REPORT OF THE HEAD OF PLANNING SERVICES TO DEVELOPMENT CONTROL COMMITTEE
SITE INSPECTION – 24 OCTOBER 2003
2. |
TCP/13691/G P/01510/03 Parish/Name: Newport Registration Date: 28/07/2003 -
Full Planning Permission Officer: Mr. A. White Tel: (01983) 823550 2 detached houses with garages; vehicular access, (revised scheme) land between 'Spindles' (62) and Harewood Lodge
(66), Clatterford Road, Newport, PO30 |
REASON FOR COMMITTEE
CONSIDERATION
The application has proved
to be particularly contentious and has raised a number of issues that warrant
committee consideration.
PROCESSING INFORMATION
This is a minor
application, the processing of which has taken thirteen weeks to
date. The processing of this
application has gone beyond the prescribed eight week period for determination
of applications because of the need to ensure receipt of all consultee
comments, the need for a Committee consideration and a Committee site visit.
LOCATION AND SITE
CHARACTERISTICS
This application relates to
an irregular shaped site surrounded on all sides by residential
properties. To the south is a prominent
Grade II Listed Building (Harewood Lodge), to the north east is a split level
bungalow (Spindles), immediately north west are properties fronting Nodgham
Lane and to the south east are properties fronting Clatterford Road separated
from the application site by the driveway serving Harewood Lodge.
The site slopes away from
the north west to the south east boundary and contains a number of trees, three
of which are protected by a recently confirmed Tree Preservation Order. There is a substantial 2 metre high beech
hedge between the site and the property to the north east with a 1.8 metre high
leylandi hedge along part of the rear boundary. Although the application site is under the same ownership as
Harewood Lodge, the two are almost totally separated by a line of substantial
natural growth consisting of both deciduous and coniferous specimens.
The application site,
Spindles, Harewood Lodge and 60 Clatterford Road are served by a shared access
drive off Clatterford Road. This has a
metalled finish and varies in width from 3.6 metres to 2.6 metres.
RELEVANT HISTORY
Outline consent, including
siting and means of access, was conditionally approved for two bungalows in
January 2001.
Detailed consent was
refused for two houses in June of this year under the delegated powers
procedure. Reasons for refusal can be
summarised as follows:
DETAILS OF APPLICATION
Full consent is sought for
two detached houses. Both houses would
be dug into the slope so that they appear two storey from the front and single
storey at the back. The houses have
been designed with their living accommodation at first floor level in order to
benefit from the distant views. Each
house would have four bedrooms (one en suite), bathroom and an attached garage
at ground floor level with a lounge, dining room, kitchen/diner and a WC at
first floor level. There would be a
balcony across part of the front and over the side garage of each dwelling.
Although both proposed houses
would offer a similar level of accommodation, plot 1 (closest to Harewood
Lodge) would be marginally smaller and less detailed in design than plot 2,
(nearest to Spindles). Both houses
would be finished with cedar cladding and colour washed render under a slate
roof. The three protected trees and the
substantial belt of natural growth between the application site and Harewood
Lodge are shown to be retained. The
dwelling on plot 1 is shown to be approximately 18 metres north of Harewood
Lodge and 3 metres from the north western boundary. The dwelling on plot 2 would be situated approximately 2 metres
away from the beech hedge along the north eastern boundary and some 15 metres
from the nearest part of Spindles. It
is proposed to widen the access at the junction with Clatterford Road in order
to facilitate the additional traffic associated with the proposed development.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY
PPG3 (Housing) encourages
the efficient use of land in urban areas but stresses that this should not be at
the expense of cramped development. The
government attaches particular importance to the "greening" of
residential environments and states that landscaping should be an integral part
of new development and opportunities should be taken for the retention of
existing trees and shrubs, and for new plantings.
The site is situated within
the development envelope boundary as defined on the Unitary Development Plan
(UDP) and is also situated within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB).
The following UDP policies
are considered applicable:
S1 - New development will be concentrated within existing urban areas.
S6 - All development will be expected to be of a high standard of
design.
S10 - In areas of designated or defined scientific, nature conservation,
archaeological, historic or landscape value, development will be permitted only
if it will conserve or enhance the features of special character of these
areas.
