Waverley Borough Council Home Page Waverley Borough Council Home Page


Waverley Borough Council Committee System - Committee Document

Meeting of the Western Area Development Control Sub Committee held on 28/03/2001
Agenda



NOTE FOR MEMBERS

Members are reminded that Contact Officers are shown at the end of each report and members are welcome to raise questions, etc. in advance of the meeting with the appropriate officer.

AGENDA

1. MINUTES

To confirm the Minutes of the Meeting held on 28th February 2001 (to be laid on the table half an hour before the meeting).

2. APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE AND SUBSTITUTIONS

To receive apologies for absence and to report any substitutions.

3. DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY AND OTHER INTERESTS

To receive from members, in relation to any items included on the agenda for this meeting, disclosure of any pecuniary interests which are required to be disclosed by Section 94(1) of the Local Government Act 1972; and any personal non-pecuniary interests in such matters, in accordance with paragraph 10 of the National Code of Local Government Conduct.

4. SITE INSPECTIONS 4.1 Application for Consideration Following Site Inspection

At its last meeting, the Sub-Committee deferred consideration of the under-mentioned planning application to enable members to inspect the site in question. The site inspection has now been held and a report on the application is submitted for the Sub-Committee’s consideration.

In considering the report, the attention of the Sub-Committee is drawn to the decision of the Planning Committee, endorsed by the Council, that if an application is deferred to enable a site inspection to be held, there should not be further deferments for second or further site inspections.

WA01/0046
Mr & Mrs Corrigan
11.01.01
Erection of extensions and alterations together with the erection of a detached garage with vehicular access off Parfitts Close at 17 Crondall Lane, Farnham (revision of WA00/1454) (as amplified by letters dated 16.02.01 and 23.02.01 and amended by plans date stamped 26th February 2001 and 23.02.01 and amended by plans date stamped 26.02.01).
Grid Reference:E: 483281 N: 146630
Town:Farnham
Ward:Castle
Development Plan:No site specific policies
Highway Authority:Recommends conditions
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Town Council:Have concerns regarding sight lines and access and the vehicular use of Parfitts Close
Representations:Eleven letters of objection have been received, together with a letter of objection from Parfitts Close Limited, which raise the following concerns:
      1. Parfitts Close is very narrow, one car width, unsuitable for further traffic, reversing and turning traffic would need to take place in the private part of the road which is maintained by the residents of Parfitts Close;
      2. residents are elderly, access is permanently required for visitors, including medical practitioners and emergency vehicles;
      3. increased traffic – danger to grandchildren and animals;
      4. removal of established boundary hedge and wide verge would set a precedent; the landscaped access, undertaken at the time of the development of Parfitts Close, provides a pleasant outlook;
      5. a garage should be provided to the side of the property with access onto Crondall Lane;
      6. existing problems of traffic, parking and access will be exacerbated;
7. disruption to quiet environment in Parfitts Close;
      8. previous application was refused on environmental grounds, this current application should be refused on the same grounds;
9. the road is used as a footpath by residents;
10. restricted visibility from the access;
      11. previous application at No. 21 was refused, allowing this proposal would undermine that decision;
      12. yellow lined parking restrictions in The Close have facilitated unencumbered passage at all times.

Relevant History

WA88/2490Outline application for the erection of a single-storey dwellingRefused
14.02.89
WA00/1454Erection of extensions and alterationsWithdrawn 07.12.00

Description of Site/Background

No. 17 Crondall Lane is a detached property located on the south-western side of the road. Vehicular access is currently from Crondall Lane. The back gardens of the properties fronting Crondall Lane extend to Parfitts Close which is a small cul-de-sac serving twelve bungalows constructed in the 1980s.

To the rear of the site is a strip of land approximately 2 m deep over which the new access will be formed. It is understood that this land is owned by the Highways Authority who have raised no objection to the proposal.
The Proposal

This application seeks to provide a two-storey side extension to provide a new study, utility and extended kitchen at ground floor with a new bedroom, en-suite and extended bedroom above. The two-storey extension is flush with the front elevation, set approximately 1.2 m from the side boundary. The new pitched roof is set below that of the existing roof. The proposal also seeks to provide a new vehicular access to the rear garden from Parfitts Close, the cul-de-sac to the rear of the site to serve a new single garage. The proposed rendered finished garage with a footprint of 6 m x 4 m extends to a height of 3.9 m and will be set approximately 6 m into the site from the rear boundary.

Relevant Policies

The site is located within the defined settlement of Farnham where extensions may be acceptable in principle subject to no materially adverse impact upon residential or visual amenity. As such, Policies DE1 of the Adopted Local Plan and Policies D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan apply to this proposal.

Main Planning Issues

The main issues for consideration are the impact of the proposal on the amenity of neighbouring properties and the impact on highway safety.

With respect to the proposed extensions to the existing dwelling, these are considered to be acceptable in planning terms. Other properties in the immediate vicinity have had substantial two-storey extensions to the side. No objections have been received with respect to the proposed extensions to the dwelling.

The objections to this development are entirely concerned with the provision of the new rear access. It is acknowledged that the views of the residents of Parfitts Close are consistent with objections raised to previous applications for new access and garages onto Parfitts Close (references WA88/0554 and WA90/1935). The adjoining property to the south-east, No. 19 Crondall Lane, was the subject of an application for a single garage and new 2.4 m wide access. That application (WA88/0554) was approved in May 1988. At that time similar objections were raised. One of the issues raised concerned the impact that the proposal would have on the planted area within Parfitts Close. In considering that application, it was felt that the removal of a small section of landscaped area was not sufficient to justify a refusal. An application for a double garage and new access to the rear of No. 21 in 1990 was recommended for approval by officers but was subsequently refused by Members for the reason that the proposed development would result in additional traffic using Parfitts Close. It was considered that traffic would, by reason of the narrowness of the existing road, result in unacceptable inconvenience and loss of amenity to the residents of this small and carefully designed development.

Following queries raised by officers, the applicant's agent has confirmed an intention to retain, as far as possible, the mixed hedge fronting Parfitts Close, leaving only a gap for a pair of close-boarded access gates. Furthermore, he has submitted an amended plan indicating the provision of the proposed garage set 6 m into the garden with a parking/turning area within the site. Officers consider that this would reduce concerns about safety in Parfitts Close.


Conclusions

Whilst acknowledging the concerns of local residents, it is considered that this application seeks to erect a modestly scaled garage which visually would be acceptable from a planning point of view and, given the absence of any objection from the Highways Authority, it would be difficult to sustain a highway safety objection to the new access.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

Background Papers (BP&DM)

There are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report.

4.2 Site Inspections Arising From this Sub-Committee Meeting

In the event of site inspections being necessary as a result of consideration of the applications before this meeting, these will be held on Tuesday, 10th April 2001.

5. APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

Attached for consideration and report at Schedules A, B and C. Plans and letters of representation, etc. will be available for inspection before the meeting.


6. TREE PRESERVATION ORDER – 10 THE WARREN, HEATH END, FARNHAM

To consider the report at Appendix A.

7. PLANNING APPEALS

7.1 Appeals Lodged

The Council has received notice of the following appeals:-

WA00/1187 Erection of two self-contained flats with parking spaces, adjacent to 2 Knights Road, Heath End, Farnham

WA00/2296 Side and rear extensions and additions at 2 Woodcut Road, Wrecclesham, Farnham

Background Papers (CEx)

Notification of appeals received on 12.3.01 and 2.3.01 respectively.

7.2 Appeal Decisions

7.3 Appeal Withdrawn

WA00/0395 Application for development at site of Morris Lodge Hotel, Frensham Road, Lower Bourne, Farnham (WITHDRAWN)

7.4 Inquiry Arrangements
8. ENFORCEMENT ACTION - CURRENT SITUATION

The current situation in respect of enforcement and related action previously authorised is set out below:

(a) Kemplen Forestry, Wrecclesham Hill, Farnham (04.11.92 and 06.03.95)

Action to secure removal of unauthorised advertisements and breach of condition notices. Officers to seek to establish with the owner, a timetable for the implementation of the remaining parts of planning permission WA91/0159, together with a timetable for compliance with outstanding conditions. Negotiations to proceed with a view to rationalising the entrance signage. Planning application submitted and yet to be determined for an extension to the partly completed sawing shed as an alternative to that previously approved (reference WA98/1605).

(b) Land at rear of Surrey Sawmills, Wrecclesham Hill, Farnham (07.10.96)

To secure cessation of the unauthorised change of use of land to motorcycle training/practice and to secure the cessation of engineering operations and the removal of unauthorised works. Surrey County Council has received an undertaking to cease waste operations and creation and use of motorcycle track ways from 04.11.96. This site forms part of the application site of the recently submitted application for an extension to the Alton Road Sand Pit (WA99/0223). A Tree Preservation Order was made on 25.06.99.

(c) Bourne Mill, Farnham (4.1.93, 12.5.93, 11.10.93, 12.1.94, 15.6.94, 28.4.95, 8.1.96, 13.5.96, 10.6.96 and 8.7.96)

Action being pursued to secure the cessation of the use of land for use as a garden centre and for the sale, display and storage of sheds, garden structures, etc., plus the demolition of all sheds, structures, etc. and removal of all resultant materials; action to remove unauthorised signs. Planning Use Notice rejected by Inspector, but operational development notice upheld. Security fence and retaining wall erected. Retrospective planning application in respect of security fencing refused and presently the subject of an appeal. Application for Certificate of Lawfulness for proposed use of additional area for retail purposes refused and appeal dismissed. Compliance with landscaping condition being investigated. Subject to the advice of Counsel on the matters identified in (Exempt) Appendix A to the Agenda of 3rd February 1999, enforcement action taken to secure the cessation of the use of land for retail display purposes and to secure the removal of unauthorised ground works and unauthorised buildings. Enforcement Notices served, appeal dismissed. Partial costs awarded to the Council. Periods for compliance: three months and six months.

(d) Northside, West End Lane, Frensham (07.03.94)

To secure cessation of various unauthorised uses. To secure demolition of unauthorised building works. Notice served. Appeal Inquiry took place 27.06.95. Application for Certificate of Lawfulness refused. Appeal dismissed. High Court appeal against Inspector’s decision refused. Nine months to comply with Notice – expired 14.09.96. Site visit took place 08.11.96. Further site visit took place on 30.07.97 to assess current situation. Fined £500 and ordered to pay £500 costs at hearing on 23rd February 1999. Further inspection took place on 23rd March. Summons issued.

(e) Century Farm, Green Lane, Badshot Lea, Farnham (24.07.95)

To secure the cessation of the unauthorised business and storage uses. Planning application refused 09.09.96. Enforcement Notices served. Appeal lodged. Inquiry held 04.11.97. Appeal dismissed, subject to amendment of Enforcement Notice. Twelve months compliance period. Appellants obtained leave to appeal to High Court. Remitted back to the Planning Inspectorate to review the decision. A further Inquiry took place on 23rd February 1999. Appeal dismissed. Inspector has concluded in favour of the Council in that there are no lawful commercial uses on the site. Notice took effect on 14th December 2000.


(f) Dockenfield Farm, Pitt Lane, Dockenfield (10.12.97)

To secure cessation of unauthorised horse box repairs in farm workshop. Further site inspections have taken place and indications are that the unauthorised repair of horse boxes may have now ceased, although further investigations are being undertaken concerning the current use of the building. Site meeting took place on 11.10.2000.

