Planning Development Control Committee - 18 January 2011 Report Item 3 Application No: 10/95806/FULL Full Application Site: Brown Gables, Forest Edge Road, Crow, Ringwood BH24 3DF Proposal: Outbuilding Applicant: Mr P Gray Case Officer: Clare Ings Parish: RINGWOOD 1. DISTRICT/BOROUGH: New Forest District Council 2. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION Contrary to Parish Council view. 3. DEVELOPMENT PLAN DESIGNATION No specific designation 4. PRINCIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES DP1 General Development Principles DP12 Outbuildings 5. MEMBER COMMENTS None received 6. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS Ringwood Town Council: Recommend permission. 7. CONSULTEES 7.1 NFDC Engineering & Land Drainage: No objection subject to a condition requiring details of surface water drainage. 8. REPRESENTATIONS 8.1 One letter from neighbouring property: no issues of concern. 9. RELEVANT HISTORY 9.1 Outbuilding (95404) refused on 22 September 2010. 9.2 Roof alterations in association with new first floor (86851) refused on 15 March 2006. 9 10. ASSESSMENT 10.1 Brown Gables lies to the west of Forest Edge Road, an unmade gravel track serving a number of properties which is accessed off the road between Ringwood and Burley in the Crow area of Ringwood. The plot is generous in size with the dwelling set at the eastern side. It is served by two accesses and there is a gravelled parking area to the front of the dwelling. The dwelling itself is a large detached chalet bungalow of render and tile with an attached double garage. A fence separates the garden from the parking area. The plot is characterised by mature vegetation and large trees. This size of the plot, dwelling and mature landscaped nature of the application site are characteristic of the area. 10.2 The proposal, which is a resubmission following a previous refusal, is for a large outbuilding comprising a double garage, double and single car ports, a store and log store with storage accommodation above, served by an internal staircase. It would be constructed of timber on a brick plinth under a clay tile roof and would measure some 117m² in footprint. The highest part of the ridge would be 5.2m. It has been marginally reconfigured since the previous refusal, but is not significantly different in scale. There has been no reduction in the height of the outbuilding. 10.3 The key planning considerations are the scale of the outbuilding and its appropriateness to the existing dwelling and its plot, and its impact on the wider New Forest area. 10.4 The relevant policy is DP12 which requires that outbuildings should be incidental to the use of the dwelling, but also that they should be located with the residential curtilage and not capable of providing additional habitable accommodation. It is the overall scale of the development, both its footprint and height, which would result in a single building which would not appear incidental to the main dwelling. As a result of this scale, including its height which would be greater than that of the dwelling (which scales off at 4.7m), it would have the appearance of competing with the main dwelling on the site rather than being wholly subservient to it, and would considerably add to the built development within and across the plot which would detract from the rural character of the area. 10.5 The outbuilding is unlikely to have any impact on the amenities of adjoining dwellings due to the nature of the boundary treatment. However, the scale of the outbuilding is such that it would not appear incidental to the main dwelling and therefore would not comply with policy DP12. It would have a detrimental impact on the spacious character of the area and the New Forest National Park as a whole. The application is therefore recommended for refusal. 11. RECOMMENDATION Refuse Reason(s) 1. The proposed outbuilding, by virtue of its scale and height, would considerably detract from the rural character of the area, consolidating the impact of built development in associated with the dwelling and would not be considered to be incidental to the main dwelling. This would be harmful to the character and appearance of the New Forest National Park and the proposal could not be considered appropriate to the dwelling and its curtilage. The proposal would therefore be in direct conflict with the requirements of policies DP1 and DP12 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (DPD) December 2010. 10 41 41 67 75 00m 00m 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 104700m 104700m 46 46 45 45 44 44 43 43 42 42 41 41 40 40 39 39 103800m 103800m 41 41 75 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 00m 00m New Forest National Park Authority South Efford House, Milford Road, Everton, SO41 0JD Item: 3 Tel: 01590 646600 Fax: 01590 646666 Ref: 10/95404/FULL Date: 06:01:11 © Crown copyright. All rights reserved New Forest National Park Authority. Licence no. 1000114703 2011 SCALE: 1:5000 11 Planning Development Control Committee - 18 January 2011 Report Item 4 Application No: 10/95835/FULL Full Application Site: Rest Harrow, Hightown Hill, Ringwood, BH24 3HE Proposal: Two storey outbuilding. Applicant: Mr & Mrs Gray Case Officer: Liz Young Parish: RINGWOOD 1. DISTRICT/BOROUGH: New Forest District Council 2. