|
Date: |
12 August 2021 |
Ward: |
Haxby And Wigginton |
|
Team: |
West Area |
Parish: |
Haxby Town Council |
|
Reference: |
20/01958/FUL |
|
Application at: |
Cedar House 29 Station Road Haxby York YO32 3LU |
|
For: |
Conversion of existing house into two dwellings with single storey rear extension, side and rear dormers, rear extension, demolition of garage and erection of new dwelling to rear |
|
By: |
Mr Paul Lee |
|
Application Type: |
Full Application |
|
Target Date: |
11 March 2021 |
|
Recommendation: |
Approve |
1.0 PROPOSAL
1.1 This application seeks permission for the conversion of the existing property into two dwellings (dwelling 1 and 2) with associated extensions and alterations and the construction of a new dwelling (dwelling 3) in the rear garden with access from Ash Lane.
1.2 The following amendments have been made to the original submission in response to concerns from officers and residents:
· Removal of external stairs and rear balcony to main dwelling and reduction in height of single storey rear extension
· Relocate vehicle access to dwelling 2
· Provide 2no. passing places and a turntable to dwelling 2
· Side dormer obscurely glazed and fixed shut
THE SITE
1.3 The host dwelling is a large semi-detached property accessed via Station Road with existing vehicle access to the rear garden via the adjacent Ash Lane. This lane also serves 1 and 2 Cedar Court. The large rear garden is bounded on three sides by a brick boundary wall and has been the subject of many previous planning applications, the most relevant of which are summarised below.
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY
1.4 The following planning applications have previously been submitted for this and surrounding sites:
· 3/57/459/PA – Construction of a dwelling to the rear of 29 Station Road – REFUSED (March 1984) due to site incompatibility with surrounding development, overdevelopment and unsatisfactory highway access (length and narrow width)
· 3/57/459C/PA – Change of use of one dwelling into two and erection of single storey rear extension to form lounge – REFUSED (December 1988) due to length and width of access lane and proposed parking area to front garden would be detrimental to residential amenity of neighbouring properties.
· 3/57/459D/PA - Change of use of one dwelling into two and erection of single storey rear extension to form lounge – REFUSED (November 1989) due to impact on amenity of neighbours and length and width of access lane re vehicle movements.
· 03/04114/FUL – Erection of detached dormer bungalow and garage on land to the rear of 36 Windmill Lane – REFUSED (May 2004) due to siting and scale of the dwelling, together with the consequent need for access via a long and narrow private drive resulting in an adverse impact on the character and amenity of the area representing overdevelopment of the site.
· APP/C2741/A/04/1158659 – Appeal of 03/04114/FUL – DISMISSED (May 2005) due to overdevelopment of the site only.
COMMITTEE CALL-IN
1.5 The application has been called to committee by Cllr Pearson over concerns regarding the narrow/inappropriate access lane and the long history of rejected applications for additional dwellings accessed via Ash Lane.
2.0 POLICY CONTEXT
Publication Draft Local Plan 2018
2.1 The Publication Draft City of York Local Plan 2018 ('2018 Draft Plan') was submitted for examination on 25 May 2018. Phase 1 of the hearings into the examination of the Local Plan took place in December 2019. In accordance with paragraph 48 of the national Planning Policy Framework (‘NPPF’) the Draft Plan policies can be afforded weight according to:
-The stage of preparation of the emerging plan (the more advanced the preparation, the greater the weight that may be given);
- The extent to which there are unresolved objections to relevant policies (the less significant the unresolved objections, the greater the weight that may be given); and
- The degree of consistency of the relevant policies in the emerging plan to the policies in the previous NPPF published in March 2012. (NB: Under transitional arrangements plans submitted for examination before 24 January 2019 will be assessed against the 2012 NPPF).
2.2 Relevant Policies:
D1 Placemaking
D11 Extensions and Alterations
CC1 Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Generation and Storage
CC2 Sustainable Design and Construction of New Development
ENV5 Sustainable Drainage
Development Control Local Plan 2005
2.3 The York Development Control draft Local Plan was approved for development control purposes in April 2005. Its policies are material considerations in the determination of planning applications although it is considered that their weight is very limited except when they are in accordance with the NPPF.