G1 - Development Envelopes for Towns and Villages.
G4 - General Locational Criteria for Development.
D1 - Standards of Design.
B2 - Settings of Listed Buildings.
H4 - Unallocated Residential Development to be restricted to Defined
Settlements.
H5 - Infill Development.
C2 - Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
C12 - Development Affecting Trees and Woodland.
TR7 - Highway Considerations for New Development.
CONSULTEE RESPONSES
Highway Engineer recommends
conditions should application be approved.
The Council's Conservation
Officer states:
"On the understanding that the trees and landscaping as shown on
the plans will be retained and controlled by conditions, I am of the opinion
that the revised details for the dwellings would not adversely affect the
setting of the Listed Building, or the longer distant views of the site from
the Conservation Area in the vicinity of Carisbrooke Castle."
Senior Countryside Officer
states:
"Given the existing outline consent I can see no reason to refuse
it now. The most important tree to
protect is the sycamore between the two plots.
I have made a TPO to protect this tree and others on the site, because
of the effect on the views.... The
sycamore in particular, although a good specimen, is vulnerable because of its
location and special precautions are necessary to ensure that it is
undamaged. This should include a
condition that the driveway, which encroaches on the crown of the tree, is (and
remains) a permeable surface laid over the existing ground level, so that no
root disturbance occurs nor loss of soil drainage or aeration."
The AONB Planning and
Information Officer states:
"Further to our comments on earlier schemes for this proposal, we
do appreciate some attempt has been made in terms of revised siting to enable
these houses to sit more comfortably in the landscape, particularly in terms of
retaining tree cover.
However, we remain concerned at the proposed height and scale of this
revised scheme, particularly considering the adjacent property (Spindles) is a
bungalow. We suggest that the applicant
submits a photo montage to illustrate how the proposed development would sit in
the landscape in relation to adjoining properties, in order to assess its
impact on an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty."
Following submission by applicant’s agent of a pictorial presentation of
the houses in the landscape, further comments have been received from AONB
Planning and Information Officer. She
comments that the artist (architect) has captured well the objective to retain
the leafy green foil surrounding development, which characterises this area of
settlement and Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. In particular, she notes that the illustration suggests that the
green foil between the proposed houses and existing houses along the eastern
side of Nodgham Lane would be visible from Carisbrooke Road. She would wish to ensure that the heights
and levels of the final built development do in fact achieve what is
illustrated in the artistic impression and that landscaping and planting
conditions of any permission granted ensure that this is maintained. With regard to the general design of the two
proposed houses, it is considered that they no longer mimic each other in
design and therefore sit more comfortably with the diverse style of design and
materials that characterises this area of settlement and Area of Outstanding
Natural Beauty. The only remaining
reservation is the elaborate use of decking on the front elevations.
PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL
COMMENTS
None.
THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS
Carisbrooke West Community
Forum objects on grounds of overdevelopment and also has concerns over
increased traffic, and parking related problems for Clatterford Road residents.
Five letters of objection
from neighbours and local residents which can be summarised as follows:
Additional letter received
from co-owner of adjoining property reiterating grounds of objection detailed
in earlier letter. In addition, some
procedural issues were raised regarding briefing of Members and the public
speaking procedure.
One letter received from a
local resident confirming that she has no particular objection to the
proposal.
CRIME AND DISORDER
IMPLICATIONS
No crime and disorder
implications are anticipated.
EVALUATION
The site is within the
development envelope for Newport and is the subject of an extant outline
consent for two bungalows. The
principle of two dwellings is therefore established. Therefore, the main consideration in respect of this proposal is
whether the developer has satisfactorily overcome the previous reasons for
refusal in order to justify approval of this latest application.
SETTING OF LISTED BUILDING
The Listed Building dates
from the early nineteenth century and is a villa style dwelling with a low
pitched hipped roof, rendered elevations and a distinctive veranda. Although situated outside of the
Conservation Area, it is a prominent feature in the landscape, particularly
when viewed from the grounds of Carisbrooke Castle where the building is seen
against a background of a garden with tree screening.
