hard standing to the west there is an extensive grassed garden area which then continues round the southerly side and easterly rear section of the building.
Contact Officer: Rebecca Tier Tel: 01403 215382 APPENDIX A/ 2- 2
1.4 Nash Manor is accessed from Horsham Road to the west via a track which provides access to a number of residential dwellings. The site is surrounded by other residential properties to the north, east and south. To the west there is a small group of single storey dwellings situated to the east of the site and the larger dwellings comprising Nash Farm and Nash Grange are located to the north-east and south-east of the application site.
2. INTRODUCTION
STATUTORY BACKGROUND
2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY
2.2 The National Planning Policy Framework 2012 - Section 1 (Building a strong, competitive economy) and Section 3 (Supporting a prosperous rural economy) are considered to be the relevant National planning policy guidance relating to this proposal.
RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY
2.3 Horsham District Local Development Framework: Core Strategy 2007 – Policies CP1, CP2, CP3, CP14, CP15 & CP18.
2.4 Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies 2007 – Policies DC1, DC9, DC39.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.5 ST/40/01 – Planning permission was granted in 2001 for the removal of condition 1 from ST/55/83 which related to restricting the permission to a named occupier.
ST/6/91 – Planning permission was granted in 1991 for change of use from hotel to rest home.
ST/55/83 – Planning permission was granted in 1983 for the renewal of temporary permission ST/24/80.
ST/12/83 – Planning permission was granted in 1983 for a change of use from guest house and holiday flats to residential home for the retired.
ST/34/80 – Planning permission was granted in 1980 for the renewal of ST/66/78.
ST/61/81 – Planning permission was granted in 1981 for a guest house and/or holiday flats for maximum of 16 persons including family and staff.
ST/66/78 – Planning permission was granted in 1978 for change of use of first floor four rooms for guest house to self catering holiday units.
APPENDIX A/ 2- 3
3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS
INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS
3.1 The Council’s Strategic Planning department have provided the following concluding comments in relation to this application.
“Additional information as outlined above is required regarding the viability of the existing use. As the proposal currently stands, it is considered that due to the lack of relevant information and evidence provided regarding the viability of the existing B&B, a strategic policy objection is raised in principle to the change of use of this tourist facility as it does not comply with the objectives of CP14 of the Core Strategy (2007). However, this policy allows for some circumstances where the loss of tourist facilities would be acceptable, therefore, should the applicant provide additional information which clearly demonstrates that the B&B is no longer feasible; or should there be evidence of an alternative comparable facility within the vicinity of this property then there may be scope to allow the change of use of this building from the current use as a B&B to a residential dwelling. Should further evidence become available prior to consideration of the application I would be happy to comment further.
In conclusion then it is noted that the applicant currently resides at the property and the proposal is to allow the property to revert back to its original use as a dwelling to be occupied solely by the applicant. As such, it is acknowledged that this proposal would not allow a new residential property in the countryside; nonetheless, given the proposed loss of the B&B facility, particularly near to the SDNP, it is considered that the overall aims and objectives of policies CP14, CP18 & DC39 of ensuring the protection of tourist facilities, have not been met. Therefore, on balance, without the required evidence, a strategic planning objection would be is raised to this proposal.”
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
3.2 West Sussex County Council Highways department have raised no highways concerns with this application providing the proposed car parking provision does not exceed the WSCC Maximum Standards. The Highways Authority have also confirmed that the proposal is unlikely to result in any material increase or any detrimental impact over and above what is currently permitted.
3.3 Steyning Parish Council have raised no objection to this application and have advised that the Parish Committee supports the proposed change of use.
PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS
3.4 No letters of public representation have been received in relation to this application.
4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS
4.1 Article 8 (right to respect of a private and family life) and Article 1 of The First Protocol (protection of property) of the Human Rights Act 1998 are relevant to the application. Consideration of human rights is an integral part of the planning assessment set out below.
5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER
5.1 It is not considered that the proposal would have a material impact on crime and disorder.
APPENDIX A/ 2- 4
6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS
6.1 The application seeks planning permission to change the use of part of the building known as Nash Manor from a Bed & Breakfast (Class C1) to a residential dwelling (Class C3).
6.2 The proposed change of use relates to the six bedrooms on the first floor of the building and the sitting room, kitchen, office, utility room and dining room at the ground floor level of the building. On checking the planning history of the site, it would seem that the building previously formed a residential dwelling and parts of the ground and first floor of the building received planning permission during the eighties to be used as holiday let units and B&B use.
6.3 Since 2001, the ground floor and first floor sections of the building subject to this application have been used as accommodation in conjunction with weekend workshops that have been provided with breakfast and these workshops ceased at the end of October 2012. The information submitted with this application confirms that this part of the building has been used as bed and breakfast accommodation since November 2012 and has mostly been occupied by people working in the local area and family members visiting local residents nearby. From evidence submitted with the application and gained during the Officers site visit, the Council is therefore of the view that the established lawful use of this section of the building is Class C1 Bed and Breakfast. However, the supporting information submitted indicates that Nash Manor has not been used as a tourism facility and that the premises could not operate as a feasible tourism facility due to its isolated rural location. The very nature of the Class C1 B&B use is however associated with tourism and therefore in accordance with local planning policies, it would need to be demonstrated through marketing exercises that this main section of the building could no longer be used as a viable tourism facility.
6.4 The Horsham District Tourism Strategy states that there appears to be a shortage of B&B facilities within the District and that high-quality self catering and B&B facilities are likely to sustain local services. When read in conjunction with tourism policy DC39 of the General Development Control Policies, policy CP14 of the Core Strategy states that proposals that would result in the loss of sites and premises for the provision of community facilities, leisure or cultural activities will be resisted. When considering the loss of such facilities, CP14 requires as a minimum that the applicant demonstrate that continued use of the service is no longer feasible having regard to appropriate marketing for a period of 12 to 18 months, the demand for the use of the premises, it usability and the identification of a potential future occupier.