2.4 Relevant Policies:
GP1 Design
GP10 Subdivision of gardens and infill development
H7 Residential Extensions
3.0 CONSULTATIONS
Highways Network Management
3.1 Initial consultation comments required further information to be submitted regarding :- sight lines, car parking and tracking, arrangements for deliveries, passing places, visitor parking/deliveries, refuse collection and cycle parking.
3.2 On receipt of further information and drawings officers consider that the issues raised have been addressed and there are no objections on highways grounds subject to a condition securing the vehicle turntable for dwelling 2. The addition of 2 dwellings would not significantly impact highway safety on this existing access lane.
Flood Risk Management
3.3 Following the submission of drainage details and a drainage report, a soakaway test on site was witnessed by the Senior Flood Risk Management Engineer. The test was successful and soakaways are considered an acceptable method of surface water disposal in this location. The proposals are therefore supported in principle subject to condition.
Public Protection
3.4 No objections subject to the inclusion of a condition for passive provision for electric vehicle recharging points.
Yorkshire Water
3.5 No observation comments required as existing drainage system in use.
Fire and Rescue
3.6 No objections to the proposed development.
Haxby Parish Council
3.7 No objections to the initial submission. Upon re-consultation, significant objections in support of multiple neighbour concerns, overdevelopment, highway safety concerns and historic refusals for similar developments. Also raise the issue of the new Haxby railway station which will compound parking/traffic flow in the area.
4.0 REPRESENTATIONS
Neighbour Notification and Publicity
Neighbour Notification and Publicity
4.1 Thirty four letters of objection have been received from six neighbouring properties. The following issues have been raised:
· Significant access and highway safety issues relating to long and narrow access lane
· Lack of passing places resulting in dangerous vehicle manoeuvres
· Additional traffic and noise nuisance, including use of turntable
· Parking issues for occupants, visitors and deliveries
· Historic refusals of multiple applications for similar development due to the access lane
· Destruction of walled garden and impact on local environment and amenity
· Overdevelopment of the rear garden and plot as a whole
· Impact on the amenity of no. 25 in relation to new dwelling in the garden, specifically loss of light to ground floor dining room window
· Loss of privacy, overlooking and overshadowing from side and rear dormers
· Poor outlook to no’s 1 and 2 Cedar Court and 25 Station Road
· Design of new dwelling not in keeping with appearance/scale of surrounding plots
· Proposals will significantly alter the visual appearance of the access lane and wall, including the loss of mature trees and plants to the detriment of surrounding properties.
Ward Councillor
4.2 The following objections have been received from Cllr E Pearson:
· Significant access and highway safety issues relating to long and narrow access lane
· Historic refusals on site due to inappropriate access lane
· The new and converted dwellings would have a detrimental impact on the amenity of neighbours
· Parking should be provided to the front of no. 29 with direct access to Station Road
· Many of the highway requirements appear to be unachievable
· The new dwelling was cause a loss of light to the side facing window of no. 25 Station Road
· The dormer windows would result in a loss of privacy for adjacent neighbours
· Drainage issues are known to exist on site
5.0 APPRAISAL
KEY ISSUES:-
· Principle of development
· Design and appearance
· Impact on neighbouring property
· Highway issues
· Drainage
· Climate change
· Planning history
Principle of Development
5.1 Paragraph 11 of the NPPF sets out the presumption in favour of sustainable development. For decision taking this means where there are no relevant development plan policies, planning permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies of the Framework taken as a whole. The NPPF seeks to support the Government’s objective of significantly boosting the supply of homes.
5.2 The NPPF requires local planning authorities to seek the efficient use of land in sustainable locations, focus development towards previously developed land and to deliver a wide choice of high quality homes. The definition of previously developed land does not however include residential gardens. Policy GP10 of the 2005 Draft Local Plan reflects NPPF policy and states that whilst subdivision of gardens may be acceptable this is subject to the proviso that there would be no detriment to the character and amenity of the local environment. Policy D1 of the 2018 Publication Draft Local Plan states that development proposals which cause damage to the character and quality of an area will be refused and requires that proposals are appropriate for its proposed use and neighbouring context.
