4.

TCP/03513/E   P/01995/02  Parish/Name:  Shanklin

Registration Date:  01/11/2002  -  Full Planning Permission

Officer:  Mrs. J. Penney           Tel:  (01983) 823593

 

Chalet bungalow, garage & formation of vehicular access (Revised Plan)

land rear of 2, Hungerberry Close, Shanklin, PO37

 

REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

 

Report requested by Team Leader due to recent planning history and nature of representation.

 

LOCATION AND SITE CHARACTERISTICS

 

The application site is part of the rear garden at 2 Hungerberry Close, Shanklin which is a chalet bungalow.  Within the garden is a summer house and flat roof double garage. The plot  fronts Victoria Avenue with number 46 Victoria Avenue, neighbouring property to the south east being a two storey dwelling set well back from the road.  The area is of residential character with a mix of properties in the vicinity.  Victoria Avenue is the main approach road into Shanklin.                             

 

RELEVANT HISTORY

 

TCP/3513/D - Bungalow and formation of vehicular access, land rear of 2, Hungerberry Close, Shanklin, refused August 2002. 

 

DETAILS OF APPLICATION

 

The proposal is for a detached dwelling,  garage and vehicular access off Victoria Avenue 30  metres east of the junction of Hungerberry Close/Victoria Avenue.  The plot measures approximately 16.5 metres by 14.25  metres with access shown to be over existing open verge area outside the applicant’s ownership and turning shown within the site.

 

The proposed footprint measures 7  by 9.5 metres  with garage measuring 2.9 by 5 metres;  external finishes to be agreed.  Accommodation to be provided is living room/dining area, kitchen, utility, cloakroom at ground floor with two bedrooms and bathroom at 1st floor.

 

Details of garage elevations have not been provided but this could be conditioned to be agreed if application approved.   

 

Further plans showing details of garage submitted.

 

DEVELOPMENT PLAN/POLICY

 

The application site is within the development envelope for Shanklin and policies H5 (Infill Development) and D1 (Standards of Design) apply.  Determining factors are matters of site size, visual effect of development, space around building, adequacy of car parking and access and effect on adjoining properties.  The proposal is generally acceptable if it does not unduly damage the amenity of neighbouring property and the surrounding area. 

 

CONSULTEE RESPONSES

 

Following receipt of revised parking/turning arrangements, Highway Engineer recommends conditional approval. 

 

Further correspondence with the Highway Officer who concludes that the potential conflict is resolvable.  A fixed speed camera in Victoria Avenue to the east of the junction with Hungerberry Close is part of the approved Hampshire and Isle of Wight Safety Camera Partnership operational case for the financial year 2003/04 and is essential to contribute towards the reduction in personal injury accidents in this area. Highway Officer has analysed plans showing speed camera and driveway location indicating camera will be 0.75 metre from the edge of the drive, though the camera's position could be varied slightly and the driveway by several metres.  Driveway could also be used by vehicle carrying out maintenance on the camera to save having to construct an additional parking area especially for it, as has been proposed.  Highway Officer is of the view that potential conflict between driveway and camera site can be overcome by condition to state: "the precise location of the approved access will be determined on site before construction commences to take into account a static speed camera and associated apparatus (programmed to be installed in the Summer of 2003) in the immediate vicinity."

 

Tree and Landscape Officer has inspected site and comments that there are 4 trees on the adjoining site which would be affected by the proposal: 3 ash and a horse chestnut.  However, none of these is worth protecting - the ash nearest Victoria Avenue leans substantially to the west/north west so is not well-shaped; the other two ash and horse chestnut have been topped at some time in the last 2 - 10 years, leaving them with no amenity value.  No objection therefore to development on tree grounds. 

 

PARISH/TOWN COUNCIL

 

Shanklin Town Council object  on the basis that not satisfied with the proposed access arrangements. 

 

THIRD PARTY REPRESENTATIONS 

 

Nine letters of objection received on grounds of overdevelopment of small plot of land; inappropriate; adverse effect on appearance of area, unattractive and out of character in area where properties are older style and well spaced; lack of garden space.  

 

Dangerous access, loss of existing pleasant open land,  proximity to bus stop and double yellow lines; inadequate turning, inadequate visibility, potential hazardous parking on main road and unsightly parking on verge;  noise generation by parking manoeuvres; garages too close together. 

 

Adverse affect on views; loss of privacy and light; effect on trees on adjoining boundary, trees important for preservation of red squirrels, increase in water retention in an already damp area, loss of public land, larger property than the one previously refused; disposal of public land without referendum, devaluation of property, proposal contrary to Policy D1 and TR7 as was the original application. 