6.5 Some additional marketing information and details of accounts have recently been submitted to support the case that the B&B is no longer a viable tourism facility. The details submitted show that the building has been on the market with one estate agent since March 2012, yet the marketing details of the property appear to advertise the building as a ‘Private Retreat and Family House’ instead of a B&B or tourism facility. The estate agent has however confirmed in writing that they have not been able to find a purchaser for the premises as a B&B/guest house or hotel as the potential buyers have not considered the size or location of the building to be commercially viable or the proximity to neighbouring properties and the shared access to be acceptable. This information does not however accord with the estate agent’s marketing details of the property submitted for the premises. A further estate agent marketed Nash Manor for a period of three months from June 2012 to August 2012 and did not find a purchaser for the premises, yet it is not clear how the property was marketed in this instance as details have not been provided, the estate agents have however confirmed in writing that purchasers were looking at the premises as a potential care home and B&B facility. On examination of this information, it is considered that the property has not been adequately marketed as a B&B or C1 related use for any APPENDIX A/ 2- 5
length of time. It is therefore considered that it has not been adequately demonstrated that the premises could not be used as a tourism facility by a future occupier and therefore this proposed change of use resulting in the loss of a B&B facility would conflict with policy CP14 of the Core Strategy.
6.6 When assessing the usage of the site, it has been confirmed by the applicant that during the period of January 2010 to October 2012, the workshops have generated 36 participants on a monthly basis (this however excludes the months of December to February). Since the end of October to 16th November 2012 a total of 6 people have stayed at the B&B for stays which varied from 1 night to 11 nights in total. These figures show that guests have regularly stayed at the B&B and when taking into consideration the lack of marketing that has been undertaken in relation to the premises as a B&B or C1 related use, it is considered that there could be potential for the continued commercial use of the premises as a tourism facility.
6.7 Within accompanying information submitted with the application, the applicant and agent state that the B&B is not viable as a tourism business based on the rural location of the premises. The site is however located approximately 1.5km from the centre of the village of Steyning, therefore, the people who visit the B&B could readily access pubs, restaurants and shops in the village. It is however noted that visitors are mainly restricted to using a vehicle as there are no safe pedestrian links to Steyning village. The sites proximity to the South Downs National Park is also considered to be relevant, as visitors may come to enjoy the rural character of this area, and as such the B&B facility could provide an important tourist facility within the National Park.
6.8 Within the accompanying Planning Statement, a number of hotels and B&Bs are listed many of which provide tourist accommodation within nearby village centres. However, given the inadequate extent of the marketing exercise that has appeared to have taken place for the B&B use and that a lack of information has been submitted in relation to the demand for the use of this B&B in accordance with policy CP18, it is considered that the listing of other tourism accommodation in the local area would not justify the loss of this B&B facility on its own.
6.9 The applicant currently resides in the B&B part of the building in order to oversee the B&B business and would like to continue to stay in the dwelling when she retires from the business. Whilst this could not form part of the consideration of this planning application, it is however noted that there are other areas of the building particularly the residential units at the northerly and southerly ends which appear from the information submitted with this application to fall within the same ownership as the B&B and these could be potential areas in which the applicant could reside within.
6.10 In conclusion, it is considered that this proposed change of use would conflict with planning policies CP14 and DC39 and Officers therefore feel unable to support the loss of this B&B facility on the basis of the information submitted with this application.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 It is recommended that permission be REFUSED subject to the following reason:
The proposed change of use would result in the loss of a premises currently used as a tourism facility and it has not been demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority that its continued use as a Bed & Breakfast facility or service is no longer feasible having regard to appropriate marketing, the demand for the use of the site, its usability and the identification of a potential future occupier. The proposed change of use would therefore conflict with policies CP14 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework APPENDIX A/ 2- 6
Core Strategy 2007 and Policy DC39 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies 2007.
Background Papers: DC/12/1857 Contact Officer: Rebecca Tier APPENDIX A/ 3 - 1
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT
TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services DATE: 19 February 2013 Erection of new dwelling to rear of Steeton, including new access DEVELOPMENT: driveway and garage to serve existing house SITE: Steeton Rock Road Storrington Pulborough WARD: Chanctonbury APPLICATION: DC/12/1629 APPLICANT: Mr and Mrs L Reineck
REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Application was deferred at the January meeting to seek a reduction in ridge height and plan to show street scene.
RECOMMENDATION: To grant planning approval, subject to a Section 106 agreement
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 This application was first reported to the January committee meeting, whereby it was resolved to investigate a reduction in the ridge height of the proposed dwelling and provide a plan to the show the proposed dwelling within the street scene and a cross section of the site. The previous committee report is appended.
1.2 A street plan has been provided, which shows the proposed dwelling in its set back position from Hillside Walk in relation to other dwellings, which are located in close proximity to the site.
1.3 Following objections from the occupiers of neighbouring dwellings and the concerns of Local Members, it was considered necessary to seek a reduction in the ridge height of the proposed dwelling. The applicant however considered that the proposed ridge height of 6.8m height is not out of keeping with other properties in the road, some of which are over 7m in height, and given its lower siting from the road level, he is of the view that the proposed dwelling would not be out of keeping with the character of the street scene.
1.4 Whilst a cross section of the site has not been submitted there is no significant difference in levels on the site and the proposal would be sited on the existing footprint of the garage. Furthermore, notwithstanding that the ridge height has not been reduced, it remains your officer’s view that the proposed new dwelling along with new access and garage would be in keeping with the character of the surrounding area, as demonstrated by the submitted plan of the street scene and would not be considered to have any detrimental impact upon
Contact Officer: Doug Wright Tel: 01403 215522 APPENDIX A/ 3 - 2
the street scene or neighbouring dwellings and therefore it is recommended that the application be approved.