5.3 The site lies within an established residential area within the village of Haxby in a sustainable location close to local shops and with public transport links into the centre of York. The proposal relates to an existing walled garden surrounded by residential development. Similar back land development in rear gardens has previously taken place. Given the previously developed nature of this part of the site, the principle of the subdivision of the existing dwelling and the infill house to the rear of the garden is considered to be acceptable in this location.
Design and Appearance
5.4 Section 12 of the NPPF sets out that the creation of high quality, beautiful and sustainable buildings and places is fundamental to what the planning and development process should achieve. Paragraph 130 seeks to ensure that developments function well and add to the overall quality of the area while being visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping. Developments should be sympathetic to local character and history and establish or maintain a strong sense of place, using the arrangement of streets, spaces, building types and materials to create attractive, welcoming and distinctive places to live, work and visit.
5.5 Policy D1 of the 2018 Draft Plan states that proposals will be supported where they improve poor existing urban and natural environments, enhance York’s special qualities and better reveal the significances of the historic environment. Development proposals that fail to take account of York’s special qualities, fail to make a positive design contribution to the city, or cause damage to the character and quality of an area will be refused.
Alterations to existing dwelling
5.6 The proposal seeks to sub-divide the existing large semi-detached property into two dwellings. Dwelling 1 would retain the main front facade with the addition of a single storey rear extension to infill between the existing boundary wall with no. 27 and the existing two storey rear offshoot. A rear dormer is also proposed. This dwelling would have 5no. bedrooms. Dwelling 2 would be formed within the two storey rear offshoot and existing single storey rear extension with a total of 4no. bedrooms. A side dormer facing east is also proposed.
5.7 The rear dormer would sit centrally within the rear roof slope and would mirror the adjacent rear dormer belonging to no. 27 in terms of height and depth. It would be wider than the existing rear dormer, however given its overall design and scale it is considered that it would not look overly large or dominant in this location. Its overall scale and proportions appear in keeping with the scale of the dwelling as a whole.
5.8 The side dormer would be located on the east elevation and would be situated relatively centrally within the side roof slope of the rear offshoot. The overall design and scale are considered acceptable and would not result in a top-heavy addition that would appear overly dominant here. It is noted that it appears to sit quite far down in the roof when viewed from the front elevation drawing, however, given the distance from the front elevation, it is likely that the side dormer would not appear overly incongruous.
5.9 It is also proposed to add a single storey flat roof extension to the full width of the rear elevation of dwelling 1 infilling the patio space between the rear offshoot and the side boundary with no.27. This element of the scheme has been amended from its initial submission, with the balcony and external steps removed and the overall height of the structure reduced. The revised scale and design and considered sympathetic to the overall design and scale of the dwelling, and given its location, tucked away from the main garden, there would be no adverse impact to the overall appearance of the site.
New dwelling
5.10 The new detached single storey dwelling (dwelling 3) would be located in the rear garden of the existing property, with a new vehicle access from Ash Lane. The new 2 bedroom dwelling would be modest in scale, measuring 9.7m (at its widest point) x 10.8m with a height of 3m and has been designed to reflect the form and design of a modern garden building rather than a more traditional bungalow. Bins and bicycles would be stored to the south west corner of the site with 2no. car parking spaces adjacent.
5.11 Residents have commented that the proposed dwelling does not resemble existing development in the area, with regard to design, form and materials. Further, they have objected to the modest size of the site, the small amount of external amenity space and that proposals appear cramped, the site overdeveloped and the resulting loss of the existing large walled garden which is an important feature within the immediate area.
5.12 It is acknowledged that the dwelling does not appear similar to existing brick built development, with the immediate area being characterised by larger dwellings (one and two storey), in spacious plots. However following previous refusals on this site, it was considered that a smaller, more modest dwelling would be better suited to the plot, with a reduced height so as to reduce impact to immediate dwellings and the overall design is that of a modern garden building, so that it would not look out of character in this back garden location. Whilst it is recognised that the dwelling would be a departure from form of surrounding development, it is not considered that the proposal would appear out of character with other back garden development in the immediate vicinity.
