EASTERN AREA PLANNING COMMITTEE MONDAY 17 SEPTEMBER 2012 REPORT OF THE HEAD OF PLANNING SERVICES APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION APPLICANT REFERENCE LOCATION PROPOSAL CONTACT ADDRESS DATE VALID GRID REFERENCE DATE OF APPLICATION MR DARREN CRUSH TW/12/01631 Tower Cottage RETROSPECTIVE – (Chris Anderson Bedgebury Road Garden shed and Architects Ltd GOUDHURST replacement palisade 4 Western Road GO fence. Southborough Royal Tunbridge Wells Kent TN4 0HG) 31/05/12 571674/134685 31/05/12 1.0 DESCRIPTION OF SITE 1.01 The property is Grade 2 listed, as is the adjoining property which is located to the north. The property listing describes it as an estate cottage for the Bedgebury Estate, built circa 1850. 1.02 The application site is located outside the Limits to Built Development south of Goudhurst, in the High Weald Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. 1.03 The application site is narrow and roughly rectangular in shape, with the curtilage located to the front and sides of the cottage. It sits on a T-junction formed by Bedgebury Road and Rogers Rough Road, which is known as Bedgebury Cross. 2.0 PROPOSAL 2.01 The application is seeking retrospective planning permission for the erection of a garden shed and a replacement fence along the east and south boundaries. 2.02 The shed is 2.6m by 2.02m, with an eaves height of 2.25m and a ridge height of 3.28m. The walls are dark stained timber and the roof is covered in secondhand Welsh slate tiles. 2.03 It is located to the east of the cottage, with the door facing the wall of the cottage. 2.04 The replacement fencing is 1m high and is painted white. 2.05 The application has been called to the Eastern Area Planning Committee by Cllr Noakes in view of the Parish Council’s and various neighbours’ concerns regarding amenity, highway safety and impact on the listed building. 3.0 RELEVANT HISTORY 3.01 TW12//01772 – Demolish existing garage and construct garage with pitched roof incorporating bedroom accessed from half landing in tower. Awaiting determination. 3.02 TW/12/01776 – Listed Building Consent: Demolish existing garage and construct garage with pitched roof incorporating bedroom accessed from half landing in tower. Awaiting determination. 4.0 POLICIES 4.01 National Policies - National Planning Policy Framework, March 2012. 4.02 South East Plan 2009 - Policy C3 – Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty. - Policy BE6 – Management of the Historic Environment. 4.03 Tunbridge Wells Borough Core Strategy 2010 - Core Policy 4: Environment. - Core Policy 14: Development in the Villages and Rural Areas. 4.04 Tunbridge Wells Borough Local Plan 2006 - Policy LBD1 – Development outside the Limits to Built Development. - Policy EN1 – Development Control Criteria. - Policy EN25 – Development control criteria for all development proposals affecting the rural landscape. 5.0 CONSULTATIONS Goudhurst Parish Council 5.01 24/06/12 – Recommend Refusal. Inaccurate plans, harm to setting of Listed Building, illogical siting, excessive height. TWBC Principal Conservation Officer 5.02 26/06/12 – No objections in relation to the setting of the listed cottage. TWBC Principal Environmental Health Officer 5.03 26/06/12 – No adverse comments on the application. Local Residents 5.04 Five letters of objection on the following grounds: Inaccurate plans. Encroachment over boundary with adjoining property. Encroachment onto highway causing pedestrian safety concerns. Loss of light for adjoining property. Excessive size. Harm to setting of listed building. Unattractive design. 6.0 BACKGROUND PAPERS 6.01 Drawing No. 1203-02 received 31/05/12 – Superseded. 6.02 Drawing No. 1203-01 received 31/05/12. 6.03 Design and Access Statement received 31/05/12. 6.04 Drawing No. 1203-02A received 09/07/12 – Superseded. 6.05 Photographs received 09/07/12. 6.06 Drawing No. 1203-02B received 13/08/12. 7.0 APPRAISAL Principle of Development 7.01 Despite the fact that the works have already been carried out their merits must be assessed against current planning policy. The erection of ancillary buildings and fences within the residential curtilage of a dwelling in the countryside is considered to be acceptable in principle, subject to any specific constraints of the site. Impact on setting of Listed Building 7.02 None of the works are attached to the cottage so there is no impact on the fabric of the listed building itself. The cross on the chimneystack, which is a special feature of the property, is still highly visible from the highway. The Principal Conservation Officer had visited the site prior to the submission of this application and has raised no objections in relation to the impact of the works on the setting of the listed building. Therefore, it is considered that the works are acceptable in relation to the setting of the listed cottage. Impact on Highways Safety 7.03 A site visit from a Kent Highways Engineer took place following expressions of concern from local residents regarding the encroachment of the works onto highways land. The actual line of the boundary was agreed with the applicant and the line of the fence moved accordingly. Therefore, the works no longer encroach onto highways land and the verge is retained for use by pedestrians. Therefore, the works do not have a detrimental impact on highway safety. Residential Amenity 7.04 The applicant has confirmed that the boundary is demarked by the plinth course that projects from the base of the wall, so none of the shed encroaches over the boundary with the adjoining property. Given that the shed is lower than the height of the boundary hedge and that the roof slopes away from the boundary, it is not possible to conclude that there would be significant overshadowing of the adjoining residential property. Size/Design/Location 7.05 The design of the shed is quite standard for such a structure, but the materials and finish have been specifically chosen in consultation with the Principal Conservation Officer in consideration of the setting of the listed building. The size is quite modest for an ancillary garden structure. The curtilage of the property is limited, and so the chosen location of the structure in this unused corner seems sensible. There is sufficient room for someone carrying tools to pass between the wall of the cottage and the corner of the shed. Therefore, it is not considered that the design, size or location of the shed are in any way inappropriate. The white painted palisade fence is also considered to be appropriate in this location. Other 7.06 The original plans submitted with the application were inaccurate but amended plans have been submitted in their place. It is therefore possible to make an informed decision on the application based on these plans. 8.0 SUMMARY The following is a summary of the main reasons for the recommendation: The development respects the context of the site and is not harmful to the street scene. The development is not harmful to the residential amenities of nearby dwellings. The scale, location and design of the development preserve the character and appearance of the rural landscape. The work protects the special character and appearance of the listed building. RECOMMENDATION – APPROVE, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION: (1) The development hereby permitted shall be retained in accordance with the following approved plans: Drawing No. 1203-01 and 1203-02B. Reason: To clarify which plans have been approved. Reference: CLC/TN1 NB For full details of all papers submitted with this application please refer to the relevant Public Access pages on the council’s website. The conditions set out in the report may be subject to such reasonable change as is necessary to ensure accuracy and enforceability. .