1.5 Thakeham Parish Council at the time of the previous meeting had not provided any comments. They have since held a meeting and have no objection to the application.
2. CONCLUSION
2.1 It is recommended that permission be granted subject to the following conditions:
01. A2 Full Permission 02. M1 Approval of Materials 03. D5 No Windows…first floor level on South-east & north west elevations 04. M8 Sustainable Construction 05. D6 Finished floor levels 06. E3 Fencing 07. G6 Refuse/recycling 08. H6 Wheel Washing 09 H4a On Site Parking 10. L1 Landscaping 11. O1 Hours of working 12. O2 Burning of materials…in connection with the development 13. O3 Site Clearance 14. V5 No extensions
8. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
ICAB1 The proposal does not materially affect the amenities of neighbouring occupiers.
ICAB3 The proposal does not have an adverse impact upon the character and appearance of the street scene or locality.
Background Papers: DC/12/1629
APPENDIX A/ 4 - 1.
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT
TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services DATE: 19th January 2013
Minor amendments to DC/11/1924 (Demolition of existing property Calluna and the erection of seven dwellings consisting of two pairs DEVELOPMENT: of semi detached dwellings, and three detached dwellings) to provide an additional parking space to Plot two as well as amendments to the roof style of the garages and finishing of conservatories
SITE: Calluna, Nyetimber Lane, West Chiltington
WARD: Chanctonbury APPLICATION: DC/12/2258 APPLICANT: Mr S Forrester
REASON FOR INCLUSION ON AGENDA: Nature of application
RECOMMENDATION: To approve the minor material amendment subject to completion of an amended legal agreement ensuring that the proposed dwellings are marketed to West Chiltington residents and prevented for re-sale to those outside of the Parish, and to secure a financial contribution towards community and transport infrastructure. .
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
To consider the planning application.
DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION
1.1 This application seeks planning permission for a minor material amendment to planning application DC/11/1924.
1.2 The changes proposed to the approved scheme relate to the provision of an additional parking space to the rear of plot 2, close to the southern boundary, the addition of two low boundary walls to delineate parking areas, the addition of a brick
Contact: Nicola Mason Extension: 5289 APPENDIX A/ 4 - 2.
plinth to each of the dwellings and garages, change to the roofshape of the garage on plots 1, 2, 4 and 7, and the provision of a single storey extension to the rear of plots 3, 4 and 5 in lieu of the approved conservatories. A window is also proposed at first floor level in the southern elevation of plot 3.
DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
1.3 The application site is within the built-up area as defined by the Horsham District Local Development Framework and is to the western side of Nyetimber Lane, almost opposite its junction with Nyetimber Copse.
1.4 Calluna shares a boundary with 8 different properties to the south, north and west as Silverwood, Silverwood Copse and a small private road serving 3 properties off Nyetimber Lane almost encircle the subject dwelling. Calluna is currently unoccupied and cannot be said to be a property of intrinsic visual character to West Chiltington being a standard chalet bungalow with dormers to the front, a large gable and attached single storey garage.
1.5 As is common with this part of West Chiltington, the site contains a number of trees some of which are preserved along the site frontage. Although properties to the south are screened by existing trees, this is partially offset by the slope in Nyetimber Lane which means those neighbouring properties to the south are at a much lower level. The character of the properties within the immediate vicinity of the site is mixed in design and style, with a predominance of single storey bungalows, interspersed with two storey dwellings. Screening is more intermittent in places along the site boundary to the north and in the north western corner of the site.
PLANNING HISTORY
1.6 DC/11/1924 – In October 2012 an application for the demolition of existing property Calluna and the erection of seven dwellings consisting of two pairs of semi detached dwellings, and three detached dwellings was approved.
2. INTRODUCTION
STATUTORY BACKGROUND
2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990
RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY
2.2 Relevant government policies are contained within the National Planning Policy Framework which was published in March and has replaced guidance contained within PPG’s and PPS’s. The section on neighbourhood planning, amongst others, is considered relevant to the proposal and therefore the provisions of the Localism Act are also relevant.
APPENDIX A/ 4 - 3.
RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY
2.3 Policies CP1, CP3, CP5, CP12, CP13 and CP19 of the Core Strategy of the Local Development Framework are relevant to the determination of the application.
2.4 Policies DC9, DC15 & DC40 of the General Development Control Policies Document are also relevant to the determination of the application.
2.5 The West Chiltington Village Design Statement is also considered relevant to the application.
3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS
INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS
3.1 None undertaken.
OUTSIDE AGENCIES
3.2 None undertaken.
PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS
3.3 West Chiltington Parish Council has raised no objection to the application but have requested that the condition relating to Permitted Development rights is carried over to the current application.
3.4 Six letters have been received objecting to the application on the grounds that the application was originally to satisfy a local housing need to downsize, the increased size of the properties would increase prices which would result in them becoming unaffordable for those in need, the proposal will materially increase floorspace, a single storey extension would allow a first floor extension, and the window in the southern elevation of plot 3 would result in overlooking and loss of privacy.
4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS
Article 8 (right to respect of a private and family life) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (protection of property) of the Human Rights Act 1998 are relevant to the application. Consideration of Human Rights forms part of the planning assessment below.
5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER
APPENDIX A/ 4 - 4.
It is not considered that the proposal will have any material impact on crime and disorder issues.
6. PLANNING ASSESSMENT
6.1 This application seeks to make amendments to a previously approved scheme for the demolition of the property known as Calluna and the construction of seven dwellings (DC/11/1924). The application was originally submitted to meet a local housing need identified in a Housing Needs Survey undertaken by the Parish Council. As part of the proposal a legal agreement was signed which restricted sales of the properties to local residents for the first 6 months and on first sale of the property.