5.13 The proposal would sub-divide the existing large rear garden into three smaller plots, with dwelling 3 occupying the full width of the far rear garden and dwelling 1 and 2 retaining the remaining garden being split roughly down the middle. Dwelling 1 would retain the largest garden, with dwelling 2 having a modest rear courtyard garden and dwelling 3 would have a small wrap-around garden. All dwellings are considered to have adequate and appropriate outside amenity space for the corresponding size of each property, with adequate provision for bin and cycle storage. The subdivision of the garden is not considered to have a significant detrimental impact to the character of the area, with all of the existing walls that bound the garden to be retained.
Impact on neighbour amenity
5.14 The NPPF states that developments should create places with a high standard of amenity for all existing and future users. Policy D1 of the 2018 Draft Plan states that development proposals should ensure design considers residential amenity so that residents living nearby are not unduly affected by noise, disturbance, overlooking or overshadowing.
5.15 The single storey dwelling would be situated in close proximity to 25 York Road which is a large two storey dwelling located along the side boundary with the application site. Multiple windows across the ground and first floor overlook the application site, with the new dwelling being located adjacent to the largest ground floor window serving the dining room. Objections have been raised by residents with regard to loss of light and overshadowing of this room. The Building Research Establishment (BRE) have set out guidelines to measure the impact a development would have upon the daylight of an existing building. The submitted drawing showing the 25 degree line, measured from the centre point of the window shows that there would not be a significant loss of daylight and because of the single storey height, it would not prevent the occupiers of no. 25 having sight of the sky. Whilst it is acknowledged that the new dwelling would be in close proximity of the boundary, the existing windows within no.25 have been located in close proximity and having sight over the existing rear garden. As such whilst there would be some impact on this room, the impact is not considered so harmful that refusal would be justified in this instance.
5.16 The creation of dwellings 2 and 3 would result in the relocation of the existing vehicle entrance to the side boundary wall facing Ash Lane and the addition of a new gated vehicle entrance to dwelling no. 3. The agent has confirmed that these changes would result in the removal of two small trees only, with the majority of mature vegetation to the north to be retained. Objections have been raised by the occupants of Cedar Court that the proposed alterations to the lane would result in significant harm to outlook, particularly from 1 Cedar Court which lies directly opposite the site. The proposals would result in the vehicle and pedestrian accesses being centralised within the wall, although these would be gated as per the present situation and as such the overall impact on outlook is not considered to be significant.
5.17 There have also been objections from residents with regard to noise nuisance from the additional development on site. Two additional households would occupy the rear garden, the use of the turntable and also the addition of car parking to what is currently a single rear garden. The development would result in more vehicle movements than at present, however there is an existing rear vehicle access which could be used to park cars in the rear garden. As such the principle of cars using the back lane and being parked in the current rear garden is already established. Whilst it is recognised that the potential additional vehicle use would create some additional noise, it is not considered that this would be significant or detrimental to existing owners/occupiers of the lane or to other immediate neighbouring properties.
5.18 The side and rear dormers to the existing property have raised concern amongst residents due to their location and the associated loss of privacy, particularly from the side dormer on the east elevation. It is noted that both dormers could be constructed under permitted development rights as part of the existing dwelling, however as they would be installed as part of the application to sub-divide the property, it is considered appropriate to safeguard the amenity of neighbouring residents. As such amendments have been made to obscurely glaze the side dormer so that there would be no overlooking to properties further along Station Road. With regard to the rear dormer, it is noted that no. 27 has a similar dormer which already results in an element of overlooking to the host and neighbouring gardens. Therefore the addition of a rear dormer to the host dwelling is not considered to cause significant further overlooking than already occurs.