 

Letter of objection confirming objections still stand.

 

CRIME AND DISORDER IMPLICATIONS

 

No crime and disorder implications anticipated.

 

EVALUATION

 

The character of this part of Victoria Avenue is of a mix of properties on the main route to Shanklin.  The site is within the development envelope boundary and there is  no principle objection to residential development.  Utilisation of sites such as these, a more economical use of land by the subdivision of existing curtilages, is in line with Governmental advice, so long as the resulting development maintains adequate standard and character of development, consistent with its location. 

 

In terms of access, Highway Engineer is satisfied with the proposal subject to conditions. 

 

The Property Services section have been consulted on application.  It would be necessary for developer to apply to acquire land outside application site if scheme to be implemented.

 

With regard effect on adjoining properties, the main aspect windows,  two at ground floor and two dormers front Victoria Avenue.  There is one dormer window on the rear elevation with a patio door and window at ground floor, no windows on the eastern elevation and two small ones at ground floor on the western elevation.   Any potential overlooking from rear dormer window is considered minimum as this serves a bathroom.   

 

With regard size of plot and appearance within street scene, main consideration is how it relates to property to immediate west as the house sited to the south east is well set back from the road,  whether proposal will represent overdevelopment of site and whether it is of adequate standard and character consistent with location. 

 

It is considered that although a limited sized plot, this site can accommodation a dwelling of proposed size with minimum impact on surrounding area given characteristics and neighbouring property.   

 

The Tree and Landscape Officer’s comments that trees on the eastern boundary are of limited amenity value and therefore a refusal on these grounds would be unsustainable. 

 

With regard the previous refusal for a dwelling, the reasons for refusal were additional access onto Victoria Avenue creating hazards, unsatisfactory access by reason of inadequate visibility, inadequate and deficient details in respect of pedestrian and vehicular access to fully consider effects of proposal.  In addition, proposal by reason of position, size and external appearance would be intrusive, out of scale and character with the prevailing pattern of development and have an adverse effect on neighbouring amenities. 

 

Because of Highway Engineer comments on previous application, I have sought clarification on conflicting comments.  Confirmation has been received that subject to satisfactory turning and visibility, application is acceptable.  Revised plan meets with Highway Engineer's approval.  It is considered that a refusal on highway grounds would not be sustained if an appeal were to be lodged. 

 

In terms of design, size and siting compared with the previous scheme, this proposal does have  larger footprint and higher ridge.   The current scheme is considered to be more in keeping in its relationship with the neighbouring property to the west and area in general.  I am of view proposal is of appropriate scale, design and that previous reasons for refusal have been overcome.

 

I consider that the use of this piece of land for an additional dwelling will be acceptable subject to  conditions regarding materials, access and parking, boundary treatment and the prevention of insertion of further windows.

 

No change to recommendation, other than to consider condition regarding access.

 

Siting of speed camera is a matter for Highway Authority and therefore suggested highway condition not considered to be reasonable.  Any revised siting of the access would need to be dealt with by amended/revised planning application.

 

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 and in the public interest.

 

JUSTIFICATION FOR RECOMMENDATION

 

Having given due regard and appropriate weight to all material considerations referred to in this report, it is considered that the proposal conforms with policies D1 and H5 of the Isle of Wight Unitary Development Plan.

 

                        RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL

 

Conditions/Reasons:

 

1

Time limit - full   -   A10

 

2

Construction of the building hereby permitted shall not commence until a schedule of all materials and finishes to be used for the external roofing and walls of the same has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  Thereafter only such approved materials and finishes shall be used in carrying out the development.

 

Reason: To safeguard the amenities of the locality and to comply with Policy D1 (Standards of Design) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

 

 

3

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 without the prior written consent of 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.

 

 

4

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, B, C, D, E and G) 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.

 

 

5

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 use hereby permitted is commenced) (before the buildings is occupied) (in accordance with a timetable agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority).  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.

 

 

6

The access and crossing of the highway verge and/or footway shall be constructed in accordance with the following vehicular crossing specification for light vehicles before the development hereby approved is occupied or brought into use:

 

(a)  Footway Construction (strengthening) for light vehicles

 

1.   Excavate to a minimum depth of 150mm

2.  Construct the vehicle crossing in Class C30P/20 concrete to a minimum thickness of 150mm, properly compacted with float and brush finish.

 

Reason:  To ensure adequate access to the proposed development and to comply with Policy TR7 (Highway Considerations) of the IW Unitary Development Plan.

 

7

Retention of parking   -   K08