6.2 The current application seeks to amend the approved scheme through the substitution of the approved conservatories to plots 3, 4 and 5 by a single storey extension of a similar footprint. The proposed extension would have a lower height than the approved conservatory. It is considered that the proposed change to single storey extensions on the plots would be in keeping with the other properties within the development as plots 1, 2, 6 and 7 all have flat roofed extensions similar to those proposed in this application. It is your officer’s view that it would be difficult to maintain an objection to the proposal as the floor area is similar to that already approved albeit by means of a conservatory, however both are habitable areas of the property.
6.3 The application also seeks to place a plinth around the base of each of the properties as a design feature; the proposed plinth would increase the height of the buildings by approximately 0.2m. It is considered that the proposed change would not on balance harm the overall appearance of the development and would therefore be acceptable in this instance.
6.4 Changes are also proposed to the garage roofs on plots 2 and 4 which would reduce the height of the garages from 4.65m on plot 2 to 3.65 m, and 4.2 m on plot 4 to 3.65m approximately. The garages to plot 1 and 7 would also be amended with its roof hipped although the height of the building would remain the same. It is considered that the proposed changes are minor in nature and would not harm the character of the area.
6.5 It is considered that the proposed additional parking space to the rear of plot 2, close to the southern boundary, and the addition of two low boundary walls to delineate parking areas would be in keeping with the nature of the proposal. The application also seeks permission for a window to be placed in the southern elevation of plot 3. It is considered that the window which is proposed for an ensuite bathroom may be acceptable provided that the window is obscure glazed and fixed shut, so as to maintain the privacy of the neighbouring property. Whilst the approved scheme showed no window at first floor level on the southern elevation it is considered that it would be difficult to maintain an objection to the proposal if a condition relating to obscure glazing could be secured.
APPENDIX A/ 4 - 5.
7. RECOMMENDATION
7.1 To approve the minor material amendment subject to completion of an amended legal agreement ensuring that the proposed dwellings are marketed to West Chiltington residents and prevented for re-sale to those outside of the Parish, and to secure a financial contribution towards community and transport infrastructure and the following conditions;
01 The works for which planning permission is hereby granted must be begun not later than 23rd October 2015.
Reason: To be consistent with the original permission; to comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act and to reflect the special circumstances relating to this proposal.
02 No dwelling, hereby approved, shall be occupied until the car parking spaces have been provided, surfaced and marked out in accordance with a detailed construction plan to be submitted to and approved by the planning authority. These spaces shall thereafter be retained at all times for their designated use. Reason: To provide the maximum level of car parking for the development in accordance with the District Council car parking standards with policy DC40 of the General Development Control Policies Document. 03 No dwelling, hereby approved, shall be occupied until covered secure cycle parking spaces have been provided in accordance with a detailed construction plan to be submitted to and approved by the planning authority. Reason: To provide alternative travel options to the use of the car in accordance with policy DC40 of the General Development Control Policies Document. Note to applicant: A formal application for connection to public sewerage system is required in order to service this development, please contact Atkins Ltd, Anglo St James House, 39A Southgate Street, Winchester, SO23 9EH (Tel 01962 858688) or www.southernwater.co.uk
04 D6 Finished Floor Levels 05 E3 Fencing 06 J10 Removal of Permitted Development 07 L1 Hard and Soft Landscaping 08 M1 Approval of Materials 09 O1 Hours of Working 10 S1 Restriction on occupation…drainage… 11 S4 Surface Water Details…option A… 12 G6 Recycling 13 M8 Sustainable Construction 14 H4a On Site Parking 15 H4b Construction Material Storage 16 H6 Wheel Washing 17 L2b Protection of Trees 18 O3 Site Clearance APPENDIX A/ 4 - 6.
19 Prior to the implementation of the development hereby approved details relating to the management of highway drainage, including the maintenance of roadside ditches shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local planning Authority. The work shall be undertaken as per the agreed details unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. Reason as per S4 20 O2 No Burning
21 The window(s) in the southern elevation of the plot 3 shall at all times be glazed with obscured glass precise details of which, together with details of any opening, shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing before installation. The approved glass and any agreed opening details shall be maintained at all times.
Reason: To protect the amenities and privacy of the adjoining property and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
8. REASONS
8.1 The proposal meets a specific identified housing need as required by policy CP5 of the Core Strategy of the Horsham District Local Development Framework
Background Papers: DC/11/1924 Contact Officer: Nicola Mason
WK3/DC071028/46 APPENDIX A/ 5 - 1
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT
TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services DATE: 19 February 2013 DEVELOPMENT: Installation of a solar PV greenhouse in the garden of the house SITE: Dennis Marcus Farm Gay Street Pulborough West Sussex WARD: Chanctonbury APPLICATION: DC/12/2138 APPLICANT: Mr Roger Paterson
REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Applicant is a Local Member
RECOMMENDATION: That planning permission is granted
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
To consider the planning application.
DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION
1.1 The application seeks permission for the erection of a greenhouse with solar panels on the southern roof slope. The proposed greenhouse would measure 3.14metres in height by 6.76metres in width and 3.20metres in depth. The proposed greenhouse would be constructed of red cedar with doors on the west elevation and 12 solar panels in a horizontal arrangement on the southern roof slope. The proposed green house would be located approximately 5metres to the north of the existing stables where there is currently a vegetable patch.
DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
1.2 The application site is located outside of the built up area boundary in a countryside location. The main dwelling house and associated barn are Grade II Listed and there is a footpath which runs along the northern boundary of the site.
1.3 The area in which the proposed greenhouse would be located to the north of the stable block and main dwelling house is within the garden area of the property. The site sits at an elevated level to the main dwelling house with the garden area in line with the eaves line of the stable block. A hedge runs along the northern boundary of the site which currently has some gaps in it and allows views to the fields beyond. The western boundary runs alongside the road and is currently well screened by mature trees and planting.