Highway Matters
5.19 The proposals would rely on Ash Lane to provide vehicle and pedestrian access to dwellings 2 and 3. The existing side vehicle entrance to the host dwelling would be relocated further north to the end of the plot for dwelling 2, with the new access created adjacent to this with a pedestrian access for dwelling 1 in between to provide access for bins and bicycles. All dwellings would have two car parking spaces and covered, secure cycle provision, although full details of the cycle provision would be required by condition. A communal bin storage area has also been provide in front of no. 1 for the collection of bins only, given the narrowness of the lane and the difficulty of refuse vehicles manoeuvring down the lane. Significant concerns have been raised by residents, the Parish Council and Cllr Pearson about the use of the lane for further vehicle movements due to its length and narrow width. Highways colleagues also expressed concern due to the limited width, lack of sight lines and passing places, which could cause highway safety issues for existing and new users of the lane. The revised site plan shows the inclusion of two passing places, one to the entrance to the lane adjacent the front drive of dwelling 1, and one further down the lane in front of the drive of dwelling 2. This would ensure that vehicles entering and exiting the lane would have adequate space to pull over in the event of another vehicle approaching in the opposite direction. It is considered that both passing places would be well situated to provide adequate width for two vehicles, and there is also additional width at the turning head in Cedar Court and at the entrance to the lane for larger vehicles to wait if required.
5.20 In order to provide adequate sight lines for dwellings 2 and 3, the existing side vehicle access has been relocated for better visibility of vehicles entering and existing the new accesses and for other vehicles using the lane. Dwelling 3 has adequate space to turn within the site so could exit the drive in forward gear which is important in this instance given the highway concerns regarding the use of the narrow lane. A similar turning area could not be provided for dwelling 2, therefore a turntable to allow vehicles to access in forward gear is proposed and would be secured by condition. It is considered that the amendments made satisfy the Council’s concerns regarding highway matters and that the lane, being an existing access for three properties, albeit the existing side access for no. 29 is not currently utilised, could accommodate further vehicle movements without causing harm to highway safety.
5.21 In terms of deliveries and visitor parking, it is considered that the passing places would provide short term parking if necessary for deliveries, as could the turning head at Cedar Court. Visitor parking would most likely be either within the sites themselves or on Station Road. Concerns have been raised by the Parish Council with regard to additional traffic caused by the Haxby railway station, however this should not have an impact on vehicle movements along Ash Lane.
5.22 Despite the amendments to address the Council’s Highway concerns, significant neighbour objections still remain with regard to highway safety grounds and on the Highway comments made based on the CYC Highway Design Guide (Section 8.8). Paragraph 111 of the NPPF states that development should only be prevented or refused on highways grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety, or the residual cumulative impacts on the road network would be severe. As such strict compliance with the Council’s Highway Design Guide is not justified in every situation, but a case by case judgement on the impact on highway safety. The proposals also relate to an existing private lane and not a newly designed access route. In considering the development, the primary access would be for up to 5 dwellings, three of which are existing accesses. The addition of two further dwellings here is not considered to cause significant additional traffic that there would be a detrimental impact on highway safety. It is also noted that the Fire Service and the Council’s Waste Services have been consulted and neither have objected to the proposals.
5.23 In this case, given the amendments made to address the highways issues raised, the limited number of additional dwellings being created and that the lane is an existing vehicle access route, despite not meeting all requirements of the Council’s Highway Design Guide, the scheme would not result in an unacceptable impact on highway safety and as such would comply with the requirements of the NPPF.
Planning History
5.24 There have been a number of planning applications previously submitted for similar development on this and neighbouring sites, most of which have been refused due to the narrow access lane. The details of these are contained within Section 1.4. A number of objections have been made that the principle of no development has been established through the previous refusals on this site due to the use of the narrow access lane and its unsuitability of accommodating further traffic movements. The most recent application submitted in 2003 and dismissed at appeal in 2005, was recommended for approval by officers but overturned by members by reason of its siting and scale, together with the consequent need for access via a long and narrow private drive, which was considered to have an adverse impact on the character and amenity of the area, representing overdevelopment of the site. No specific highway safety concerns were raised. The Inspector specifically noted that the Council had not raised any objections on highways grounds and no case was made in either the planning officer’s or Inspector’s reports for there to be highways concerns. All previous refusal decisions which cited the unsuitability of the access lane as a reason for refusal were prior to 1990. Given the above, it is not considered that the historic planning decisions have set a precedent for refusing future development here because of the unsuitability of the access lane to accommodate additional vehicle movements.