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION Contrary to Parish Council view. 3. DEVELOPMENT PLAN DESIGNATION No specific designation 4. PRINCIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES DP1 General Development Principles DP12 Outbuildings 5. MEMBER COMMENTS None received 6. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS Ringwood Town Council: Recommend permission. 7. CONSULTEES 7.1 Tree Officer: No objections; proposed development would be sufficiently remote from trees so as to avoid an unacceptable impact. 8. REPRESENTATIONS 8.1 None received. 9. RELEVANT HISTORY: 9.1 Two storey addition and garage and conservatory (34173) approved on 2 April 1987. 10. ASSESSMENT 10.1 Rest Harrow is a detached dwelling located in rural surroundings at the end of a shared access track adjacent to Hightown Hill. Areas of woodland lie to north east 12 and south east of the site and it also lies in close proximity to the open forest. Screening along the north west boundary is fairly limited, enabling views of the property southwards along the access track. The site is not directly adjoined by any residential properties. The property has already been extended beyond its full potential under current policies following a consent for a large two storey extension incorporating an integral garage in 1987 (reference 34173). 10.2 Consent is sought to replace the existing two bay carport with a three bay garage with room above (along with an external staircase). The external footprint would be increased from 38 square metres to 78 square metres and height would be increased from just under four metres to just under 6 metres. The building would also be re-oriented by 90 degrees and re-positioned to a more prominent location so that it would be parallel and adjacent to the north west boundary of the site. Three rooflights are proposed in the rear (north west) elevation. 10.3 The development would not impact upon any neighbouring residential properties and the main issues under consideration would be the extent to which the proposed building could be regarded as appropriate and incidental to the dwelling along with the impact upon the character and appearance of the wider area (having regard to the cumulative impact of development within the site). 10.4 The proposed building would have a gross internal floorspace of 116 square metres (well beyond the upper floorspace limit which applies to “small dwellings” under the policies of the adopted Core Strategy). The significant head room and availability of natural light, along with the substantial floorspace could potentially enable the building to provide additional habitable living accommodation. Its overall design, scale and massing is such that it would not enable the building to be considered either incidental or subservient to the main dwelling, and would also significantly increase the amount of development on the site. The development would therefore be contrary to the policies of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy. 10.5 The proposal would therefore be contrary to policy DP12 of the adopted Core Strategy which seeks to avoid any form of habitable accommodation within outbuildings (regardless of whether or not it could potentially become independent). The proposed development would therefore fail to be appropriate or incidental to the existing dwelling and would be harmful to the character and appearance of the New Forest National Park, particularly when having regard to its prominent siting and the lack of screening along the north west boundary and the extent to which the dwelling has already been extended. 10.6 A proposal for a three-bay garage, albeit with dormer windows, was recently dismissed at appeal (Uppacott, Bagnum Lane, Ringwood ref: APP/B9506/D/10/2128556). That dwelling was similarly in a fairly isolated position with limited external views, and the Inspector stated "....In any case, whether (the outbuilding) can be seen or not, the impact on the character of the area remains very important, particularly as this is a national park....the proposed outbuilding is very large because of the combination of its height, width and length, so it would have a significantly greater impact on the character of the area....". 10.7 The application is therefore recommended for refusal due to its size and harmful impact on the character of the New Forest National Park. 13 11. RECOMMENDATION Refuse Reason(s) 1. The outbuilding as proposed, by virtue of its scale, massing, design and floor area, would not be incidental or appropriate to the dwelling and its curtilage, and would consolidate the impact of built development associated with the dwelling.