Contact Officer: Emma Greening Tel: 01403 215122 APPENDIX A/ 5 - 2
2. INTRODUCTION
STATUTORY BACKGROUND
2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY
2.2 The relevant government policy is contained within the National Planning Policy Framework published in March 2012.
2.3 Section 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework emphasises the importance of Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment. Paragraph 128 states that in determining planning applications, local authorities should require an “applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting”.
RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY
2.4 Horsham District Local Development Framework Core Strategy (2007): Policies CP1 (Landscape and Townscape Character), CP2 (Environmental Quality), CP3 (Improving the Quality of New Development)
2.5 Horsham District Local Development Framework General Development Control Policies (2007). Policies DC1 (Countryside Protection and Enhancement), DC2 (Landscape Character), DC8 (Renewable Energy and Climate Change), DC9 (Development Principles), and DC13 (Listed Buildings)
PLANNING HISTORY
2.6 There is no relevant planning history
3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS
INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS
3.1 Design and Conservation Advisor: Dennis Marcus farm is located in a rural area in Gay Street, Pulborough. The farmhouse and the barn courtyard together form a good example of a traditional farmstead, commonly found in the south east, especially in the Weald and South Downs area. These types of farmsteads form an important part of the districts’ heritage and built environment, contributing positively to the character and experience of the area. The barn and the house are both grade II listed, and buildings within the curtilage of the listed building, constructed prior to 1st July 1948 under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, as also considered to be listed. All buildings are in domestic or ancillary domestic use and although the barns retain their agricultural character, they are no longer in use for strictly agricultural purposes.
As required by para. 128 of chapter 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework, information has been provided on the listing and historic significance and setting of the barn (grade II), but not the house (also grade II). Although this is required as part of the application, at this stage it is not considered to be a barrier to making a decision. The application should be assessed against policies DC13; Listed Buildings and Chapter 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework, “Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment”, with particular reference to Para. 131. This policy sets out the criteria for assessment of an application affecting a designated heritage asset. Further consideration is also given to the English Heritage guidance policy document on the “Setting of Heritage APPENDIX A/ 5 - 3
Assets”, published 2012 as the application affects the setting of the farmstead, with particular reference to the listed house and barns.
The proposal for the green house with attached solar panels would be located to the north of the courtyard, within the domestic garden of the house. There appears to be no historic or formal layout to the garden, and as such the greenhouse is not considered to detract from any significant historic landscape around the building complex. Although there will be a visual connection between the listed building and the proposed greenhouse site, the proposals would not compromise the domestic garden character of the area.
As such, the application would not conflict with the policies as mentioned above.
I am presuming (although no details have been submitted regarding this aspect) that a cable and possibly ancillary equipment will need to be run underground (or in another location) from the solar panels to the building. From experience, other ancillary equipment is sometimes required to be installed on or within the host property. Please could this be clarified as this element is not included in the application and may require listed building consent, or if extensive, planning permission. Although it should not be barrier to granting permission for the development as proposed, details of the cable and any such equipment, including how and where it enters the building, its design and works to any interior of the buildings should be controlled by condition worded something thus:
Prior to commencement of development, precise details of any cabling, trucking or equipment associated with the development, shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the LPA, and maintained in strict accordance with the agreed details. Reasons: as insufficient details have been submitted, and to ensure compliance with DC13
I would also advise that an informative should be placed on the decision notice, to notify the applicant that any works (including any cabling and other equipment) which following the grant of permission requires to be installed on the listed buildings on the site, that these works, under the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 may require a separate application for listed building consent. This should be submitted and determined by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of those works.
PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS
3.2 West Chiltington Parish Council have raised no objections
3.3 No other consultation responses have been received
4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS
4.1 Article 8 (Right to respect of a Private and Family Life) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (Protection of Property) of the Human Rights Act 1998 are relevant to this application, Consideration of Human rights forms part of the planning assessment below.
5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER
5.1 It is not considered that the development would be likely to have any significant impact on crime and disorder.
6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS
6.1 The key considerations in the determination of this application are the design, impact of the proposal on the setting of the listed building and wider area.
APPENDIX A/ 5 - 4
6.2 The proposed greenhouse would be located in the garden area of the main dwelling house. The use of timber is considered to be relatively appropriate to the countryside location, and whilst the solar panels would be a modern addition, they would not be attached directly to the main Grade II Listed Buildings. As a result, the design is considered acceptable in this regard.
6.3 The key consideration in this application is the impact of the proposal on the setting of the Listed Building. Additional information was requested during the application process on this and the Design and Conservation Advisor has also been consulted on the application. Policy DC13 of the General Development Control Policies seeks to ensure that proposals have “no adverse effect on the on the special architectural or historic character and appearance of the building or its setting”.
6.4 The site as a whole is located within a rural area and the Design and Conservation Advisor has commented that “The proposal for the green house with attached solar panels would be located to the north of the courtyard, within the domestic garden of the house. There appears to be no historic or formal layout to the garden, and as such the greenhouse is not considered to detract from any significant historic landscape around the building complex. Although there will be a visual connection between the listed building and the proposed greenhouse site, the proposals would not compromise the domestic garden character of the area.”
6.5 It is therefore considered that given that the proposed greenhouse would be located outside of the traditional formal layout of the site, it is not considered that the proposed greenhouse would have a significant impact on the setting of the listed building and the proposal is therefore considered acceptable in this regard. The Design and Conservation Officer has however requested that additional information is supplied on the cabling and ancillary equipment which may need to be installed, however it is considered that this could be dealt with by condition.
6.6 The final area of consideration is impact of the proposed greenhouse on the wider area. There is a footpath located to the north of the application site, and the proposed greenhouse would be clearly visible through the gaps in the hedge especially during winter months. However the greenhouse would be located within the garden area and it is generally what would be expected in a garden so any impact is considered limited. The site is relatively well screened from the road by mature trees and so any impact on the street scene would be limited.
