B8 WA/2015/2231Mr & Mrs Martin23/11/2015

Committee:Meeting Date:

Erection of a first floor extension and alterations including a dormer window following removal of existing roof and demolition of existing rear extension at Tanglewood, Station Lane, Enton GU8 5AE

Central Area13/01/2016

Public Notice Was Public Notice required and posted: N/AGrid Reference: E: 495418 N: 141160

Parish : WitleyWard : MilfordCase Officer: Sophie Piper8 Week Expiry Date 18/01/2016Neighbour Notification Expiry Date 04/01/2016RECOMMENDATION That, subject to consideration of any further

representations received, permission be GRANTED subject to conditions.

Introduction

The application has been brought before the Area Committee because the applicant and agent are elected Councillors.

Location Plan

Site Description

The application site measures 0.15 hectares and is located on the west side of Station Lane.

The site comprises a detached chalet bungalow with detached garage. The existing dwelling measures 10.9m in width, 14.23m in depth (maximum), 2.34m in height to the eaves, and 6.3m in height to the ridge of the roof (maximum) with a rear single storey extension

The surrounding area is rural in character. The neighbouring properties to the north and south of the site are both detached two storey dwellings.

Proposal

The application seeks permission for the erection of a first floor extension to form a two storey dwelling following demolition of the existing single storey extension.

The extended dwelling would measure 10.9m in width, 10.68m in depth, 5.05m in height to the eaves, and 9m in height to the ridge of the roof. There would be no increase to the footprint of the dwelling and vehicular access to the site would stay the same.

The first floor would be finished with tile hanging.

Proposed block plan

Existing elevations and floorplans

Proposed elevations and floorplans

Proposed streetscene

Relevant Planning History

WA/1977/0648 Demolition of existing double garage and erection of new garage.

Full permission(15/06/1977)

Planning Policy Constraints

Green Belt – outside any defined settlement areaWealden Heaths I SAC 2km Buffer ZoneWealden Heaths I SPA 5km Buffer ZonePotentially contaminated land

Development Plan Policies and Proposals

Saved Policies C1, RD2, D1, D4, D5, D8 and D9 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002

Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires all applications for planning permission to be determined in accordance with the Development Plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The adopted Local Plan (2002) and the South East Plan 2009 (solely in relation to policy NRM6) therefore remain the starting point for the assessment of this proposal. The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) is a material consideration in the determination of this case. In line with paragraph 215 due weight may only be given to relevant policies in existing plans according to their degree of consistency with the NPPF. The report will identify the appropriate weight to be given to the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002. The Council is in the process of replacing the adopted 2002 Local Plan with a new two part document. Part 1 (Strategic Policies and Sites) will replace the Core Strategy that was withdrawn in October 2013. Part 2 (Development Management and Site Allocations) will follow the adoption of Part 1. The new Local Plan will build upon the foundations of the Core Strategy, particularly in those areas where the policy/approach is not likely to change significantly. Public consultation on potential housing scenarios and other issues took place in September/October 2014. In the latest provisional timetable for the preparation of the Local Plan (Part 1), the Council is scheduled approve the plan for publication in April 2016.

Other guidance:

National Planning Policy Framework (2012) National Planning Practice Guidance (2014) Statement of Community Involvement (2014 Revision) Council’s Parking Guidelines (2013) Residential Extensions SPD (2010) Vehicular and Cycle Parking Guidance (Surrey County Council 2012)

Consultations and Town/Parish Council Comments

County Highway Authority The County Highway Authority has undertaken an assessment in terms of the likely net additional traffic generation, access

arrangements and parking provision and is satisfied that the application would not have a material impact on the safety and operation of the adjoining public highway. The County Highway Authority therefore has no highway requirements.

Witley Parish Council No objectionCouncil’s Environmental Health Officer

No comments or requirements

Representations

In accordance with the statutory requirements and the “Reaching Out to the Community – Local Development Framework – Statement of Community Involvement – August 2014” neighbour notification letters were sent on 26/11/2015.

No letters of representation have been received.

The report was prepared prior to the expiry of the deadline for the receipt of representations. Any representations will be reported and assessed with an addendum report to the meeting. If new material comes to light, in certain circumstances it may be necessary to defer the application.

Submissions in support

In support of the application the applicant has made the following points: The proposed extension would complement the surrounding dwellings

and be built of similar materials to the existing house. The ridge height would be similar to the neighbouring dwellings. Gross increase of 38%, with a decrease in footprint.

Determining Issues

Principle of developmentImpact upon Green Belt Impact on visual amenityImpact on residential amenityEffect upon SPA & SACBiodiversity and compliance with Habitat Regulations 2010Accessibility and Equalities Act 2010, Crime and Disorder and Human Rights ImplicationsEnvironmental Impact Regulations 2011

Pre Commencement ConditionsWorking in a positive/proactive manner

Planning Considerations

Principle of development

The site is located within the Green Belt outside any defined settlement area. Within the Green Belt there is a general presumption against inappropriate development which is, by definition, harmful and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.