The latest proposal shows
that the dwelling on plot 1, which would be closest to the Listed Building, has
been reduced in size and the design simplified in order to reduce the visual
impact. The dwelling has also been
positioned to minimise its impact on existing trees and landscape screening
between plot 1 and the Listed Building.
On the basis of the distance between the Listed Building and plot 1
(some 18 metres), the presence of substantial trees and landscaping together
with the revised design proposals, I am of the opinion that the proposed
development would not adversely affect the setting of the Listed Building, or
the longer distant views of the site from the Conservation Area in the vicinity
of Carisbrooke Castle.
LANDSCAPE SETTING
The site does have
important landscape characteristics that contribute to the pleasant suburban
character of this part of Carisbrooke.
Such features are particularly important when viewed from Carisbrooke
Castle as it is from this direction that the character of the built environment
between Clatterford Road and Nodgham Lane, i.e. low density, detached houses,
offset amongst mature trees, is fully realised.
It is my opinion that the
revised proposals have due regard to the landscape features of the site. The three trees recently protected by a TPO
are shown to be retained. All three of
these trees play an important role, but the sycamore is considered to be the
most important because of its potential to partially screen the proposed
development from Carisbrooke Castle.
The spatial relationship of this development with the sycamore is
similar, if not arguably better, than the siting of the two bungalows as
approved under the extant outline consent.
The Council's Senior Countryside Officer is also of the view that the
latest proposal is acceptable on landscape grounds, particularly when
considering the outline consent. He
does, however, suggest a condition stating that the driveway, which partially
encroaches on the crown spread of the tree is (and remains) a permeable surface
laid over the existing ground level, so that no root disturbance occurs, nor
loss of soil drainage or aeration.
Whilst noting concerns of
the AONB Planning and Information Officer in respect of the decking on the
front elevation of the dwellings, these features are not considered to be
inappropriate and I am satisfied that they will not have significant impact to
the detriment of the landscape character of the locality.
DESIGN
Previous application
proposed two houses which, other than being handed, were identical in all
respects. This was considered to be a
form of repetitive development that would not have fitted comfortably into its
surroundings because of the mix of dwellings in proximity to the application
site. Views from Carisbrooke Castle
show Victorian style semi detached houses, substantial detached properties,
bungalows and chalet bungalows.
Although there are clear similarities between plots 1 and 2, I am of the
opinion that they are sufficiently different to overcome the previous reason
for refusal.
In terms of the actual
design, there can be no doubt that the external appearance of both dwellings is
individual and would bear little resemblance to other dwellings in the
immediate area. It is my opinion that
this should not necessarily be seen as a negative aspect of the proposed
development, particularly when considering the mix of dwelling types
surrounding the application site. Also,
the simplified design and reduced scale of plot 1 will help to reduce the
visual impact of that property relative to the adjoining Listed Building.
One objector has made
specific reference to a condition on the outline consent which states that the
approved dwellings should be single storey only in the interests of the
amenities of the area. It was
recognised at the time of the outline consent that two single storey properties
would have limited impact on the surrounding area with that impact likely to be
greater in the winter rather than the summer when trees are not in leaf. Two houses as proposed would most certainly
be greater in scale and mass than the two bungalows approved under the outline
consent but, in my opinion, would not appear cramped or out of character
because of the sufficient space retained between buildings and the acceptable
design as detailed above.
ACCESS
Means of access was
considered at the time of the outline application. This included alterations to the existing access onto Clatterford
Road. The current proposal is the same
in access terms as the extant consent.
I therefore see no justifiable reason on highway grounds to withhold
consent. The proposed parking
arrangements for each dwelling comply with development plan policy.
In terms of the impact upon
the privacy and amenities currently enjoyed by neighbours, the main concern to
be addressed is the potential for overlooking from the proposed windows and
balconies. The proposed dwellings would
be situated approximately 30 metres away from the boundary shared with the back
gardens of Clatterford Road properties.
Not only does this boundary comprise a high evergreen hedge, but there
is also a substantial belt of natural growth between the proposed dwellings and
the south eastern boundary. I am
therefore of the opinion that any loss of privacy to the nearby properties
fronting Clatterford Road would not be of significance.