6.7 Overall the proposed greenhouse is considered acceptable. The proposal would not have a significant impact on the setting of the listed building or wider area. As a result it is considered that the proposal meets the aims of planning policy and it is recommended that planning permission is granted.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 That planning permission is granted subject to the following conditions: 1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
2. The materials to be used in the development hereby permitted shall strictly accord with those indicated on the approved details associated with the application. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail in the interests of amenity and in accordance with policy DC9 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007). APPENDIX A/ 5 - 5
3. Prior to commencement of development, precise details of any cabling, trucking or equipment associated with the development shall be submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, these shall be maintained in strict accordance with the agreed details. Reason: To preserve the special character of the building for the future and in accordance with policy DC13 of the Horsham District Local Development Framework: General Development Control Policies (2007).
Note to applicant: The application should note that any works (including any cabling and other equipment) which following the grant of permission requires to be installed on the listed buildings on the site, that these works, under the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 may require a separate application for listed building consent. This should be submitted and determined by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of those works.
8. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
8.1 ILBC1A: The proposal would preserve the setting of the Listed Building.
Background Papers: DC/12/2138 APPENDIX A/ 6 - 1
DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT REPORT
TO: Development Management Committee South BY: Head of Planning and Environmental Services DATE: 19th February 2013 Removal of Conditions 4 (removal of permitted development rights), 9 (Code Level 3 Sustainability), 13 ( no windows or dormer windows) and DEVELOPMENT: 14 (submission of details of the design and materials of windows and doors) of DC/12/1627 (Erection of terrace of 4 (3 x 2-bed and 1 x 1-bed) cottages) SITE: Land East of Sawyards Manleys Hill Storrington West Sussex WARD: Chantry APPLICATION: DC/12/2317 APPLICANT: Ms Yvonne Ferguson
REASON FOR INCLUSION ON THE AGENDA: Five Letters of Objection Received
RECOMMENDATION: To Grant Planning Permission subject to amendments to the proposed variation of the conditions and subject to the completion of a new S106 legal agreement (ensuring the contributions paid under DC/12/1627 are also tied to this new permission).
1. THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT
To consider the planning application.
DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLICATION
1.1 The application seeks the removal of Conditions 4 (removal of permitted development rights), 9 (Code Level 3 Sustainability), 13 ( no windows or dormer windows) and 14 (submission of details of the design and materials of windows and doors) attached on application DC/12/1627 which permitted the erection of a terrace of 4 (3 x 2-bed and 1 x 1- bed) cottages).
DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE
1.2 The site is situated within the built up area of Storrington and lies adjacent to Storrington Conservation Area. The site is located on Manleys Hill (one of the main roads into Storrington Village Centre) and is highly prominent within the street scene. The site is very shallow in depth and has a large bank to its southern boundary. The original Sawyards building has been converted to three dwellings with a parking area between these converted dwellings and the application site.
Contact Officer: Kathryn Sadler Tel: 01403 215175 APPENDIX A/ 6 - 2
2. INTRODUCTION
STATUTORY BACKGROUND
2.1 The Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
RELEVANT GOVERNMENT POLICY
2.2 National Planning Policy Framework 2012
2.3 Circular 11/95
RELEVANT COUNCIL POLICY
2.4 The following policies of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (adopted February 2007) are relevant in the assessment of this application: CP1 – Landscape and Townscape Character, CP3 – Improving the quality of new development & CP5 – Built up areas and previously developed land.
2.5 The following policies of the Local Development Framework, General Development Control Policies Document (December 2007) are relevant in the assessment of this application: DC8 – Renewable Energy and Climate Change, DC9 – Development principles, DC12 – Conservation Areas and DC40 – Transport & Access.
PLANNING HISTORY
2.6 DC/07/0890 4 x 2 bed semi detached cottages with integral garages (outline), Refused.
DC/08/1934 Erection of 3 terraced cottages (outline), Refused
DC/09/1112 Erection of a building comprising 4 x 1 bed flats, Refused
DC/11/0400 3 x 2 bed cottages, Permitted
DC/12/1627 Erection of terrace of 4 (3 x 2 bed and 1 x 1 bed) cottages (revised Scheme), Permitted.
There is no other relevant planning history for the site.
3. OUTCOME OF CONSULTATIONS
INTERNAL CONSULTATIONS
3.1 The Building Control Manager has stated that “I would concur that for a small development on a tight site it will be difficult to gain credits for a number of the areas within the Code and therefore achievement of code 3 would be difficult if not impossible. However, the statement in the letter from the agent would appear to have no evidential basis and compliance with the code can be achieved in many different ways.
I would suggest that you need pre-assessment calculations from a qualified code assessor to demonstrate the potential credits that can be achieved with the current design and site constraints before agreeing to a variation. APPENDIX A/ 6 - 3
Compliance with code 3 standards for heat loss and water efficiency would be the minimum required to meet building regulations anyway.” PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS
3.2 Storrington & Sullington Parish Council have raised an objection for the following reasons:
Condition 4 – Removal of PD Rights – The reason this condition was attached was “in the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with Policy DC9 of the General Development Control Policies. The removal of this condition could result in further excavation of the bank destabilising it and affecting the peoprties to the top of it. Any further development would reduce amenity space and it was already considered cramped and overdeveloped.
Condition 9 – Removal of Code Level 3 – The reason why this condition was attached was to ensure the dwelling makes the most efficient use of renewable energy and to comply with Policy DC8 of the General Development Control Policies. There was no justification for removing this condition.
Condition 13 – No other windows/dormers shall be constructed – This condition has previously been breached at this site, therefore strong objection to its removal.
Condition 14 – Details of windows & Doors – The reason for this condition is to enable the LPA to control the development in detail in the interests of amenity by endeavouring to achieve a building of visual quality in accordance with Policy DC9 of the General Development Control Policies.