(g) The Packhouse, Tongham Road, Runfold, Farnham (28.07.99)

To secure the demolition of the unauthorised building and the removal of all associated materials from the rear of The Packhouse. Enforcement Notice issued and appeal lodged. Inquiry took place on 27th/28th June 2000. Decision modifies enforcement notice and grants planning permission for modified building, reducing height and requiring removal of first floor and staircase. Condition requires works to take place by 17.1.01.

(h) Land off Old Frensham Road (south of Gong Hill Drive), Farnham (29.03.00)

To secure the removal of chalet-style structures, car port structure and associated other works. Legal interests have been established and the Notice has been drafted. Mr Cohn, the owner of the land, died on 10th January 2001. His executors have contacted the Council to confirm that arrangements will be made to resolve the planning situation.

(i) Furze Hills, Simmondstone Lane, Churt (6.12.00)

To require the removal of the unauthorised extensions and alterations to the curtilage building, namely the rear extension, the increased height of the building by 400mm and the provision of dormer windows to return the building to the size and scale immediately prior to the works having been undertaken. Legal interests being established.

(j) Manor Farm, Dockenfield (6.12.00)

To require the removal of an unauthorised mobile home. A site visit by the Council’s Enforcement Officer on 31.1.01 confirmed that the mobile home and fenced enclosures had been removed. Clarification being sought as to touring caravan stored in one of the barns.

(k) Farnham Castle Stables, Off Old Park Lane, Farnham (6.12.00)
Background Papers (CEx)

There are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report.

9. QUESTIONS BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC

The Chairman to respond to any questions received from members of the public of which notice has been given in accordance with Standing Order 43.

10. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

To consider the following recommendation on the motion of the Chairman:

Recommendation

Item 11

Any instructions to counsel and any opinion of counsel (whether or not in connection with any proceedings) and any advice received, information obtained or action to be taken in connection with:-

(a) any legal proceedings by or against the authority, or

(b) the determination of any matter affecting the authority,

(whether, in either case, proceedings have been commenced or are in contemplation). (Paragraph 12).

11. LEGAL ADVICE

To consider any legal advice relating to any applications in the agenda.

Western 6

SCHEDULE 'A' TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
WESTERN AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
28TH MARCH 2001

Major applications or those giving rise to substantial local controversy.

Background Papers (BP&DM)

Background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report are listed under the "Representations" heading for each planning application presented, or may be individually identified under a heading "Background Papers".

A.1WA00/2035
The Times Group
24.11.00
Outline application for the erection of an 80 bedroomed hotel with ancillary restaurant, leisure and function facilities, parking for hotel and adjacent Church and construction of an access to Six Bells roundabout on land at Poacher's Barn Hotel, Hale Road, Farnham (as amplified by letters dated 04.01.01, 15.02.01, 06.03.01 and 15.03.01, and document received 12.03.01; as amended by letters dated 18.01.01 and 12.03.01 and plans received 22.01.01)
Grid Reference:E: 484860 N: 148232
Town:Farnham
Ward:Upper Hale
Development Plan:Rural Area beyond the Green Belt, Area of Great Landscape Value (AGLV), part Area of Strategic Visual Importance (ASVI).
The application site lies close to Farnham Park which is a Site of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCI) and an Area of Historic Landscape Value (AHLV). The application site lies close to Broddick House (formerly Ravenswood Farm Cottage) and the Church of St John which are Grade II Listed
Highway Authority:Recommend refusal – see report
Drainage Authority:Referred to Environment Agency. Raise no objection in principle to the development of the site but express concern that the car park is within close proximity to a ditch on the north-western boundary. Object to any new development within 5 m of any ditch to provide/establish a buffer zone.
Town Council:That Waverley Borough Council be informed that Farnham Town Council objects to planning application WA00/2035 for the following reasons that in the Local Plan this is an Area of Great Landscape Value, close to an area of Strategic Visual Importance and is in an area beyond the Green Belt. A building of this size would be detrimental to adjacent Listed Buildings.
Consultations:Surrey County Council (Strategic Planning Authority) – raise objection – see report (and Annexe 4)
Guildford Borough Council – no comments.

Rushmoor Borough Council – raise objection (see report under 'consultations').
Hart District Council – raise no objection. Comment that the location of this proposed facility on the edge of Farnham, with many transport links, particularly on the western area of Hampshire borders, will help to provide further support to the business tourism market in this area.
East Hants District Council – the development is sufficiently distant from the district not to have any direct impact and, as such, would raise no comments.
Surrey Wildlife Trust – raise no objection to the proposal but request that an ecological survey be carried out. Express concern over loss of trees, light pollution and impact on the adjacent Farnham Park Site of Nature Conservation Importance.
South-East England Tourist Board – The Board gives full support to this application (see report under "Consultations").
Surrey Amphibian and Reptile Group (SARG) – a migration strategy is required to deal with Great Crested Newts.
Representations:
      Objections:
      Four letters of objection on the following grounds:
      1. increased traffic;
      2. blot on the landscape;
      3. out of character with the surrounding buildings;
      4. destruction of green fields adjoining Farnham Park;
      5. increased noise, vibration and pollution;
      6. pedestrians and cyclists become more vulnerable;
      7. car parking adequate for Church;
      8. already two large modern hotels and leisure centres close-by;
      9. impede drainage;
      10. loss of views over fields and Park;
      11. invade valuable landscape area;
12. other locations available.
Farnham Society – Objects. The Society is most concerned about the impact of this proposal given the Local Plan designations which apply. In its view, this particular part of the Area of Great Landscape Value forms a crucial part of the open green swathe between the Farnham/Aldershot Strategic Gap and Farnham Park. The proposed development is inappropriate, it would create a precedent and would contribute to the coalescence of the town centre and the area of Hale/Upper Hale/Heath End. The Society notes the 'benefits' but these do not outweigh the planning objections.

Support:
23 letters of support:
      1. improvements to existing traffic and parking problems;
      2. in-keeping with this sensitive environment;
      3. enhance the area;
      4. provide additional employment;
      5. provide much needed overnight accommodation/catering facilities in this area;
      6. good for other business;
      7. area would benefit from this development;
      8. tasteful commercial development of this land;
Three letters stating no objection subject to the following conditions:
      1. height of hotel no higher than adjacent buildings;
      2. proposed access completed first;
      3. no further building on pasture land;
      4. time limit on use of facility.
      Farnham Chamber of Commerce - unanimously support the application and comment that the Chamber would welcome such a facility in the town, but stress the need for a large function room capable of holding a minimum of 100 people.

Relevant History

WA97/0943Alterations and change of use of existing barn to provide a single dwelling on land adjoining Ravenswood Farm Cottage
Permitted
12.09.97
WA98/1816Change of use and conversion of milking parlour to provide a single dwelling; use of land as residential curtilage and construction of access drive
Withdrawn
02.02.99
WA99/0346Change of use and conversion of milking parlour to provide a single dwelling; use of land as residential curtilage and construction of access drive
Permitted
30.04.99
(not implemented)
WA99/1952Change of use of milking parlour to guest house
Permitted
06.03.00
WA00/001AErection of an agricultural building to provide hay barn and implement store GPDO Part 6/7.
Prior Approval
Granted
19.07.00
(not yet
implemented)


Background

An application has been received for a proposal to provide a major hotel facility on land to the west of Hale Road, Farnham.

In 1997 the Council granted consent for the conversion of an existing barn to form a single dwelling. In the event, the conversion works resulted in the building being converted to provide guest house accommodation and, in March last year, the Council granted retrospective planning permission for that development (WA99/1952).

The owner of the site now proposes a substantial expansion of the existing facility to provide an 80 bedroom hotel with significant ancillary facilities. The proposals include a new vehicular access off the Six Bells Roundabout and other improvements to the area. The application is submitted in 'outline', but with matters related to siting, means of access and design to be considered at this stage.

Site Location

The application relates to land on the western side of Hale Road, some 2 kms to the north-east of Farnham Town Centre. The site is located beyond the built-up area of Farnham on the generally open land between the Six Bells Roundabout and the Church of St John at Hale. A site location plan is attached at Annexe 1.

The existing building, which forms part of the proposal, was a former milking parlour and comprised part of the farmyard buildings on the Ravenswood Estate. This existing building of 380 sq m has eleven bedrooms, reception area, kitchen and dining area. The dining area is being operated as a restaurant known as Poachers Barn. There is also a small car park to the north.

To the west of the application site is the eastern boundary of Farnham Park; to the north are the rear gardens of residential properties on Upper Hale Road; to the north-east is the graveyard of the Church of St John (Grade II listed); and to the south is Broddick House (formerly Ravenswood Farm Cottage) (also a Grade II listed building). There are two other dwellings adjacent to the hotel site; The Lodge, on lower ground to the south-east, and Ravenswood Barn to the west. In addition, there is Ravenswood House (converted into flats) some distance further to the south-west.

The Proposal

The proposed hotel relates to a site area of 1.12 ha. The land rises generally from the south-east (close to the A325) to the north-west (towards Farnham Park) and the hotel would 'sit' on the top of a minor ridge which runs on a north/south axis.

The proposed hotel is located adjacent and immediately to the north of the existing guest house accommodation which is currently approached by a driveway across a paddock from a section of road which is adjacent to the Hale Road (A325).

A site layout plan showing the different elements of the proposals is attached at Annexe 2. The proposed east elevation (to Hale Road) and west elevation (to Farnham Park) is attached at Annexe 3.

The proposed hotel would comprise 80 bedrooms, restaurant, function room, bar, gym and swimming pool together with ancillary staff and management facilities. The proposed development would have a total floor area of some 2,800 sq m comprising the following main elements:


(i) bedroom accommodation 2,000 sq m

(ii) restaurant/kitchen/laundry/offices/w.c's etc 300 sq m

(iii) pool/gym/changing area 140 sq m

(iv) atrium (ground floor only) 200 sq m

(v) function rooms 160 sq m

Total 2,800 sq m

The exiting buildings would remain largely unaltered and would be retained for staff purposes.

The proposed new buildings are situated to the north of the existing Poachers Barn and would create a courtyard between the buildings. The ground floor of the northern-most building is shown to be 'cut' into the ground and, whilst the scheme is predominantly two-storey, there are also single and three-storey elements. The new buildings would extend some 40 m north and 28 m east of the existing buildings but would not extend any further to the west.

In design terms, the proposal comprises separate buildings linked together with glass atriums. The materials are indicated to include reclaimed brickwork, wide oak cladding and hand-made clay tiles. The materials and form of buildings are intended to relate to the existing surrounding buildings. Although additional lighting will be required, this would mainly be restricted to the inner courtyard only.

A car park, providing 112 spaces, would be situated directly to the north of the hotel and to the rear of the churchyard. The car park would provide for joint use by both the hotel and the Church of St John at Hale and incorporates a purpose-designed stopping area for wedding and funeral procession cars and pedestrian access to the churchyard.

A churchyard extension forms part of the application proposals and is proposed to the north of the existing graveyard at the Church of St John. This would provide additional burial space and a Garden of Remembrance. The size of the yard is indicated to be enlarged by some 25% and would be enclosed by a hedgerow.

A new vehicular access is proposed by introducing a new 'arm' directly off the Six Bells Roundabout and pass via the former route of Hale Road before turning into the site. The provision of the new access will result in the loss of some trees close to the roundabout.