Drainage
5.25 The application site sits partly within the Foss Internal Drainage Board district. The Board has assets in the wider area in the form of various watercourses, which are subject to high flows during storm events. It was therefore recommended that soakaways were first considered to manage surface water drainage across the site. Following the submission of a drainage plan and soakaway testing on site, the information was deemed sufficient that soakaways could be used on site to mitigate surface water flooding. In addition there have been no objections with regard to foul sewage which is proposed to be connected to the mains combined sewer. Yorkshire Water have no objections to this arrangement.
Climate Change
5.26 Policy CC1 of the 2018 Draft Plan states that new buildings must achieve a reasonable reduction in carbon emissions of at least 28% unless it can be demonstrated that this is not viable. This should be achieved through the provision of renewable and low carbon technologies in the locality of the development or through energy efficiency measures.
5.27 Policy CC2 of the 2018 Draft Plan states that proposals for new residential buildings will be supported where they achieve the following at least a 19% reduction in Dwelling Emission Rate compared to the Target Emission Rate and a water consumption rate of 110 litres per person per day.
6.0 CONCLUSION
6.1 The proposed subdivision and extension to no. 29 is not considered to harm the appearance of the dwelling or cause significant impact to neighbour amenity. Similarly the proposals for the infill dwelling to the rear garden are also considered acceptable. The new dwelling would be within a sustainable location, utilising an existing access lane which, given the modest additional vehicle movements, would not cause harm to highway safety, following amendments made by the applicant to safeguard the safety of all existing and proposed users of the lane. The single storey design is compatible with its surroundings and it would not significantly harm the living conditions of adjacent dwellings. The proposals thereby comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (2021) and with Publication draft Local Plan (2018) policies D1, D11, CC1, CC2 and ENV5, the draft Local Plan (2005) policies GP1 and GP10.
7.0 RECOMMENDATION: Approve
1 TIME2 Development start within three years
2 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following plans:-
Proposed Floor Plans - Drg. No: 01.02A
Proposed Elevations - Drg. No: 01.03C
Proposed Driveway Elevations - Drg. No: 01.05
Proposed Elevations - Drg. 01.06
Proposed Site Plan showing passing places - Drg. No: 01.01 submitted February 2021
Drainage Design - Drg. No: YH836/1A
Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and to ensure that the development is carried out only as approved by the Local Planning Authority.
3 The materials to be used externally in relation to extensions to the existing dwelling shall match those of the existing dwelling in colour, size, shape and texture.
Reason: To achieve a visually acceptable form of development.
4 Notwithstanding any proposed materials specified on the approved drawings or in the application form submitted with the application in relation to the new dwelling to the rear of the garden, samples of the external materials to be used shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the construction of the development. The development shall be carried out using the approved materials.
Note: Because of limited storage space at our offices it would be appreciated if sample materials could be made available for inspection at the site. Please make it clear in your approval of details application when the materials will be available for inspection and where they are located.
Reason: So as to achieve a visually cohesive appearance.
5 The hereby approved side dormer shall be obscurely glazed and fixed shut at all times.
Reason: To protect the amenity of neighbouring residents.
6 The development should incorporate sufficient capacity within the electricity distribution board for one dedicated radial AC single phase connection to allow the future addition of an Electric Vehicle Recharge Point (minimum 32A) within each parking area. The applicant shall identify the proposed location for a future Electric Vehicle Recharge Point within the development curtilage and ensure that any necessary trunking/ducting is in place to enable cables to be run to the specified location.
Reason: To ensure future electric vehicle charge points can be easily added to the property in line with the NPPF and CYC's Low Emission Strategy.