3.3 5 letters of objection have been received on the grounds that:
There were sound grounds for applying the conditions in the first place so why remove them now. Removal of these clauses will allow for a lesser quality finish and extended scope for further development of this land; Any Antenna allowed would be an eye sore for the overlooking properties; To provide space at the rear, the bank would need to be dug away and reanchored with a retaining wall put in place; Windows facing our property to the south of the development have been changed and one dormer window in particular is very high into the roof; New windows could cause overlooking to the rear (lack of privacy); The parking in Chantry Close and Chantry Lane is already extremely stretched; Visitors to this new development would need to use Chantry Lane or Chantry Close to park; Overdeveloped. Loss of amenity;
3.4 No other consultation responses received.
4. HOW THE PROPOSED COURSE OF ACTION WILL PROMOTE HUMAN RIGHTS
4.1 Article 8 (Right to respect of a Private and Family Life) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (Protection of Property) of the Human Rights Act 1998 are relevant to this application, Consideration of Human rights forms part of the planning assessment below.
5. HOW THE PROPOSAL WILL HELP TO REDUCE CRIME AND DISORDER
APPENDIX A/ 6 - 4
5.1 It is not considered that the development would be likely to have any significant impact on crime and disorder.
6. PLANNING ASSESSMENTS
6.1 The main issues in determination of this application are considered to be the principle of the development, the effect of the development on the amenity of nearby occupiers and the visual amenities and character of the area.
6.2 Circular 11/95 (Use of Conditions in Planning Permission) provides six tests that conditions should be:
1) Necessary; 2) Relevant to Planning; 3) Relevant to the development to be permitted; 4) Enforceable; 5) Precise; and 6) Reasonable in all other respects.
6.3 Condition 4 reads: “Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)(Amendment)(No2) (England) Order 2008 (or any order amending or revoking and re-enacting that order with or without modification) no development falling within Classes A, B, C, D, E, F, G and H of Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the order shall be erected constructed or placed within the cartilage(s) of the dwelling(s) hereby permitted so as to enlarge improve or otherwise alter the appearance or setting of the dwelling(s) unless permission is granted by the Local Planning Authority pursuant to an application for the purpose.” Reason: In the interest of visual amenity and in accordance with Policy DC9 of the General Development Control Policies 2007.
6.4 This condition was attached so that the Local Planning Authority had control over all alterations and extensions proposed on this site. The site is incredibly prominent within the street scene, the dwellings are very close to the road and the adjacent Conservation Area. The development permitted is already cramped and has very restricted private amenity area and restricted outlook due to the height and proximity of the bank to the rear of the site. Any alterations could potentially have a harmful impact on other neighbouring occupiers amenities or on the character of the street scene.
6.5 The removal of permitted development falling within Class A, B, C and D is considered to be necessary given the confined plot sizes, close proximity to the road and relationships with neighbouring occupiers due to layout and land levels. The insertion of windows/roof lights and dormers in the roof space have the potential to give rise to overlooking of the private rear amenity areas to the houses in Chantry Close.
6.6 Policy DC9 states planning permission will be granted for development which:
a) make efficient use of land whilst respecting any constraints that exist; b) do not cause unacceptable harm to the amenity of occupiers/users of nearby property and land, for example through overlooking; c) ensure that the scale, massing and appearance of the development is of high standard of design and layout; d) are locally distinctive in character, respect the character of the surrounding area; e) use high standards of building materials, finishes and landscaping;
APPENDIX A/ 6 - 5
6.7 Any dormer windows in the rear elevation have the potential to give rise to overlooking of the private amenity areas of dwellings within Chantry Close. These dwellings are sited on top of the bank at the rear of the site and any dormer windows would be likely to look over the tops of the fences along the top of the bank.
6.8 The removal of Class E is also considered necessary as a shed could be erected to the rear of the properties which could have a ridge height of 2.5m, be erected on the boundary (due to the confined plot sizes) right outside the back door which could potentially have an overbearing impact causing a tunnelling effect due to the close proximity of the large bank to the rear of the properties. As part of the discharge of conditions, 1.4m high close boarded fencing has been agreed to separate the gardens as fencing of a greater height is likely to cause a loss of light. Therefore, the erection of sheds would worsen the current situation where occupiers are already going to experience a lack of light to the rear elevation.
6.9 With regard to Classes F (Hard Surfacing), G (Chimney, Flue & Vent Pipes) and H (Microwave Antenna), it is considered that the imposition of these classes is unreasonable as it is unduly restrictive on potential occupiers of the site. These elements are unlikely to have a harmful impact on the street scene or on surrounding occupiers.
6.10 Condition 9 states “The dwelling(s) shall achieve a Code Level 3 in accordance with the requirements of the Code for Sustainable Homes: Technical Guide (or such national measures of sustainability for house design that replaces that scheme). No dwelling(s) shall be occupied until a Final Code Certificate has been issued for it certifying that Code Level 3 has been achieved.” Reason – To ensure the dwelling makes the most efficient use of renewable energy and to comply with Policy DC8 of the General Development Control Policies 2007.
6.11 This condition is attached to all new dwellings within the district to ensure that measures are incorporated that reduce the impact on climate change. Having consulted the Council’s Building Control Manager he has commented that “for a small development on a tight site it will be difficult to gain credits for a number of the areas within the Code and therefore achievement of code 3 would be difficult if not impossible. However, the statement in the letter from the agent would appear to have no evidential basis and compliance with the code can be achieved in many different ways. I would suggest that you need pre- assessment calculations from a qualified code assessor to demonstrate the potential credits that can be achieved with the current design and site constraints before agreeing to a variation. Compliance with code 3 standards for heat loss and water efficiency would be the minimum required to meet building regulations anyway.” It may be possible to amend the requirements of this condition to Code Level 2 which we have done on other constrained sites that find it difficult to meet the requirements of Code Level 3 due to the limitations of the site. However, as stated above no pre-assessment calculations from a qualified code assessor have been submitted to demonstrate the potential credits that can be achieved with the current design and site constraints. Therefore, the removal of the condition is unjustified. However, if the applicant can demonstrate that a lower level could be reached (Code Level 2) then the condition could be amended appropriately through the submission of a fresh application.