Impact upon Green Belt

Proposals for the extension to buildings may not constitute inappropriate development so long as they do not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building.

Policy RD2 of the Local Plan states that extensions to dwellings in the Green Belt will be permitted provided that the extension:-

a) Does not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original dwelling;

b) Is of an appropriate design and will not adversely change the character, appearance, bulk and setting of the existing dwelling; and

c) Will not appear more intrusive in the landscape or otherwise detract from the rural character of the area.

In assessing whether a proposed extension is disproportionate, account will be taken of the relative increase in floorspace together with the form, bulk and height of the proposal in comparison to the original dwelling.

The subtext to Policy RD2 of the Local Plan indicates that, as a guideline, a proposal which individually or cumulatively increases the floor space of the original dwelling (or as existing in December 1968) by more than 40% will unlikely be considered proportionate and therefore would constitute inappropriate development. Paragraph 11.27 of the text to Policy RD2 sets out the rationale for the policy. This explains that the retention of a range of sizes of dwellings in the countryside and contributes to meeting the identified housing needs of the Borough and is an important part of the preservation of its intrinsic character.

Policy RD2 is considered to be consistent with the NPPF except for the definition of ‘original’ dwelling. The Council has maintained its existing baseline date in the interest of consistency.

It is understood from the existing plans, provided with the current application that the dwelling had an original floorspace of 148.11 m2. There is no planning history for the dwelling. Therefore officers are satisfied that this is the ‘original’ dwelling for the purposes of this assessment.

The net additional floor space sought under this application would be 64.56 m2, which would result in an increase of 33% above that of the original dwelling. This would therefore fall inside the 40% guideline of the Local Plan 2002.

Furthermore, in addition to assessing whether a proposal would result in a proportionate addition over and above the size of the original dwelling, consideration must also be given to the impact on the openness and visual amenities of the Green Belt.

This is inherently a more subjective judgment based on the uplift in the building’s bulk, mass and spread of development across a site, together with any increase in height.

The proposed extension would increase the height of the dwelling by over 3m. However, there would be a decrease in the footprint of the site and therefore no spread of development across the site. The dwelling is positioned within an existing streetscene amongst other residential properties and would therefore not appear intrusive in the landscape. As such, the proposal is considered to accord with criteria (b) & (c) of Policy RD2 of the Local Plan.

Having regard to these considerations, the proposed scheme would not represent inappropriate development within the Green Belt and would therefore comply with Policies C1 and RD2 of the Local Plan 2002, the Council’s Residential Extensions SPD and the requirements of the NPPF.

Impact on visual amenity

The NPPF attaches great importance to the design of the built environment as a key part of sustainable development. Although planning policies and decisions should not attempt to impose architectural styles or particular tastes, they should seek to promote or reinforce local distinctiveness. Policies D1 and D4 of the Local Plan 2002 accord with the NPPF in requiring development to have high quality design and to be well related in size, scale and character to its surroundings.

The section of Station Lane in which the application site lies is characterised by a group of 7 dwellings located on the west side, predominantly two-storey

in height. The styles of the dwellings are typical of the Surrey vernacular, constructed from red brick with some finished with tile hanging.

The proposal is considered to be in keeping with the character of the area and would provide a more attractive dwelling than the existing bungalow. The proposed roof would be higher than ‘Brook Cottage’ and ‘Little Oaks’ to the north and south of the property. However, it would replicate the existing form of the semi-detached properties ‘Shepley Cottage’ and ‘Newcrofts Cottage’ to the north, which are of similar form and height. The fully hipped roof would lessen the impact of the increased bulk and massing of the building.

It is considered that the proposed materials, which would include tile hanging and the existing brickwork would be appropriate within the streetscene and would be keeping with the wider area.

As such, the proposal would accord with Policies D1 and D4 of the Local Plan. Impact on residential amenity

The NPPF identifies that within the overarching roles that the planning system ought to play, a set of core land use planning principles should underpin both plan-making and decision making. These 12 principles include that planning should seek to secure a good standard of amenity for all existing and future occupants of land and buildings. These principles are supported by Policies D1 and D4 of the Local Plan and guidance contained within the Council’s SPD for Residential Extensions.

The neighbouring property to the south ‘Little Oaks’ is on the same ground level with Tanglewood; however the proposed dwelling would be over 8m away from the boundary with a total of over 19m separation distance between the two properties. As such, officers consider that there would be no material loss of privacy caused to this neighbour, and would be positioned such that there would be no material harm by way of loss of light, overshadowing or overbearing impact.

The neighbouring property to the north, ‘Brook Cottage’, is set further back than Tanglewood with a separation distance of 3.6m. The proposed extended dwelling has been assessed against the 45 degree angle test, in relation to its impact upon this property by way of overbearing impact and loss of light. The submitted plans demonstrate that the scheme does not comply with the 45 degree test in regards to a first floor window on the north elevation of ‘Brook Cottage’. However, on balance, as a result of the fully hipped form of the proposed roof, together with the fact that the neighbour’s affected room benefits from another window on the east elevation, officers consider that the

proposal would not cause any adverse impacts on the amenities of ‘Brook Cottage’ by way of loss of light or overbearing impact. However, it is considered reasonable for a condition to be imposed if permission is granted requiring the new windows on the first floor of the north elevation to be obscure glazed to the extent that intervisibility is excluded and fixed shut to a point up to 1.7m in height from floor level, together with a restriction on any further openings being formed, in order to safeguard the privacy of the neighbouring properties.