A new pedestrian/cycle link is proposed through the application site using an existing farm track adjacent to the Church to continue through other land within the control of the applicant. This would enable pedestrians and cyclists to travel from Hale Road to join the recently-constructed cycle/footpath running along the eastern edge of Farnham Park.

Various landscape proposals have also been submitted with the application. These include tree and shrub planting along the lower stretch of the A325, the planting of new trees within the site and a programme of hedge regeneration and hedge laying, providing at least 1,300 m of improved hedgerow.


Since the original submission, certain amendments have been made to the scheme. The amendments provide for changes to the internal layout, which involve the kitchen, laundry and function room areas being relocated; a minor revision has been made to the alignment of the access road at the request of a neighbour to the site; and some revisions to the elevations which now show a reduction in height of one of the buildings.

Supporting Statement/Information

The application is accompanied by a number of technical documents. These comprise a planning statement, a design statement, a landscape assessment/analysis, a visual study and a hotel demand document. A transport assessment has also been submitted with the application.

The planning statement provides a summary of the technical documents submitted with the application. It provides a description of the site, sets out the details of the proposal, considers the proposal in the policy context and the consideration of alternative sites.

The Design statement has been prepared by a local firm of architects. It explains that the proposal is to comprise separate "farm buildings" linked together with glass atriums and argues that the scale and materials of the proposed buildings will relate to the existing buildings on the site and its setting.

The Landscape and Visual Assessment statements provide an assessment of the existing landscape character and features a visual assessment of the site and its surroundings and the proposed development in its landscape framework.

A Hotel Demand Assessment report has also been submitted. This was prepared by Tourism Solutions in conjunction with the South-East Tourist Board. The report provides a quantified assessment of the need for additional hotel accommodation.

The Transport Assessment identifies the key transportation issues arising from the proposal and the scope of the assessment. It also provides arguments regarding the sustainability of the proposal.

A summary of the arguments put forward on behalf of the applicants

The submissions of the applicants argue that the application proposes a new, quality hotel to provide for a very high level of unmet business tourism demand. They point to the Hotel Demand Assessment which has been carried out. They argue that this quantifies the demand and comes to a conclusion that the proposal is ideally located to provide for an identified need. It is further argued that the site is centrally located within the business tourist catchment area with excellent access to the strategic road network.

The submissions say that at present the demand for hotel accommodation in the area is frustrated and is being displaced elsewhere. The applicants consider that this application offers an opportunity for Waverley Borough to benefit from this high spending business tourist sector and to provide tourism and function facilities that are presently not available within the district.


In relation to Farnham, where they point to a town centre road network which is historically constrained and where congestion is evident, they say that the proposal is ideally a facility to be located on the edge of the town centre with road links to the strategic road network and good access to town centre facilities by foot. The Transport Assessment seeks to demonstrate that the proposal is sustainable and that it furthers the key objectives of PPG13.

The applicants are anxious to make clear that this proposal is a roadside type facility and not a town centre use. They argue that planning policies recognise the needs of such uses and encourage hotel development as part of policies to facilitate tourism.

The applicants recognise that the site is located within an Area of Great Landscape Value. They say that the landscape around the site has urban fringe characteristics and consider that their Landscape and Visual Impact Analysis demonstrates that the proposal will not cause harm to the landscape and that the application proposals offer significant landscape benefits.

The Design Statement explains that the individually designed scheme provides for a unique and distinctive hotel to provide quality accommodation for business and leisure travellers is responsive to the environment.

The applicants are anxious to make clear that integral to the application proposals are a number of significant benefits. These can be summarised as follows:

1. Benefits for the Church of St John, Hale

A rear pedestrian access to the churchyard providing safe and convenient pedestrian access direct from the car park to the churchyard.

Provision of a car park area and purpose designed set down and collection point for wedding and funeral procession cars.

The provision of an area of land adjoining the churchyard to be made a gift to the Church as a burial ground and a Garden of Remembrance. (Note: Although this is put forward as a benefit, this provision does not fall within the application site).

2. Highway and transportation benefits

The creation of a new access onto the Six Bells Roundabout to serve all properties on the land west of Hale Road, including the Church of St John at Hale, which are currently accessed at Hale Road. The applicants consider that this new access would be safe and more convenient for all road users.

The provision of a courtesy bus from the new hotel to railway stations.

The removal of wedding and funeral cars and visitors to the Church that currently park on Hale Road close to the signal-controlled junction.


3. Cyclist and pedestrian benefits

The provision of a new pedestrian and cycle route to link Hale Road into the Council's existing cycleway network in a way which would best encourage travel by cycle. It would connect the route on the eastern edge of Farnham Park with Hale Road thus providing an alternative to negotiating the large and busy Six Bells Roundabout. It is argued that it would be quicker and safer and more appealing to cyclists and pedestrians moving between Upper Hale and the east side of Farnham.

4. Benefits for the disabled

The hotel design specification provides total access for the disabled to all areas. This exceeds current legislative requirements.

More convenient and easier access to the Church for both the disabled and elderly.

5. Landscape benefits

A landscape management plan for the farmland to improve and restore traditional hedgerows and new broad-leaved tree planting to restore the landscape.

Strategic landscaping between the Six Bells Roundabout and Church of St John to create an attractive gateway entrance to the town.

Consultations

In view of the nature of the proposal, officers have carried out extensive consultation to include all of the adjoining District Councils. A summary of the responses which have been received are set out at the beginning of this report.

Surrey County Council, as the Strategic Planning Authority, has been consulted and has raised objections to these proposals. A copy of its response is attached at Annexe 4.

The South-East England Tourist Board has advised the applicant in relation to the Hotel Demand Assessment. The Board is concerned to present a clear statement regarding market potential.

The Board considers that a new 3 to 4 star business and conference hotel would work well at this site. It believes that an edge-of-town location, with close and convenient access to the strategic road network, is preferable for a business-driven hotel, compared with a central site in an historic centre such as Farnham with its problem of traffic congestion. The Board also highlight the economic benefits which would arise from corporate spending and the knock-on effects in terms of direct and indirect employment.

The Board give full support to this application but recognise that it is for the Local Planning Authority to consider the evidence and to make its decision in the context of a wide range of other considerations.


It will be noted that Rushmoor Borough Council has raised objections to the proposal. Rushmoor points out that, within Aldershot town centre, land at Wellington Avenue is identified in the Rushmoor Local Plan Review (1996 – 2011) for comprehensive redevelopment. The Council has produced supplementary planning guidance for the site and, within that guidance, a hotel is identified as an acceptable land use. Rushmoor state that the site is available for development and is currently being marketed for sale. Rushmoor points to the planning policy constraints which apply to the current application site. Rushmoor considers that the development of unallocated sites outside of town centres and within open countryside would prejudice the redevelopment of this site and conflict with the advice in PPG9 and PPG13. The Council also points out that the submissions forming part of the application do not appear to acknowledge all existing hotels within both Rushmoor and Hart.

Representations

A number of representations have been received in response to notification and publicity. It will be seen that, in addition to the Farnham Chamber of Commerce, there have been some 23 letters in support of the proposals. These include the Parish Church of Hale who have taken the view that, despite the substantial redevelopment, the overall effect will be to the Church's benefit. Whilst some of those residents, who have written in support, live close to the site, most live elsewhere in North Farnham. Those residents who object or express concern live close to the site.

Planning Policy Background

The site lies within the Rural Area beyond the Green Belt and within the Area of Great Landscape Value (AGLV). The proposed vehicular access to the site off the Six Bells Roundabout also falls within the Area of Strategic Visual Importance (ASVI). Farnham Park, which lies to the west of the application site, is within the 'Rural Area' and the Area of Great Landscape Value and is also designated an Area of Historic Landscape Value (AHLV) and a Site of Nature Conservation Importance (SNCI).

The application raises a series of planning, highway and environmental issues. In addition to the general policies in relation to development, policies in relation to tourism and hotel accommodation in the countryside are also relevant to this proposal. A summary of Central Government advice and the main Development Plan policies considered relevant to this proposal are set out below:

Central Government Guidance

PPG Note 1 (General Policy and Principles)
PPG Note 6 (Town Centres and Retail Development)
PPG Note 7 (The Countryside)
PPG Note 13 (Transport)
PPG Note 21 (Tourism)

Adopted Surrey Structure Plan 1994

PE3: Countryside Beyond the Green Belt
PE7: Landscape
PE9: Trees, Hedgerows and Woodlands

PE12: Conserving the Heritage
MT2: The Movement Implications of Development
MT5: Provision of Off-Street Car Parking
DP23: Hotel Provision
RU9: Access to the Countryside

Adopted Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993

GB2: Rural Area beyond the Green Belt
MV4: Transport – New Development
C7: Setting of Historic Buildings, Parks and Gardens
RE1: Area of Great Landscape Value (AGLV)
RE2: Area of Strategic Visual Importance (ASVI)
RE10: Trees and woodlands
TL4: Hotels, Bed and Breakfast
FR8: Farnham Park

Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2001

LO1: The Location of Development
LO5: The Countryside
SE3: Urban Design and the Quality of Development
SE6: Landscape
SE7: Trees and Woodland
DN2: Movement Implications of Development
DN15: Tourist Facilities

Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999

D1: Environmental Implications of Development
D4: Design and Layout
C2: Countryside beyond the Green Belt
C3: The Landscape (AGLV)
C5: Areas of Strategic Visual Importance (ASVI)
C7: Trees, Woodland and Hedgerows
HE3: Setting of Listed Buildings
HE9: Historic Parks and Gardens
LT4: Visitor Accommodation in the Countryside
LT11: Walking, Cycling and Horse Riding
M1: Transport – The Location of Development
M2: The Movement Implications of Development

National Planning Policy provides for the encouragement of the provision of tourism. The need to promote and facilitate tourism in Waverley is recognised by the Borough Council and there are policies in both the Adopted and Replacement Local Plan. National policy recognises the benefits that hotel development can bring and that a well-conceived hotel proposal in some countryside locations may be acceptable.

The Surrey Structure Plan states that, other than for limited extensions, hotel development outside urban areas will not normally be allowed. The Local Plan policy provides qualification of this and seeks to concentrate new hotel provision in the four main settlements where the provision of new or enlarged hotels are supported and this positive approach is reiterated in the Council's Tourism Strategy. The policies provide for the limited expansion and upgrading of existing premises in rural areas.


Planning Analysis

The application represents large-scale new-built development in the countryside. The existing premises currently comprise 11-bedroom bed and breakfast accommodation with ancillary facilities in a building of some 380 sq m. The existing facilities were created from the re-use of an existing building. There is also a small car park.

The proposed development would comprise some 2,800 sq m of floorspace to provide a major hotel complex comprising 80 bedrooms, restaurant, conference/function facilities, swimming pool and gym. It would also provide car parking for 112 cars, a new access road direct from the Six Bells Roundabout and to the building itself.

The proposed development is considered to raise a number of planning, environmental and transportation objections which are assessed, in turn, below.

Countryside

In terms of site-specific planning policy, the position is very clear. The application site forms part of an area of open land which separates the built-up area of Central Farnham and the built-up area of Hale/Heath End. The land forms part of the Rural Area beyond the Green Belt where policies state that the countryside will be protected for its own sake. Building in open countryside away from existing settlements is strictly controlled.