6.12 Condition 13 states “Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development)(Amendment)(No.2) (England) Order 2008 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no windows/dormer windows (other than those expressly authorised by this permission) shall be constructed. Reason: To protect the privacy of adjoining properties in accordance with Policy DC9 of the General Development Control Policies 2007. To protect the character and appearance of the building in accordance with Policy DC9 of the General Development Control Policies 2007. APPENDIX A/ 6 - 6
6.13 This condition was imposed due to the dwellings close relationship to the road and street scene at the front and the dwellings close relationship to the dwellings at the rear (Chantry Close). If all the dwellings erected dormers to the front roof slopes, the dwellings would appear even more prominent within the street scene giving further emphasis to the elevated height of the dwellings and their elevated finish floor level especially at the western end of the site. However, it is acknowledged that Condition 4 also removes permitted development for the erection of windows/roof lights and dormers and therefore this condition does repeat Condition 4. Therefore, it is considered that this condition could be removed.
6.14 Condition 14 states “Before development commences on site, details of the design and materials of the windows and doors to be used shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The approved windows and doors shall be implemented on site thereafter. Reason: To enable the Local Planning Authority to control the development in detail in the interests of amenity by endeavouring to achieve a building of visual quality in accordance with Policy DC9 of the General Development Control Policies 2007.
6.15 This condition was attached to the consent in order to control the window and door detailing given the sites prominent position within the street scene and being sited right at the entrance of the village. Although the dwellings are not within the Conservation Area, part of the parking area and converted dwellings to the west of the site are within the Conservation Area. Therefore, the site is adjacent to the conservation area and therefore the LPA needs to ensure that the development and its detailing does not harm the Conservation Area or views into, out of or within the area in accordance with Policy DC9 and DC12. The character of this conservation area needs to be preserved and therefore it is important that details of the windows and doors are submitted prior to installation.
6.16 Paragraph 48 of Circular 11/95 states that “The appearance of a proposed development and its relationship to its surroundings are material considerations.” “There will, however be circumstances where it is important to secure a high quality of design in a proposal if this is to make a positive contribution to a site and its surroundings and show consideration for its local context. In such cases, the use of conditions may be acceptable.”
6.17 Planning permission can be granted subject to conditions differing from those subject to which the previous permission was granted as allowed under the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 (Determination of Applications). Section 73 (Planning Conditions) – Determination of applications to develop land without compliance with conditions previously attached states “This section applies, subject to subsection (4) to applications for planning permission for the development of land without complying with conditions subject to which a previous planning permission was granted. On such an application the local planning authority shall consider only the question of the conditions subject to which planning permission should be granted, and –
a) if they decide that planning permission should be granted subject to conditions differing from those subject to which the previous permission was granted, or that it should be granted unconditionally, they shall grant planning permission accordingly.”
6.18 The Local Planning Authority has no objection to the removal of Classes F, G and H from Condition 4 as these elements are unlikely to have a harmful impact on the surrounding area and the removal of Condition 13 is considered acceptable as Condition 4 removes permitted development rights and therefore controls future alteration/extensions. It is considered that Condition 4 (Removal of PD, Classes A, B, C, D & E), Condition 9 (Code APPENDIX A/ 6 - 7
for Sustainable Homes) and Condition 14 (Window & Door Details) are necessary, relevant to planning, relevant to the development to be permitted, enforceable, precise and reasonable in all other respects and therefore accord with Circular 11/95.
6.19 It is acknowledged that the applicant has paid contributions already under application DC/12/1627 so there is no need to seek any further contributions. However, a new S106 legal agreement will need to be completed to ensure that the contributions paid are tied to the new permission.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 It is recommended that the application be granted subject to the completion of a new S106 legal agreement (ensuring the contributions paid under DC/12/1627 are also tied to this new permission) and the following conditions:
1. A2 – Full Permission 2. E3 – Fencing 3. H4 – On Site Parking 4. J10 – Removal of Permitted Development ‘Classes A, B, C, D & E only’ 5. L1 – Hard and Soft Landscaping 6. M1 – Approval of Materials 7. O1 – Hours of Working 8. O2 – Burning of Materials…please insert ‘in connection with the development’ 9. M8 – Sustainable Construction. 10. Within six months of the date of any planning permission, maximum visibility splays shall be provided at the site access onto the A283 (Manleys Hill) in accordance with a plan to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. These splays shall thereafter be kept clear of all obstructions to visibility above a height of 0.6 metres above the adjoining road level. Reason : In the interests of road safety and in accordance with Policy DC40 of the General Development Control Policies 2007. 11. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied until the car parking has been constructed in accordance with the approved site plan. These spaces shall thereafter be retained at all times for their designated use. Reason: To provide car-parking spaces for the dwellings in accordance with Policy DC40 of the General Development Control Policies 2007. 12. S4 – Surface Water Details …….Option A 13. Before development commences on site, details of the design and materials of the windows and doors to be used shall be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The approved windows and doors shall be implemented on site thereafter. Reason – M1 15. G6 - Recycling
Note to Applicant
A formal application for connection to the public sewerage system is required in order to service this development please contact Atkins Ltd, Anglo St James House, 39A Southgate Street, Winchester, SO23 9EH (Tel no. 01962 858688) or www.southernwater.co.uk
8. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATION:
ICAB2 – The proposal does not materially affect the amenities of neighbouring occupiers or the character and visual amenities of the locality.
APPENDIX A/ 6 - 8
Background Papers: DC/12/2317 & DC/12/1627