Notes
- Any future Electric Vehicle Charging Points need to be professionally installed. The installation process routinely involves wall mounting a charge point on an exterior wall or garage and connecting it safely to the mains
electricity supply. All electrical circuits/installations shall comply with the electrical requirements in force at the time of installation
- In the UK, there is a government-grant scheme available to help reduce the cost of installing a home EV charge point. For more information on the scheme see the OLEV website:
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/government-grants-for-lowemission-
vehicles
- The above requirement does not preclude the installation of Electric Vehicle Charge Point from the outset, if desired.
- Details of passive provision to be included within household pack for first occupant, to include location of proposed Electric Vehicle Recharge Point, trunking/ducting provided and details of distribution board location and capacity.
7 The site shall be developed with separate systems of drainage for foul and surface water on and off site.
Reason: In the interest of satisfactory and sustainable drainage.
8 No development shall take place until details of the proposed means of foul and surface water drainage, including details of any balancing works and off site works, have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority. The information shall include:
i) a topographical survey showing the existing and proposed ground and finished floor levels to ordnance datum for the site and adjacent properties. The development shall not be raised above the level of the adjacent land, to prevent runoff from the site affecting nearby properties. The topographical survey must also provide level data for both the existing and proposed foul and surface water drainage systems and again all levels must be to Ordnance Datum
Reason: In the interest of satisfactory and sustainable drainage.
9 Prior to the occupation of dwelling 2 the turntable shall be installed as shown on drawing no. 01.01 and retained in situ unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To enable vehicles to exit the site in forward gear.
10 Prior to the occupation of dwellings 2 and 3, the passing place at the entrance to Ash Lane shall be clearly marked to identify it as separate from the drive belonging to no. 29.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
11 Dwellings 2 and 3 shall not be occupied until the areas shown on the approved plans for parking and manoeuvring of vehicles (and cycles, if shown) have been constructed and laid out in accordance with the approved plans, and thereafter such areas shall be retained solely for such purposes.
Reason: In the interests of highway safety.
12 In the event that contamination is found at any time when carrying out the approved development that was not previously identified, it must be reported in writing immediately to the Local Planning Authority. An investigation and risk assessment must be undertaken and where remediation is necessary a remediation scheme must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Following completion of measures identified in the approved remediation scheme a verification report must be prepared, which is subject to the approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority.
Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors.
13 The hours of construction, loading or unloading on the site shall be confined to 8:00 to 18:00 Monday to Friday, 9:00 to 13:00 Saturday and no working on Sundays or public holidays.
Reason: To protect the amenities of adjacent residents.
14 Details of the reduction in carbon emissions that the development would achieve when compared against Part L of the Building Regulations (the notional building) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the construction of the building and the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.
The details shall demonstrate a reduction in carbon emissions of at least 28% through the provision of renewable or low carbon technologies or through energy efficiency measures and at least a 19% reduction in dwelling emission rate compared to the Target Emission Rate (calculated using Standard Assessment Procedure methodology as per Part L1A of the Building Regulations).
Details shall also be submitted that demonstrate that the development shall also achieve a water consumption rate of no more than 110 litres per person per day (calculated as per Part G of the Building Regulations).
Reason: In the interests of sustainable design and in accordance with policies CC1 and CC2 of the Publication Draft Local Plan 2018.
15 Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order), development of the type described in Classes A and AA to E of Schedule 2 Part 1 of that Order shall not be erected or constructed in relation to the new detached dwelling to rear.
Reason: In the interests of the amenities of the adjoining residents the Local Planning Authority considers that it should exercise control over any future extensions or alterations which, without this condition, may have been carried out as "permitted development" under the above classes of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015.
8.0 INFORMATIVES:
Notes to Applicant
1. STATEMENT OF THE COUNCIL`S POSITIVE AND PROACTIVE APPROACH
In considering the application, the Local Planning Authority has implemented the requirements set out within the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 38) in seeking solutions to problems identified during the processing of the application. The Local Planning Authority took the following steps in order to achieve a positive outcome:
Officers requested further information with regards to drainage, highways alterations and cycle storage, and changes to the single storey rear extension and proposed side dormer.
Contact details:
Case Officer: Elizabeth Potter
Tel No: 01904 551477