The proposal is promoted on the basis that it will be an expansion to upgrade the existing visitor accommodation. The existing accommodation was formed by the conversion of some existing redundant farm buildings. Whilst it is recognised that planning policies allow for the "limited extension" of existing hotel/visitor facilities in the countryside, this proposal is not considered to meet the policy criteria in that the proposal represents large-scale new-built development as an addition to an existing modestly-sized visitor accommodation. In the context of the rural policies which relate to this site, the proposal is considered to represent a totally inappropriate scale and form of development.

Landscape

In addition to being within the Rural Area beyond the Green Belt, the site is also within an area of designated landscape importance in that it forms part of the Area of Great Landscape Value. The policies for the Area of Great Landscape Value provide that strong protection is given to ensure conservation and enhancement of the landscape.

Officers consider that, in this sensitive location, a large hotel would be overly dominant and be unacceptably intrusive in the landscape. The new buildings would encroach into an area of open countryside and would reduce significantly the value of this space. It is considered that the proposals would create a coalescence effect between the built-up area of Central Farnham and the built-up area of Hale and Heath End.


An important feature of the application site is that it forms part of a broad swathe of open land which extends from the Farnham/Aldershot Strategic Open Gap, across the Area of Strategic Visual Importance and into the Area of Great Landscape Value and Farnham Park. The proposed new vehicular access would adversely impact on the Area of Strategic Visual Importance by the creation of new roadways and through the loss of a group of trees.

Officers note the arguments which have been put forward in respect of the proposal. In particular, the concept of 'setting' the new buildings into the ground; restricting the overall height of the buildings and the intention to provide an extensive planting scheme in an attempt to reduce the impact of the development and to help it to integrate into its surroundings. However, notwithstanding those measures, the visual impact of the development will be very significant and, in the view of officers, would cause serious harm to the sensitive character of the area.

Farnham Park

The proposed development would be close to the eastern side of Farnham Park. The proposed buildings would be visible in the middle foreground of views eastwards from the public footpath which borders the west side of the site. The effect would be a dominance of buildings between Poacher's Barn and the Church of St John. Officers consider that the resultant hotel would be intrusive in views from the Park and would detract from its setting.

Heritage

There are two listed buildings in the vicinity of the site; the Church of St John and Broddick House to the south. Both of these buildings are Grade II listed and currently enjoy a rural setting characterised by open views. It is considered that the development would have an adverse effect on the setting of these two buildings. The Church is seen as a prominent landmark in a rural setting. It is considered that the proposed development would adversely affect the setting of these listed buildings.

Transportation Issues

The application is supported by a transport assessment and that submission has been the subject of a study by the County, as Local Highway Authority.

The proposal provides for a new access to be created directly from the Six Bells Roundabout. The County Council considers that the access onto the Six Bells Roundabout would be sub-standard and the Council is recommended to refuse this application on highway grounds.

The County Council also recommend that the application should be refused because the proposed development is out-of-accord with the advice contained in PPG13 (Transport). That recommendation is based on a concern that, in this location, the proposals are likely to be heavily car dependant leading to an increase in such movements, and are therefore contrary to the objectives for sustainable transport contained in PPG13.

Hotel Demand

Part of the submissions made in support of this application provide a detailed assessment of hotel demand in Farnham and the surrounding area. The applicants argue strongly that there is a shortage of hotel accommodation in the area with few

proposals coming forward and that there is a need for more and better quality hotel accommodation. They also point to the economic growth of Farnham and the nearby Blackwater Valley.

In their submissions, the applicants make reference to potential hotel sites at East Street, Farnham; the extensions permitted in relation to The Princess Royal; and the fact that permission has been granted for a Travel Lodge (in Guildford Borough) at the junction of the A31/Blackwater Valley Route (A331). The submitted material appears to show that there is a demand for quality hotel accommodation.

In the consideration of hotel demand, account also needs to be taken of the views from Rushmoor Council that there is a potential site for a new hotel on a "brownfield" site within Rushmoor. Officers would point out that, in principle, caution should be experienced over permitting development on sensitive "greenfield" sites when there is the potential to provide for that need on "brownfield sites" in more sustainable locations. The agents for the applicants are anxious to point out that the Rushmoor site may take ten years or more to come to fruition and point to the advice from the South-East Tourist Board that it may prove complex and costly to develop.

The question still arises, however, as to whether this is the right location, having regard to the rural nature of this site, the visual impact of such a large scale development and the local strategic role which this open area plays in separating parts of developed areas of the town.

Summary and Conclusions

The site lies within the Rural Area beyond the Green Belt and within the Area of Great Landscape Value. It lies adjacent to the eastern side of Farnham Park and part of the new vehicular access affects an Area of Strategic Visual Importance. There can be no doubt that this is a large development and would have a significant visual impact in this sensitive rural location. There is a clear policy objection to the construction of such a large-scale development in this location.

The applicants argue that the site is "urban fringe" and, rather than cause harm to the landscape and town setting, the proposal will offer significant landscape, transportation, economic and social benefits to the area. The applicants argue that there is policy support for a hotel on the edge of Farnham within the "urban margin" with good connections to the transport network.

Whilst recognising that the applicants have put forward certain arguments and benefits which need to be taken into account, officers do not accept that those arguments/benefits are sufficient to set aside the strong planning policy objections to this development. They therefore conclude that the proposal should be refused.

Finally, the applicant wishes Members to know that he has offered to reduce the size of the development in order to seek to overcome the planning objections. However, officers advise that the objections to this development are very much a matter of principle and, for that reason, no discussions to consider a reduced scheme have taken place. If any revised scheme is prepared, such a proposal would need to be the subject of a fresh application.

Recommendation

That permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:


1. Standard Rural Area beyond Green Belt: Outside Settlements (20.3) *(insert after 1993 "and Policy C2 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999 and Policy LO5 of the Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2001").

2. The proposal would represent the undesirable extension and consolidation of commercial development and which would, by reason of its siting, size, scale, height and bulk and, having regard to the location and natural features of the site, the proposed development would appear visually dominant and intrusive in the landscape and be seriously detrimental to the character and appearance of this sensitive location. The site lies in an Area of Great Landscape Value and, for the reasons set out above, the proposal conflicts with the policies for the control of development in such areas and would fail to maintain or enhance the appearance of such areas. The proposal would therefore conflict with Policy PE7 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy SE6 of the Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft 2001, Policy RE1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policy C3 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 2001.

3. Standard Area of Strategic Visual Importance (21.3) *(insert after 1993 "and Policy C5 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999").

4. There are two statutory listed buildings in the vicinity of the site; the Church of St John to the north and Broddick House to the south. Both are Grade II listed and currently enjoy a rural setting characterised by open views. The Council considers that the development, by reason of its siting and bulk, would represent a significant visual intrusion and have a detrimental impact on the setting of these two listed buildings. The proposal is therefore considered to conflict with Policy PE12 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2001, Policy C7 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policy HE3 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999.

5. The proposed development would result in the loss of trees which would be detrimental to the visual amenity and character of the locality. The proposal would therefore conflict with Policy PE9 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy SE7 of the Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2001, Policy RE10 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policy C7 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999.

6. The development site is close to the eastern side of Farnham Park, which is designated as an Area of High Landscape Value in the Development Plan. It is considered that the hotel development would be intrusive in views from the Park and to the Park. Development that is conspicuous from an historic park should not detract from its setting, character or appearance and it is considered that the proposal would therefore conflict with Policy FR8 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policy HE9 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999.

7. Development Plan policies seek to promote new hotel development on sites within urban areas. Small-scale extensions to, or to upgrade existing facilities in the countryside, can also be acceptable providing such development is shown to be acceptable in terms of protecting the environment. These

proposals represent a considerable increase in bedrooms and other facilities over existing provision to create a major new hotel. The proposals would therefore be contrary to Policy DP23 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy TL4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policy LT4 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999.

8. The proposed development, if permitted, would lead to the construction of a sub-standard access via the Six Bells Roundabout which does not comply with the relevant geometric design criteria, thereby likely to prejudice highway safety and interfere with the free-flow of traffic on these important heavily-trafficked Principal Traffic Routes in the vicinity of the site in conflict with Policy MT2 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994; Policy DN2 of the Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2001, Policy MV4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policy M2 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999.

9. PPG1, PPG6 and PPG13 advocate sustainable development, the re-use of previously developed land, and that town and district centres should be the preferred location for development. Given that advice and the conflict with the site-specific and other policies in the Development Plan, the Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that there is justification to permit this proposed development.
* * * * *
A.2WA01/0173
Antshire Limited
02.02.01
Use of land for the provision of 34 holiday chalets on existing caravan park together with ancillary works at Tilford Caravan Park, Tilford Road, Tilford (as amplified and amended by letters dated 26.02.01 and 15.03.01 and plans received 27.02.01 and 15.03.01)
Grid Reference:E: 487714 N: 142356
Parish:Tilford
Ward:Frensham, Dockenfield & Tilford
Development Plan:MGB, ANOB, AGLV, adjacent to SSSI and Special Area of Conservation
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:Not yet received - to be reported orally
Parish Council:Two letters from Parish Council. Concerns in relation to the following:
      1. increased size and multi-coloured roofing of new design of chalet would cause an intrusion and unsightly view of site from Tilford Road;
      2. little provision for tree planting – also concerned that no development should occur within root space of retained trees;
      3. concerned at possible future demand for a more extensive leisure complex in conjunction with adjacent Hankley Public House;
      4. concern at number of people staying in chalets and consequent effect on local infrastructure and increased number of cars on the road.

Consultations:English Nature – concern, not of over development itself, but recreation pressure and disturbance on adjacent SSSI. Need to make an appropriate assessment. Request information on how number of people using the site will alter from existing levels.
Representations:Five letters objecting principally on the following grounds:
1. overcrowding – out of character;
2. likely to lead to permanent development;
3. detract from adjacent SSSI;
      4. new scheme would result in increase in number of visitors and vehicles – intensify use of footpaths and inadequate vehicular access to Tilford Road;
      5. lack of on-site facilities means development is not self-contained;
      6. visual impact of rooflines.
      Three letters of concern:
      1. need for adequate separation from adjoining land;
      2. impact on pond – need for screening;
      3. two-storey units would be intrusive;
      4. more robust structures could be used as permanent housing;
      5. concern at future use – could be used in conjunction with adjoining public house to provide entertainment facilities;
      6. concerns about traffic and noise.

Relevant History

WA99/0490Use of land for provision of 34 holiday chalets on existing caravan park together with ancillary works
Permitted
14.12.99

Description of Site/Background

An application for a revised proposal has been submitted in respect of the caravan site in Tilford (adjacent to the Hankley Common Golf Club).

The site, which extends to 1.2 ha, has been used as a touring caravan site for a considerable number of years. In 1996, the Council granted a Lawful Development Certificate in respect of the use for a maximum of 60 "long-stay" caravans, 15 "short-stay" caravans and one static caravan. The certificate also refers to the use being within Class D2 of the Use Classes Order, which relates to leisure uses.

Members will particularly recall dealing with application WA99/0490, which sought to replace the caravans with 34 holiday chalets. These were to be of a single-storey "log cabin" type. They were to range in size from 46 – 59 sq m and contain two or three bedrooms.