The owner of Spindles is
concerned that the balcony serving plot 2 may give rise to overlooking and
general disturbance. The agent has
confirmed that the respective side of the balcony would be fitted with an
appropriate screen to minimise overlooking.
It is my opinion that the curved part of the balcony to the front would
not give rise to an unacceptable level of overlooking. General disturbance is unlikely to be
significant particularly when considering that the balcony would be
approximately 20 metres away from the nearest part of Spindles. Furthermore, I would recommend a condition
in respect of the first floor side facing window to ensure that it is fitted
with obscure glass at all times as well as being kept fixed shut.
Concern has been expressed
regarding drainage and, in particular, if the existing private drain serving
Clatterford Road properties has sufficient capacity to accommodate additional
sewage. The agent has recently
confirmed that the proposed development would not tap into the existing drain
but would be taken straight to the public sewer via a new drain to be laid
along the line of the drive.
HUMAN RIGHTS
In coming to this recommendation to grant planning permission
consideration has been given to the rights set out in Article 8 (Right to
Privacy) and Article 1 of the First Protocol (Right to Peaceful Enjoyment of
Possessions) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The impacts this development might have on the
owners/occupiers of the other property in the area and other third parties have
been carefully considered. Whilst there
may be some interference with the rights of these people this has to be
balanced with the rights of the applicant to develop the land in the manner
proposed. Insofar as there is an
interference with the rights of others it is considered necessary for the
protection of the rights and freedom of the applicant. It is also considered
that such action is proportional to the legitimate aim of the Council's Unitary
Development Plan and in the public interest.
JUSTIFICATION FOR DECISION
Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material
considerations outlined in this report, it is considered that the site is
capable of accommodating two houses whilst still retaining the main trees on
site and without compromising the character of the area which is designated as
an AONB. I am also of the opinion that
the siting and design is such that the amenities of the adjoining property occupiers
would not be compromised by this development.
I therefore consider that the proposal is acceptable and does not
conflict with policies contained in the UDP.
RECOMMENDATION -
APPROVAL
Conditions/Reasons:
1 |
Time limit - full
- A10 |
2 |
Submission of samples - S03 |
3 |
No development shall take place until a detailed scheme has been
submitted to and agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority
indicating the means of foul water disposal.
Any such scheme shall indicate connections at points on the system
where adequate capacity exists to ensure that additional flows do not cause
overloading of the existing system.
The agreed system shall be retained and maintained thereafter in
accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure adequate system
of foul and surface water drainage is provided for the development and to
comply with Policy U11 (Infrastructure and Services Provision) of the Isle of
Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
4 |
Prior to occupation of either of the dwellings hereby approved, the
access and crossing of the highway verge and/or footway shall be widened and
constructed in accordance with a scheme agreed with the Local Planning
Authority prior to development commencing on site. Reason: To ensure adequate access to the proposed
development and to comply with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IW
Unitary Development Plan. |
5 |
The development shall not be brought into use until a maximum of four
parking spaces including garages has been provided within the curtilage of
the site and thereafter all of those spaces shall be kept available for such
purposes. Reason: To ensure adequate
off-street parking provision and to comply with Policy TR7 (Highway
Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
6 |
Provision of turning area - K40 |
7 |
Prior to occupation of the development hereby approved, the level of
the land highlighted yellow on the plan attached to and forming part of this
decision notice shall be lowered and the existing highway footway shall be
widened in accordance with a specification to be agreed in writing with the
Local Planning Authority. The
resultant visibility splays shall be subsequently kept free of obstruction. Reason: In the interests of
highway safety and to comply with Policy TR7 of the Isle of Wight Unitary
Development Plan. |
8 |
Before the development commences a landscaping and tree planting
scheme and details of other hard surfacing shall be
submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning
Authority. Such scheme shall specify
the position, species and size of trees to be planted, the phasing and timing
of such planting and shall include provision for its maintenance during the
first five years from the date of planting. Reason: To
ensure that the
appearance of the development is satisfactory and to
comply with Policy D3 (Landscaping) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
9 |
The landscaping scheme shall be completed within six months from the
completion of the last building shell, or such other date as may be agreed in
writing with the Local Planning Authority.