Based on the above, the proposal would not significantly harm the amenities of the occupiers of the neighbouring dwellings by way of overbearing impact, overlooking or loss of light. The proposal would therefore comply with Local Plan Policies D1 and D4, Council’s Residential Extensions SPD and the requirements of the NPPF

Effect on SPA & SAC

As the proposed development is for a residential extension, it is not likely to result in a significant increase in the number of people permanently residing on the site or in the amount of environmental pollution and therefore would not have a likely significant effect on the integrity of the SPA & SAC in accordance with Policy D5 of the Local Plan 2002. An appropriate assessment is not therefore required.

Biodiversity and compliance with Habitat Regulations 2010

The NPPF requires that when determining planning application, local planning authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by applying the following principles:

If significant harm resulting from a development cannot be avoided (through locating on an alternative site with less harmful impacts), adequately mitigated, or, as a last resort, compensated for then planning permission should be refused.

In addition, Circular 06/2005 states ‘It is essential that the presence or otherwise of protected species and the extent that they may be affected by the proposed development, is established before planning permission is granted.’

The application property does not fall within a designated SPA, SAC, SNCI or SSSI. It is not within 200m of ancient woodland or water, and is not an agricultural building or barn. Having regard to this, and the completed biodiversity checklist, it is considered that a biodiversity survey is not required in this instance. However, an informative should be added to remind the

applicant that protected species may be present at the property and that works should stop should they be found during the course of the works.

Accessibility and Equalities Act 2010, Crime and Disorder and Human Rights Implications

There are no implications for this application.

Environmental Impact Regulations 2011

The proposal is considered not to be EIA development under either Schedule 1 or 2 of the EIA Impact Regulations 2011 or a variation/amendment of a previous EIA development nor taken in conjunction with other development that is likely to have a significant environmental effect.

Pre Commencement Conditions

Article 35 of the DMPO 2015 requires that for any application for planning permission, the Notice must state clearly and precisely the full reasons, in the case of each pre-commencement condition, for the condition being a pre-commencement condition. This is in addition to giving the full reason for the condition being imposed.

“Pre commencement condition” means a condition imposed on the grant of permission which must be complied with: before any building/ other operation/ or use of the land comprised in the development is begun.

Where pre commencement conditions are justified, these are provided with an appropriate reason for the condition.

Development Management Procedure Order 2015 - Working in a positive/proactive manner

In assessing this application, officers have worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner consistent with the requirements of paragraphs 186-187 of the NPPF. This included:-

Provided or made available pre application advice to seek to resolve problems before the application was submitted and to foster the delivery of sustainable development.

Provided feedback through the validation process including information on the website, to correct identified problems to ensure that the application was correct and could be registered;

Conclusion/ planning judgement

The proposed scheme has been assessed against relevant policies within the Local Plan and the guidance contained within the SPD relating to residential extensions. The proposal would comply with these policies and as a result there would be no harm to visual or residential amenity.

Officers consider that there would be no adverse impacts as a result of the development that would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of approval, when assessed against the policies in the NPPF taken as a whole. In addition there are no specific policies within the Framework which indicate that the proposal should be resisted.

Recommendation

That subject to consideration of any further representations received permission be GRANTED subject the following conditions:

1. ConditionThe windows in the first floor of the north and south elevations shall be glazed with obscure glazing to the extent that intervisibility is excluded and fixed shut to a point up to 1.7m in height from first floor level and shall be retained.

ReasonIn the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

2. ConditionNotwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no windows/dormer windows or other openings other than those expressly authorised by this permission shall be constructed in the first floor of the north and south elevations without the written permission of the Local Planning Authority.

ReasonIn the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

3. ConditionNo variation of the type and colour of the external materials to be used in the construction of the development as shown on the approved

deposited plan shall be made without the prior written consent of the Local Planning Authority.

ReasonIn the interest of the visual amenities of the area in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

4. ConditionThe plan numbers to which this permission relates are Location Plan (unnumbered, scale 1:1250), Block Plan (unnumbered, scale 1:500), 2456.200 Existing Plans & Elevations, 2456.201 Proposed Plans & Elevations, 2456.202 Street Scene & Existing Elevations. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plans. No material variation from these plans shall take place unless otherwise first agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority.

ReasonIn order that the development hereby permitted shall be fully implemented in complete accordance with the approved plans and to accord with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

Informatives

1. The applicant is reminded that it is an offence to disturb protected species under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. Should a protected species be found during the course of the works, the applicant should stop work and contact Natural England for further advice on 0845 600 3078.

2. The Council confirms that in assessing this planning application it has worked with the applicant in a positive and proactive way, in line with the requirements of paragraph 186-187 of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012.