The application was considered by the Sub-Committee on three occasions and, following amendments to the layout to improve the spacing between units and to safeguard the surrounding trees, permission was granted in December 1999. Members may recall that the permission contains a number of conditions designed to ensure that the chalets would only be used for holiday accommodation and not for any permanent accommodation.

The Present Application

A revised scheme has been submitted. The number of chalets proposed remains 34, but there have been significant changes in terms of the size, height and design.

Officers first became aware of the proposed changes when the applicant sought to discharge the various planning conditions from the earlier scheme (materials etc). It became apparent that in working up the proposals, quite significant changes had been made to the amended scheme. The officers considered these changes to be material and requiring a new application. It is understood that these changes have evolved both as a result of revising the proposals to reflect customer and market expectations and also to deal with other technical requirements such as Building Regulations.

The scheme now incorporates five different chalet types. The "Cobbett" is a one-bedroom high specification unit which incorporates a sauna and Jacuzzi. This unit has a footprint (including covered veranda) of 59.6 sq m. It would be 4.5 m high. The "Sturt" is a two-bedroomed unit of 59.3 sq m. This would be 5.4 m high with the living room and main bedroom having a vaulted ceiling. The "Hawthorn II" unit is a rectangular three-bedroomed unit measuring 77.2 sq m and having a ridge height of 5.2 m. The "Hawthorn" and "Falkner" are variations on a theme. Both have a footprint of 73.62 sq m and both incorporate some first floor accommodation in the roof. Both would have a ridge height of 6.1 m. The "Hawthorn" is a three-bedroomed unit with two of those bedrooms and a bathroom within the roofspace. The "Falkner" is a four-bedroomed unit with a larger first floor area incorporating three of the bedrooms. The first floor space for these units would be 39.96 sq m and 48.6 sq m respectively. The mix of units is as follows:

8 x "Cobbett" (one bedroom)
13 x "Sturt" (two bedrooms)
5 x "Hawthorn II" (three bedrooms)
3 x "Hawthorn" (three bedrooms)
5 x "Falkner" (four bedrooms)

Officers have compared the sizes of the units now proposed with those previously proposed. Officers have calculated the total footprint (i.e. the total footprint includes the veranda areas in both permitted and proposed schemes where these "open-sided" areas are beneath the main roof of the building).

Permitted scheme total footprint = 1,813 sq m
Proposed scheme total footprint = 2,222 sq m
Increase = 409 sq m
% increase = 22.6%

In addition, the inclusion of first floor areas within eight of the units adds a further 362 sq m of floorspace. This represents a 42% increase in floorspace from the 1,813 sq m approved in the 1999 consent.


The proposed units are sited roughly in the positions previously proposed. The scheme again incorporates a central amenity area. The layout has recently been adjusted to reposition some units further away from trees and to reposition the higher (two-storey) units away from the entrance and the outer boundary. In the permitted scheme, the applicant sought to space the units 6 m apart. The applicant has sought to maintain this spacing within the new scheme.

In terms of materials, the permitted cabins were to be timber clad with glass-fibre reinforced bituminised impregnated strip slates on the roof. In the present scheme, the units would again have timber wall cladding. In terms of roofing material, it is now proposed to use slates and tiles in a range of colours.

Submissions in Support

The applicant's agent has referred to the previous use on the site. He expresses the view that the previous use with up to 75 caravans could have resulted in over 150 people being on site.

He refers to the permitted scheme having a total of 82 bedrooms which would reduce to 78 the proposed scheme. He states that the footprint areas would increase from a permitted figure of 1,770.42 sq m to a proposed figure of 2,008.98 sq m. This would be a 13.5% increase. The reason these figures differ from the officers' figures is that the agent has not included the covered veranda areas in either case.

Planning Policies and Considerations

The site is within a very sensitive location. It is within the Green Belt, Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Area of Great Landscape Value. It is also adjacent to a Site of Special Scientific Interest. As Members will know, the general policies are of restraint and seek to protect the special character of the area.

The principle of replacing the caravans with holiday chalets has been approved and the key issue is to assess the changes between the scheme and determine whether these changes have any adverse impacts that would now warrant a refusal.

Officers acknowledge that the number of bedrooms does not increase and it could be argued that the revised chalet designs would not result in an unacceptable increase in the overall level of activity on the site.

Officers do have concerns, however, about the impact of the physical changes to the size and especially the height of the units.

The proposal approved in 1999 represented a quite intensive use of the site and, as noted above, negotiations took place to improve the layout and of the spacing between the units. Following those negotiations, officers were satisfied that the permitted development of smaller chalets would not have an adverse visual impact, particularly taking into account the lawful use as a caravan site. The site is quite well screened but, nonetheless, even the permitted chalets would be visible from the Tilford Road, particularly at certain times of the year.

Officers are concerned that, with this current proposal, the larger and higher units would become more visible from outside the site and the overall increase in floorspace will inevitably increase the perceived density of development. Whilst officers acknowledge the reasons why the scheme has changed to meet market needs and expectations, it is still felt that the greater visual impact of the development would outweigh these matters.


Officers acknowledge that certain revisions have already been made to lessen the impact of the two-storey units. However, officers still feel that, in consequence of the overall increase in the size of units from that which has been permitted, consideration should be given to deleting some of these larger higher units and/or reducing the overall floorspace proposed in order to reduce the overall impact to a level more akin to that which has been approved. Before undertaking further discussions, the matter is brought to Members to establish whether they share officers' concerns.

Recommendation

That the application be deferred for negotiations with a view to securing a reduction in the overall amount of development on the site.
* * * * *



















Western 52
SCHEDULE 'B' TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
WESTERN AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
28TH MARCH 2001

Applications where the considerations involved are clearly defined.

Background Papers (BP&DM)

Background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report are listed under the "Representations" heading for each planning application presented, or may be individually identified under a heading "Background Papers".

B.1WA01/0172
S Cobden
02.02.01
Erection of a detached dwelling (revision of WA00/1854) on land to the rear of Larchwood, 54 Crooksbury Road, Farnham, (as amplified by letters dated 08.03.01 and 09.03.01 and additional plans date stamped 08.03.01 and 09.03.01
Grid Reference:E: 487285 N: 146861
Town:Farnham
Ward:Waverley
Development Plan:Developed Area of Special Environmental Quality; AGLV; TPO WA11
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Town Council:We have no objection provided it conforms with the Local Plan.
Representations:Eight letters of objection have been received to date (two letters from the same person) on the following grounds:
      1. loss of trees covered by TPO, many are at the entrance to the site and contribute to the wooded environment of Greenacres. The tree survey does not cover the trees required to be removed to provide the approach driveway (land outside of applicant's ownership and within Greenacres);
      2. Greenacres is a private road, maintained by residents; do not wish to see an increase in traffic which would be detrimental to privacy, safety and maintenance;
      3. a new dwelling would be contrary to policy in special environmental quality area;
      4. Greenacres is a narrow road with poor sight lines;
      5. application states drainage is to the main sewer – there is no sewer in Greenacres;
      6. proposed access to the site is via land outside of ownership of applicant; neighbours have indicated no intention of giving up the land or allowing the access across it; the land forms a visual barrier to the existing properties;

7. proposals are for financial gain;
      8. whilst acknowledging that notice has been served on more interested parties, two parties affected by the sole access have not received notice from the applicant's agents.
One further letter has been received in response to amended plans which reiterates previous concerns. Also concerned with misleading tree survey and unclear as to what is existing and proposed planting. Trees are inaccurately labelled, have no wish for any of these trees to be removed. Given the time taken for the applicant to acknowledge there will be tree removal, concerned how much woodland would remain after construction.

Relevant History

WA76/0255Erection of six detached houses landscaping schedule
Permitted
02.09.76
WA00/1854Erection of a detached dwelling
Withdrawn
08.01.01

Description of Site/Background

The application site lies to the rear of 54 Crooksbury Road, a large bungalow fronting Crooksbury Road. The site lies within the built-up settlement area of Farnham but is identified as being within the South Farnham Area of Special Environmental Quality. The site also lies within the Area of Great Landscape Value. The application site is currently part of the rear garden to the property Larchwood and is currently well wooded. Immediately to the south and west of the application site lies the development at Greenacres.

The Proposal

This application seeks to sub-divide the existing garden and erect a new detached chalet bungalow and detached garage with a new access taken off of Greenacres. The property will provide a four-bedroom property with a ground floor area of 137.5 sq m and a first floor area of 57 sq m, resulting in approximately 194.5 sq m. A detached pitched roof garage is also proposed (6 m x 6 m).

Relevant Policies

The site lies within the Area of Special Environmental Quality, Policy DE3 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy BE3 of the Replacement Local Plan refer. In such areas, new development for housing will not be allowed if the proposal would, inter alia, "lead to an erosion of its semi rural character; be out of keeping with the scale, pattern and density of surrounding development; detract from the well wooded appearance of the area".


Main Planning Issues

In considering the above development, the main issues are considered to be whether the sub-division of the site and the provision of a new detached chalet-style property would be compatible with the character and density of development in the immediate area and whether such a proposal would have any adverse effect on the semi-rural character of this part of South Farnham. In considering the impact on the character of the locality, consideration has been given to the impact on the tree cover and the loss of trees including those outside of the site indicated to be removed to form the new access onto Greenacres.

The application site is situated immediately to the north-east of an estate of six houses, each occupying a curtilage of about one acre. The estate was allowed on appeal in 1973 (reference FAR 485/72). Since that permission was granted, two further properties were permitted in the 1970s and constructed on land to the rear of Bracken Hill and Freeland. The application site is similar in size to these more recent developments in Greenacres and Crooksbury Road and similarly is accessed from Greenacres. Plot sizes in the immediate vicinity range from approximately 0.37 ha to 0.58 ha. The application site is approximately 0.40 ha.

Whilst it is accepted that the proposal will involve the felling of a number of trees, it is not considered that the loss of the trees within the site would adversely affect the amenities of the area. In addition to the trees shown to be felled within the site, officers consider that an additional five trees could not be adequately protected during construction in accordance with the British Standard. The applicant's agent has submitted an amended plan indicating the removal of these trees. Notwithstanding the additional tree removal, it is not considered that the loss of the trees would significantly harm the character of the area given the tree retention proposed around the periphery of the site. Furthermore, in constructing the driveway it is considered that three trees will need to be removed, three conifers and one larch. No objection is raised by officers to their removal. Officers recommend however the imposition of a condition ensuring the retention for a minimum of five years the trees shown to be retained on the submitted plans. The agent has confirmed that a septic tank would be provided for the discharge of foul water as there is no sewer along Crooksbury Road.

Conclusions

The applicant's agents have been advised of the concerns of local residents in relation to ownership. In response they have indicated that they have served notice on all relevant parties, including the freeholders of the road who have indicated that they have no objection to access being obtained to the plot. Furthermore, the applicant’s agents indicate that with respect to the land required to form the access drive, the legal owner of the land has agreed to the access being formed. Whilst it is accepted that the road is privately maintained by local residents, this is not sufficient reason to refuse permission, this issue is a private concern. Therefore, given that this site is essentially surrounded by properties and the loss of trees is not considered to be detrimental to the character of the area, officers consider that the application is acceptable and would logically relate to the existing development of Greenacres.


Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
6. Standard services (8.3)
* * * * *
B.2WA01/0078
Surrey Community
Development Trust
08.01.01
Erection of a building to provide four flats on land at junction of Crondall Lane and Waynflete Lane, Farnham (as amplified by letters dated 02.03.01 and 07.03.01)
Grid Reference:E: 483106 N: 146733
Town:Farnham
Ward:Castle
Development Plan:No site specific policies

Highway Authority:Recommend conditions
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Town Council:We are concerned that there is insufficient car parking spaces
Representations:One letter of objection received from a neighbour on the following grounds:
1. overdevelopment;
2. concern over the existing vegetation and is there any guarantee that it would remain;
      3. highway safety and increased traffic;
      4. concern over drainage;
      5. lack of parking.
Farnham Society – concern over the scale and massing of the proposed building resulting in an over-development of the site – object to the proposal.

Relevant History

WA89/1838Consultation under Regulation 4 or 5 – outline application for the erection of two semi-detached dwellings
Permitted
March 1990
WA98/0411Erection of a pair of semi-detached houses
Withdrawn
26.01.99

Introduction

Members will recall that this application was reported at item B.16 to the Sub-Committee meeting on 28th February. The application was deferred for further information. Officers have contacted the applicants on the three issues of concern raised by the Members which were as follows:

1. the landscaping;

2. the services;

3. the levels/access.

A letter has been received from the applicant's agents responding to these issues.

Firstly, they state that the landscaping scheme would allow for the existing screen of trees and bushes to Crondall Lane and the junction with Waynflete Lane to be maintained, with judicial pruning etc and replanting.

Secondly, they state that all works in connection with the provision of services to the site and any works necessitated by the lowering of the footpath in Waynflete Lane to accommodate the site access would be allowed for in the contract. They also state that they are aware of where the services run (approximately). They state that if there is not sufficient depth to protect the services at the new levels, they would be lowered to the approval of the Statutory Undertakers and the Local Planning Authority.


Thirdly, with regard to the levels of the footpath, the applicant's agents state that the existing footpath in Waynflete Lane would be graded to suit the new levels of the access crossover to comply with all relevant legislation for wheelchair and other similar users. Officers have requested longitudinal and cross sections to illustrate this. Officers have not yet received this information but anticipate the information being available to be reported at the meeting.

Recommendation

That, subject to the consideration of further satisfactory information in respect of levels, permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard external materials (5.2)

2. Standard surfacing materials (5.3)

3. Standard fencing (6.1) *(one) *(of first occupation)

4. Standard landscape scheme (8.9)

5. Before any other operations are commenced, the proposed vehicular access from the site to Waynflete Lane shall be constructed and provided with visibility zones all as shown on the application drawings and thereafter maintained all to the reasonable satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority and the visibility zones shall be kept permanently clear of any obstruction *(delete reference to visibility)

6. Standard on site permanent parking etc - detailed (H14) *(a)

Reasons

1 – 4. Standard (4.50)

5 – 6. The above conditions are required to satisfy Surrey Structure Plan Policies MT2 and MT5.
* * * * *
B.3WA01/0118
Lacey Simmons Limited
17.01.01
Erection of eight dwellings following demolition of existing dwelling on land at Saxons Croft, The Green, Badshot Lea, Farnham (as amplified by letter dated 08.03.01 and plan received 09.03.01)
Grid Reference:E: 486557 N: 148514
Town:Farnham
Ward:Weybourne and Badshot Lea
Development Plan:No site specific policy
Highway Authority:Recommend conditions
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Town Council:Concerned at increased development in this very small enclosed area and suggest a site visit
Consultations:Surrey County Council – Rights of Way Officer – recommends conditions and informatives

Representations:Letters from three local residents (including the two residents adjoining the site) objecting principally on the following grounds:
1. overdevelopment;
      2. encroachment of estate environment – adjoining houses would be incorporated into estate;
      3. unacceptable impact of traffic from this development and coupled with recent development;
      4. disturbance from noise and pollution;
      5. impact on privacy – loss of screening – overlooking;
      6. additional noise and disturbance during building works;
      7. impact of development that has already taken place off The Green;
      8. question adequacy of surface water drainage.
Two letters on behalf of one household questioning the ownership of a strip of land on the boundary of the site.

Relevant History

Adjoining Site (Drumossie)

WA99/1510Erection of nine dwellings following demolition of three dwellings
Withdrawn
WA00/0039Erection of eleven dwellings together with construction of access road and associated garages following demolition of three existing dwellings
Permitted
March 2000

Description of Site/Background

Saxons Croft is a detached bungalow located off the southern side of The Green. The location of the site is identified on the plan attached as Annexe 1.

The property has an irregular shaped curtilage which measures 0.187 ha and extends around the front of the adjoining pair of semi-detached properties (Lea Corner and Conifers). Thus the west side is adjoined to the west and partly to the south by the curtilages of these dwellings. It also has a southern boundary with open fields. On its northern side, the curtilage of the property is adjoined by the public footpath that links The Green with St George's Road. Beyond this is the residential development that is being carried out by Lacey Simmons on the site, formerly occupied by the bungalow "Drumossie". To the east of the site is the established development of semi-detached houses in St George's Close.

The Proposal

Permission is sought to replace the existing bungalow with eight dwellings. A copy of the site layout is attached as Annexe 2.


It is proposed that the recent residential development on the "Drumossie" site be extended onto the application site. The development on the former "Drumossie" site comprises nine new dwellings together with the retention of the original pair of houses fronting The Green (Nos. 1 and 2). That development comprises a mix of four new two-bedroomed houses, four three-bedroomed houses and one four-bedroomed house. The density of development on that site is 40.9 dwellings per hectare.

The proposed development would comprise five two-bedroomed dwellings, two three-bedroomed dwellings and one four-bedroomed dwelling.

The density proposed on this site would be 42.8 dwellings per hectare. The dwellings would range in size from 79 sq m to 105 sq m excluding garages. Four of the houses would have single garages, the others would have dedicated parking spaces. A total of 18 garage/parking spaces are proposed.

Six of the houses would be served off the estate road from the adjoining development. This would cross the public footpath. The other two units would have direct access onto The Green.

Planning Policies

The site lies within the developed area as defined in the Local Plan. The principle of development is acceptable subject to compliance with relevant environmental and housing policies. In the adopted Local Plan, Policy DE1 sets out criteria against which developments are assessed. Policy HS2 indicates that new housing should be at as high a density as is appropriate to the character of the site and its surroundings.

In the Replacement Local Plan, relevant environmental policies are D1 and D4. These again set out criteria for the assessment of development. Policy H4 again places an emphasis on the provision of smaller units.

Planning Considerations

The development would provide eight further small units in accordance with housing policy objectives. It would be within the urban area and can be argued to be making good use of an otherwise under-utilised parcel of land. It is also close to the centre of the village. In principle, therefore, there is much to commend a development of this type. However, these considerations must be balanced against the potential effects both on the character of the area and the amenities of adjoining residents.

Impact on the Character of the Area

In the officers' judgement, the recent developments on the former vicarage site and the site of "Drumossie" have demonstrated that new high density developments can be accommodated without having a detrimental effect on the character of the area. Similarly, it is felt that this development, at the density proposed, can fit into the existing settlement pattern without harm to its surroundings.

It is acknowledged that, in this particular case, the new development would, to some extent, wrap itself around the curtilage of the two houses "Lea Corner" and "Conifers". Officers understand, therefore, why those residents have expressed concerns about the "encroachment" of the development. However, it is not felt that the settlement pattern in this locality is so fixed as to rule out a higher density redevelopment of this type.


Impact on Residential Amenity

The most potentially affected residents are the occupants of the two above-mentioned properties (both of whom have objected to the scheme) and also the residents in St George's Close whose houses back onto the site.

With regard to the occupants of Lea Corner and Conifers, there is presently a tall hedge that screens the front of these properties from the front part of the garden of Saxons Croft. It appears from the site survey that most of this hedging is within the application site.

It is proposed that this part of the site would be occupied by a semi-detached pair of houses with the flank elevation facing the front of the adjoining properties. The location of the new houses is such that the majority of the present overgrown hedging would need to be removed. The flank wall of the new house would be 0.8 m from the boundary with these adjacent properties and the total separation distance between buildings would be 12 – 13 m.

The applicants have stated that they acknowledge the need to clear some of the existing screening on the boundary. They argue however that the integrity of hedging on the neighbour's side would remain. Officers consider this to be an optimistic assessment and recognise that there would only be limited space on either side of the boundary for planting of any significance. It is further acknowledged, therefore, that the outlook from the front of Lea Cottage and Conifers would change quite considerably. However, the flank of the new house would be on the northern side of these neighbours. The only window (a landing window) could be obscurely glazed to eliminate overlooking. It is felt that the combination of the distance, the orientation and the limited height and depth of the new house is such that the impact on the amenities of the occupants of these adjoining houses would not be unacceptable.

Turning to the relationship with the houses in St George's Close, the main potential impact would be in terms of overlooking from the rear facing windows of the staggered terrace of houses on plots 1 – 4. The Ordnance Survey reveals that there was historically a "field track" separating the St George's Close houses from Saxons Croft. There is some uncertainty about ownership of this strip of land. The applicant states that the present owner of Saxons Croft has confirmed their use of that part of the "track" adjoining No. 7 St George's Close since 1963. The remaining length of this track appears to have been incorporated into the gardens of Nos. 8 and 9 St George's Close. Much of this boundary is defined by thick hedging. Whilst no new buildings are proposed on this strip of land, it does still perform a function in defining the boundary. The application site boundary reflects the present situation.

Officers did raise some concern about the potential overlooking from the new houses into the gardens of Nos. 8 and 9. It is acknowledged that the respective orientation and distances involved are such that window-to-window inter-looking would probably not be unacceptable. However, there would inevitably be a degree of overlooking into gardens that presently does not exist. To some extent, this would be offset by some of the screening that exists on the former track. Overall, officers have concluded that the degree of overlooking would not be of such significance as to justify a refusal.


In the representations, comments have been made about the impact in terms of noise and disturbance including disturbance during building works. Whilst the officers sympathise with these concerns, especially as any development would follow a period of disturbance from the other recent developments. However, they are not matters that can ultimately determine whether or not a proposal which might otherwise be acceptable, should succeed.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard extensions (4.1)

2. Standard obscured glazing (4.12) *(first floor windows) *(side elevations of plots 5, 6, 7 and 8)

3. Standard fenestration (4.13) *(at first floor level) *(in the side elevations of plots 1, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8)

4. Standard external materials (5.2)

5. Standard surfacing materials (5.3)

6. Standard fencing (6.1) *(one month) *(of first occupation)

7. Standard open plan estate (6.3)

8. Standard landscape scheme (8.9)

9. Standard modified access - detailed (H8) *(The Green)

10. Standard on site permanent parking etc - detailed (H14) *(a, b, c, d)

11. Standard construction related loading and parking (H15) *(a, b, c)

12. Standard protection of highway from mud etc (H18)

Reasons

1. Standard (4.50)

2 - 3. Standard (4.52)

4 – 8. Standard (4.55)

9 – 11. Standard (HR1)

12. Standard (HR2)

Informatives

1. The applicant's attention is drawn to the contents of the letter dated 28th February 2001 from the Principal Rights of Way Officer of Surrey County Council.