Any trees or plants which die during the first five years shall be
replaced during the next planting season. Reason: To ensure that the
landscape scheme is completed in the interests of the appearance of the
development and to comply with Policy D3 (Landscaping) of the IW Unitary
Development Plan. |
10 |
No development shall take place until there has been submitted to and
approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan indicating the
positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be
erected. The boundary treatment shall
be completed before the buildings are occupied. Development shall be carried out thereafter in accordance with
the approved plans. Reason: In the interests of maintaining
the amenity value of the area to comply with Policy D1 (Standards of Design)
of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
11 |
Notwithstanding the provisions of any current Town and Country
Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking
and re-enacting that Order), no extension, building or structure permitted by
Part 1, Classes A and E of the 1995 Order, as amended, shall be erected
within the curtilage of the site without the prior written approval of the
Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of
amenities of the area and to comply with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of
the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
12 |
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning
(General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and
en-enacting that Order) (with or without modification), no windows/dormer
windows (other than those expressly authorised by this permission) shall be
constructed unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. Reason: In the interests of the
character and amenities of the area and to comply with Policy D1 (Standards
of Design) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
13 |
Before the balcony to the house on Plot 2 is brought into use, a
solid/opaque screen to a minimum height of 1.8 metres shall be erected on the
north eastern perimeter and shall be retained thereafter, in accordance with
details to be submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority prior
to work commencing on site. Reason: In the interests of the privacy and
amenity of the occupiers of the adjoining property and to comply with Policy
D1 (Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
14 |
The first floor window in the north east elevation of the dwelling on
of Plot 2 shall at all times be fitted with obscure glass and fixed shut. Reason: In the interest of the
amenities of the adjoining property occupiers and to comply with Policy D1 of
the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
15 |
No development shall take place until a specification of the proposed
driveway, parking and turning area including levels, method of construction
and surface has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority. The development
shall be carried out and thereafter retained and maintained in accordance
with the agreed details. Reason: To ensure the protection
of the trees to be retained in the interest of the amenities of the area and
to comply with policies D1 and C12 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development
Plan. |
16 |
No development including site clearance shall commence on the site
until all trees, shrubs and other natural features, not previously agreed
with the Local Planning Authority for removal, shall have been protected by
fencing or other agreed barrier along a line to be agreed in writing with the
Local Planning Authority. Any fencing
shall conform to the following specification: 1.2m minimum height chestnut paling to BS 1722 Part 4 standard,
securely mounted on 1.2m minimum above ground height timber posts driven
firmly into the ground/or 2.4m minimum height heavy duty hoardings securely
mounted on scaffold poles, or other method of agreed protection which forms
an effective barrier to disturbance to the retained tree. Such fencing or barrier shall be maintained
throughout the course of the works on the site, during which period the
following restrictions shall apply: (a) No placement or storage of material; (b) No placement or storage of fuels or chemicals. (c) No placement or storage of excavated soil. (d) No lighting of bonfires. (e) No physical damage to bark or branches. (f) No changes to natural ground drainage in the area. (g) No changes in ground levels. (h) No digging of trenches for services, drains or sewers. (i) Any trenches required in close proximity shall be hand dug
ensuring all major roots are left undamaged. Reason: To ensure that trees,
shrubs and other natural features to be retained are adequately protected
from damaged to health and stability throughout the construction period in
the interests of amenity and to comply with Policy C12 (Development Affecting
Trees and Woodland) of the IW Unitary Development Plan. |
17 |
The existing trees, shrubs and hedgerows on the southern boundary
between the application site and Harewood Lodge shall be retained and
maintained and, where necessary, reinforced with further planting, the
details of which shall accord with a scheme to be agreed in writing with the
Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interest of the
amenities of the area in general and the setting of the adjoining Listed
Building in particular and to comply with policies D1 and B2 of the Isle of
Wight Unitary Development Plan. |
18 |
All material excavated as a result of general ground works including
site levelling, installation of services or the digging of foundations, shall
not be disposed of within the area identified in red/blue on the submitted
plans. The material shall be removed
from site prior to the construction of the dwellings proceeding beyond damp
proof course level. Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the
area in general and adjoining residential property in particular and to
comply with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary Development
Plan. |
Head of Planning Services