2. Standard highways (HF15)
* * * * *
B.4WA01/0098
Tindle Newspapers
15.01.01
Outline application for the erection of five dwellings on land at Wrecclesham Community Centre, Greenfield Road, Wrecclesham, Farnham (as amplified and amended by letter dated 26.02.01 and illustrative plans date stamped 05.03.01)
Grid Reference:E: 482940 N: 145146
Town:Farnham
Ward:Rowledge and Wrecclesham
Development Plan:No site specific policies
Highway Authority:See report – final views awaited
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Town Council:The Planning and Traffic Committee of the Town Council strongly objects to the application due to the proposed impact on the neighbourhood. Whilst a lengthy letter of concern has been submitted, in essence they are concerned at the development of community land for building purposes on what the Town Council considers is a 'valuable community asset'. They consider its development would be contrary to policy.
Consultations:Environment and Leisure recommends conditions with respect to drainage; sound insulation; noise insulation and control of noise disturbance during construction.
Representations:Two letters of objection have been received which raise the following concerns:
      1. parking problems currently experienced with the use of the community centre would be exacerbated by five new houses, use of site would be intolerable;
      2. narrow width of Greenfield Road, particularly busy during school times;
      3. removal of parking for the Community Centre will result in safety hazards for children being dropped off to the nursery school;
      4. the Community Centre can have up to 20 – 30 cars which will park in the road if the car park is removed;
      5. Community Centre and housing cannot be accommodated;
      6. this part of Greenfield Road is shown on residents' deeds as being the property of the residents, was upgraded in the 1950’s, doubt whether proposed dwellings would have a right of exit; the Youth Centre required residents' consent when built.



Description of Site/Background

The Wrecclesham Community Centre is located on the northern side of Greenfield Road, to the south-west of the playing fields of Weydon County Secondary School. The application site comprises the land immediately to the east of the Community Centre building, currently forming part of the playground, the access drive and parking area for the centre. The application site is set at a lower level than the adjacent roadway; the levels continue to fall to the north across the adjoining playing fields. The site, which is approximately 30 m in depth and 25 m in width, is estimated to have an area of approximately 0.085 hectares (the applicant's agent indicates 0.1 hectares).

The Proposal

This outline application, as originally submitted, sought to erect five dwellings with associated parking. The application form stated that the type of house would be town houses with basement parking with provision for 34 parking spaces. The application form also referred to the residential units being ‘affordable’.

In view of the particular characteristics of the site and the nature of the proposed development, officers took the unusual step of invoking the provision of the planning legislation to require the provision of additional details prior to determination of the application. When considering outline applications, Local Planning Authorities are, in accordance with Article 3 of the Town and Country Planning (General Development Procedure) Order 1995, able to request, within one month of submission, further details which would otherwise have been reserved for later approval. This was considered to be appropriate given the limited size of the site and its prominent position adjacent to the open playing fields, the change in levels and the displacement of the existing parking provision.

Accordingly, the applicant's agent was requested to submit additional details with respect to scaled details of the size and scale of the proposed dwellings, including their height in relation to the highway and the properties opposite; the exact location of the proposed development and associated parking provision and amenity space for each dwelling and that associated with the Community Centre. Furthermore, given that the application form referred to parking for 34 vehicles, clarification was sought as to how this could be achieved. Clarification with respect to how the subsidised affordable units would be provided was also requested.

In response, the applicant’s agent has reiterated that the siting, design, external appearance, means of access and landscaping are all to be reserved for consideration at a later date; it is also indicated that the Council could limit the number of units. Notwithstanding the above however, an illustrative sketch has been provided which indicates the provision of a terrace of five dwellings with parking to the front and gardens to the rear. An illustrative cross section indicates that the land levels would be raised to provide the residential parking at the level of the adjacent highway. The sketch also indicates that a forecourt to the front of the site would also provide access to a ramp into a new parking area for the Community Centre which would provide parking for six vehicles. This indicative parking provision is however outside of the application site.


Submissions in Support

The applicant’s agent has submitted a lengthy letter which outlines the approach that has been taken in submitting the application and has outlined the reasoning behind the application. Historically, the Youth Club has been in existence since the early 1960s previously run by Surrey County Council. Following the County Council's decision to offer the site for sale, a local group formed a committee to secure the continuation of the community use. The applicant’s bid for the freehold was accepted.

A letter from the applicant referred to by the agent states that:

"This outline application is made in support of a plan to develop half the site alongside the centre to raise cash to save the centre itself. The outline plan that accompanies this application details that part of the site we wish to preserve. It is proposed to develop the remaining part, approximately 0.09 hectares, by the erection of a number of dwellings, possible small ‘Town Houses’ that will appeal as starter homes".

The agent states that:

"Without outline planning consent for a limited number of residential units, the possibility to retain the centre for a community use could be compromised. The local community needs this centre and Management Committee to achieve this scenario".

The agent acknowledges that the site levels create difficulties to produce an economic scheme for development, however he concludes that in his opinion "five terrace houses with garage or car parking space is at a density per hectare in accordance with the current as built environment within the Borough. In fact the site proposed for change of use could be considered as a ‘brown field site’ that the current government seek local authorities to determine and utilise for residential use".

Relevant Policies

The most relevant policies when considering this application are those relating to the design and layout of development; the retention and loss of community facilities and policies with respect to highway safety issues and parking provision.

Main Planning Issues

As indicated above, this application is submitted in outline with all matters being reserved for consideration at a later date, however this application specifically seeks permission for five dwellings.

On the basis of the information submitted, officers are not convinced that the site can satisfactorily accommodate this number of properties. The site is small in size, furthermore it slopes down from the adjacent highway, consequently there is likely to be a need to raise the ground levels within the site. In view of the constraints outlined, officers are not satisfied that the scheme would not result in a form of development out of character with the area. Furthermore, concern is expressed that, given the change in levels, and the illustrative proposal to raise the ground levels, the proposed built form, which extends the full width of the site, would have a poor relationship with the adjacent community centre and from views across the playing fields.


The proposed dwellings are to be erected on land which currently provides parking provision for the community centre. Concern has therefore been raised with respect to the existing parking being displaced. The recently received illustrative plans have indicated that parking provision for the community centre could be provided on the existing hard play area linked by a ramp to a forecourt in front of the proposed dwellings. Given the limited level of information submitted, officers have concerns as to whether adequate provision could be made for parking for the retained community centre use. Prior to reaching a conclusion on this issue, officers have sought the Highway Authority's view on the latest submissions from the applicant. It is anticipated that these views will be available at the meeting when an oral report will be made.

Recommendation

That permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. On the basis of the information submitted, and by virtue of the size of the site and the change in levels, the Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that the amount of development proposed could be satisfactorily accommodated on the site without having a detrimental impact on the character of the locality and the amenities of the area. The proposal is therefore considered to be contrary to Policy DE1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999.

2. Any appropriate highway reasons.
* * * * *
B.5WA01/0233
Mr & Mrs J Harper
12.02.01
Erection of a two-storey extension following demolition of existing outbuildings together with the erection of a detached garage at Hambledon House, Longdown Road, Lower Bourne, Farnham
Grid Reference:E: 483758 N: 144174
Town:Farnham
Ward:Bourne
Development Plan:Developed Area of Special Environmental Quality
Highway Authority:No observations
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Town Council:No objection
Representations:One letter of objection received to date which raises the following concerns:
      1. two-storey extension is within 12 m of boundary, will result in overlooking and loss of privacy;
      2. the proposal is double the size of the existing building, is this acceptable;
      3. car lights from the car port will affect neighbour's windows, change in levels are significant;
      4. proposal is extremely large and inappropriate and will encroach onto existing properties, extension should be re-sited;
5. area is rural in nature.



Description of Site/Background

Hambledon House is a large detached dwelling situated on the northern side of Longdown Road. The site is very well screened by established trees. The site lies within the settlement of Farnham within the Area of Special Environmental Quality. The existing property has a floor area of approximately 226.5 sq m.

The Proposal

This application seeks to erect a two-storey extension to the rear to provide a kitchen, family room, boiler/utility and playroom at ground floor with two bedrooms and en-suite at first floor. The proposed extensions would result in an additional floor area of 181.74 sq m resulting in a total floor area of 413.36 sq m. The proposal also seeks to demolish a number of existing outbuildings and a single garage and erect a car port for two vehicles and an enclosed tool store.

Relevant Policies

The site lies within the settlement area for Farnham within the Area of Special Environmental Quality where Policy DE3 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy BE3 of the Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) apply.

Main Planning Issues

In considering this application, the main issues are considered to be those relating to the proposed scale of the development and its impact on the environmental character of the area and the amenities of neighbouring properties.

Whilst it is appreciated that the site lies within the Area of Special Environmental Quality, and that the proposal represents a significant sized extension, it is not considered that the proposal would undermine the special environmental and visual quality of the area. Whilst it is not intended to fell any trees to facilitate the development, it is considered that, as submitted, an oak reaching early maturity is likely to be affected by the proposed garage, however officers consider that this is not particularly visible from outside of the site and its loss would be unlikely to be detrimental to the character of the area.

Whilst the comments of the neighbour are noted, given the level of screening which is substantial, it is not considered that the proposal would result in any material overlooking to the detriment of the privacy of neighbours. It is also not considered that the lights from cars using the car port will detrimentally effect neighbouring properties.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:


Reasons
* * * * *
B.6WA01/0067
D Blythe
16.01.01
Erection of extensions and alterations to dwelling and outbuilding; erection of a detached triple garage at 30 Sandrock Hill Road, Farnham (as amended by letter and plans date stamped 12.03.01)
Grid Reference:E: 483320 N: 144191
Town:Farnham
Ward:Rowledge and Wrecclesham
Development Plan:No site specific policies
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Town Council:No comment
Representations:Two letters of objection received to date which raise the following concerns:
      1. the adjacent property has been extended to within 2 m of the boundary; new garage would provide a wall in front of a day room window;
      2. the garage should be relocated, although concern would be expressed if mature beech trees were to be removed – they provide a barrier between properties. Application site is 1.5 m below the level of adjacent property;
      3. concerned at size of extension, question whether it would be in keeping with locality;
      4. need for detached accommodation in the adjacent outbuilding;
      5. access to the site has limited sight lines, proximity on brow of hill and narrowness of drive, increase in traffic and potential for accidents. Can alternative access be made during construction?

Relevant History

WA94/0043Demolition of existing sub-standard house and its replacement with two detached chalet-style properties and one detached garage
Appeal Dismissed
22.08.94
WA94/1630Erection of bungalow and garage following demolition of existing garage and workshop, construction of access to existing dwelling and erection of garage
Refused
08.02.95

WA97/0179Erection of single-storey extension.
Permitted
25.03.97
WA99/1417Outline application for the erection of a detached dwelling
Refused
29.20.99

Description of Site/Background

30 Sandrock Hill Road is a detached property set within a substantial garden positioned on raised ground rising from Jubilee Lane immediately to the south-east of the site. The existing property benefits from an existing basement and accommodation in the roof. Access to the site is taken from Sandrock Hill Road. The property is currently served by a detached garage/workshop.

The Proposal

This application seeks to remove an existing single-storey side extension which currently provides a dining room and kitchen and in its place erect a large two-storey extension on the south-western side of the property to provide a reception area, study, kitchen and utility on the ground floor with two bedrooms and an en-suite above. It is also proposed to erect a conservatory on the south-western corner of the dwelling and provide access to the garden from the basement beneath the existing house. The scheme also proposes a pitched roof above existing flat roof bay windows.

The application also seeks to convert the existing garage/annexe into a workshop and bathroom with an office above. To facilitate the conversion, a new dormer is proposed on the western elevation to provide head height from the staircase. A new triple bay garage is proposed to the north of the annexe (9m x 6m) which originally extended to a height of 4.8 m. Amended plans have been received which indicate a reduced size dormer with frosted glass. The garage has also been reduced in height to 4 m.

Relevant Policies

The site lies within the defined settlement area for Farnham and therefore the proposals should be considered in the light of Policy DE1 of the adopted Local Plan and Policies D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan.

Main Planning Issues

In considering the above development, it is acknowledged that the extensions are significant in size and scale, essentially doubling the existing two-storey part of the dwelling. However, the site is considered to be of a size which could accommodate a substantial extension without having an adverse impact on adjoining properties. The property is particularly prominent when viewed from Jubilee Lane, being set up on a hill substantially above the road level. Whilst the properties in Jubilee Lane lie to the south-east of the site, the extension is approximately 18 m from the site boundary and in excess of 30 m from the bungalows in Jubilee Lane. It is acknowledged that additional windows are proposed in the south-eastern elevation; however, given the existing fenestration, it is not considered that there would be a material increase in overlooking over and above that which currently exists.


With respect to the proposed alterations to the garage/annexe, officers had expressed concern at the size and scale of the proposed new dormer which would look towards and across the front of the adjacent property. Whilst amended plans have been received indicating a reduction in the size of the dormer, now shown to have frosted glass, concern is still expressed at the size of the dormer and the provision of rooflights on this side elevation. The applicants have been advised to further reduce the size of the dormer and provide a fixed, obscure glazed window together with the omission of the new rooflights on the south-western elevation.

With respect to the proposed garage, following concerns at the impact that the new building would have on the adjacent property which has a habitable window facing the rear of the garage, amended plans have been received indicating a reduction in the height to 4 m. Whilst it is accepted that the building is set close to the boundary, the neighbour's land is approximately 1.5 m higher than the application site. Therefore, given that the shallow roof pitches away from the window, it is not considered that the proposed location of the garage would be unacceptable.

Conclusions

Whilst it is acknowledged that the alterations and proposals are extensive, the site lies within the built-up area where the principle of development is acceptable. Furthermore, the site is capable of accommodating the scale of development proposed without adversely affecting neighbouring properties or the wider locality. Accordingly, officers consider that, in the circumstances, it would be difficult to substantiate a reason for refusal.

Recommendation

That, subject to the receipt of satisfactory amended plans indicating a further reduction in the size of the dormer to the workshop/office and omission of the rooflights in the workshop, then permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:
4. Standard levels (5.1) *(of the new garage building)
3 - 4. Standard (4.53)
* * * **


B.7WA01/0147
Mr & Mrs C H W Sanders
25.01.01
Outline application for the erection of a detached dwelling at 4 The Avenue, Rowledge, Farnham (as amended and amplified by letter dated 07.02.01 and plans received 08.03.01)
Grid Reference:E: 482439 N: 143303
Town:Farnham
Ward:Rowledge and Wrecclesham
Development Plan:No site specific policy
Highway Authority:Recommend conditions and informative
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Town Council:Original Proposal
We are still concerned at possible overdevelopment. Also concerned at use of re-opening of disused access onto The Long Road and strongly object to position of proposed garage and its proximity to Ellerslie Lodge.
Amended Scheme
Any further comments to be reported orally.
Representations:
      Original Proposal
One letter from The Farnham Society – given the landform of the proposed application site, concerned that the scale of the proposed dwelling remains such that it would represent an overdevelopment of the site contrary to Local Plan policies; concerned at potential loss of trees; grounds for objection to application WA00/0383 not been addressed.
One letter expressing concerns that the area has seen a great deal of development in the past few years; impact on surrounding area; bring into use an entrance on The Long Road; and likely loss of trees.

Relevant History

WA00/0383Outline application for the erection of a detached dwelling with access on to Chapel Lane
Refused
28.04.00

Description of Site/Background

No. 4 The Avenue is one half of a large two-storey property located between The Long Road, The Avenue and Chapel Road.

The main garden area of No. 4 is situated on the northern side which is generally well secluded by mature trees and hedges. The property is served by two vehicular accesses, off both The Long Road and The Avenue.

The Proposal

Permission is sought to sub-divide the main garden area and to erect a detached bungalow and garage. The application is a revision to that refused in April last year and now affects a different part of the garden.


The application is submitted in outline with means of vehicular access to be considered as part of the proposal. The plot created is regular in shape and has an area of 0.08 ha with frontages of about 35 m to The Avenue and 28 m to Chapel Road.

Illustrative plans are submitted which show how a detached bungalow and garage could be accommodated on the site. The plans show a two-bedroomed bungalow of 75 sq m and detached garage of 18 sq m. Use would be made of the existing entrance off The Avenue with the other entrance off The Long Road being retained to serve the main house.

Submissions in Support

The applicant has stated that in making this application, account has been taken of the objections to WA00/0383 and the reasons for its refusal.

The applicant has argued that the proposal would comply with relevant policies of the Local Plan, including Policy HS2 and H4 for the provision of smaller dwellings. The applicant has argued that it is on an area of open garden and does not affect the main existing features of the site. No healthy mature trees would be affected, with the only tree which might need to go being a beech on the edge of the lawn which is suffering severe dieback.

The applicant argues that the site could be seen only from an upstairs window of Ellerslie House and two of Ellerslie Lodge. The applicant also wishes to point out that the present vehicular access off The Long Road remains in regular use and has never been closed.

Relevant Policies

The site is within the developed area of Farnham and, as such, the proposal should be considered in the light of Policy DE1 of the adopted Local Plan 1993 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999.

Policy PE10 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994 relates to the protection of urban character. Policy H2 of the adopted Local Plan 1993 and Policy H4 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999 make reference to the provision of housing for smaller households (i.e. one and two-bedroomed units).

PPG Note 3 on Housing promotes the best use of urban land, but recognises that any development should have regard to the character and appearance of an area.

Main Planning Issues

The main issues to be considered are whether this proposal represents an acceptable form of residential infill development and its impact on the character and appearance of the area.

Officers consider that the plot created is of sufficient size to accommodate a modest sized dwelling and which would be of similar density to other development in the vicinity. The illustrative layout plans are also considered to show that satisfactory amenity space could be provided and that the mature trees and vegetation and the boundaries of the plot would be unaffected by the proposed development.


However, officers did have some reservations over the relationship of Nos. 2 – 4 The Avenue (Ellerslie House and Ellerslie Lodge) to the proposed new dwelling. These two properties have first floor windows serving two bedrooms and a bathroom which look over the plot, which currently forms part of the rear garden of No. 4. Whilst the bedroom window at No. 4 would be a sufficient distance away (at some 10 m away from the new boundary), the bedroom window to No. 2 is closer and would overlook the proposed garage and front entrance area. However, it is considered that any direct overlooking would be limited. For these reasons, it is not considered that there would be an unsatisfactory relationship between dwellings.

The size of dwelling proposed would meet Development Plan policies on the provision of smaller dwellings and could be argued to make the best use of urban land in accordance with Government policy.

Conclusion

The proposal is considered to represent an acceptable form of infill development in accordance with Government guidance and Development Plan policies and which would not cause material harm to the character and appearance of the area.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard outline (1.2) *(siting, design, external appearance, landscaping)

2. Standard duration (1.3)

3. Standard extensions (4.1)

4. Standard size limitation: single garage (4.3) *(95 sq m)

5. Standard single-storey dwelling (4.11)

6. Standard tree survey (8.1)

7. Standard tree protection (8.2)

8. Standard services (8.3)

9. Standard hedging (8.7) *(south-western and south-eastern boundaries) *(2)

10. Standard on site permanent parking etc - outline (H13) *(a)

11. Standard construction related loading and parking (H15) *(a – c)

Reasons

1. Standard (1.50)

2. Standard (1.51)


3 – 4. Standard (4.50)

5. Standard (4.52)

6. Standard (4.54)

7 – 8. Standard (4.56)

9. Standard (4.52)

10-11. Standard (HR1)

Informative

1. Standard highways (HF7)
* * * * *
B.8WA01/0059
P A Lloyd
16.01.01
Erection of extensions following demolition of existing garage at Silverdale House, Longdown Road, Lower Bourne, Farnham (as amended by plans dated 19.03.01)
Grid Reference:E: 483665 N: 144082
Town:Farnham
Ward:Bourne
Development Plan:No site specific policies
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Town Council:Original Scheme - concerned at size of extension and proximity to neighbours.
Revised Scheme – any further comments to be reported orally.
Representations:Original Scheme – letter from Bourne and Lower Bourne Residents' Association objecting on the grounds of overdevelopment. Increased floor area would give cramped appearance unlike other properties in the surrounding semi-rural area.

Relevant History

FAR 60/0088Construction of house and garage
Permitted
20.04.60
WA94/1224Erection of extensions and alterations following demolition of existing attached garage; erection of a double garage
Permitted
17.10.94
WA99/1708Erection of extensions and alterations following demolition of existing garage together with erection of detached garage
Refused
08.12.99


Description of Site/Background

Silverdale House is a detached property situated on the north-western side of Longdown Road.

In 1994, permission was granted for the erection of a two-storey side extension and garage (WA94/1224). A subsequent proposal for a larger addition and the provision of a detached garage positioned further forward of the house was refused. It was considered that the extension would appear dominant, overlarge and cramped and that the garage would be unduly prominent in the street scene.

The Proposal

Permission is sought for a two-storey side and rear extension, a new entrance lobby and a detached double garage following the demolition of the existing garage. It is a revised scheme in which the applicants have sought to address the grounds of refusal of the earlier scheme. The two-storey side extension would have an overall depth of 13.8 m extending 1.4 m in front of the existing building line of the property. The two-storey extension would be within 2 m of the boundary with the neighbouring property at its closest point. The garage would be detached but located immediately to the front of the property, adjacent to the boundary and within 1.2 m of the house.

Relevant Policies

Policy DE1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993

Policy D4 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999

Main Planning Issues

The main issues are again the potential impact of both the extension and the garage on the character and appearance of the area. In this latest application, the garage has been set further back from the road, closer to the house. This addresses one of the previous grounds of refusal. However, officers still had concerns about the scale of the extension.

Following negotiation, amended plans have recently been submitted. Officers consider these amended proposals to be acceptable. The applicants have removed the first floor element from over the garage and detached the garage from the extension to the dwelling. The revised position of the garage and the size of the extension are now comparable to the previous application granted permission in 1994. In addition, the amended proposal, in officers' opinion, overcomes the reasons for refusal for planning application WA99/1708. Officers consider the proposals to be acceptable.

Recommendation

That, subject to the consideration of any representations received prior to the expiry of the reconsultation period on 02.04.01, the Borough Planning and Development Manager be authorised to GRANT permission subject to the following condition:

1. Standard fenestration (4.13) *(first floor) *(flank wall) *(east elevation)


Reason

1. Standard (2.51)
* * * * *
B.9WA00/1897
Barnett & Small
01.11.00
Display of illuminated signs at Barnett and Small, Crondall Lane, Farnham
Grid Reference:E: 483341 N: 146558
Town:Farnham
Ward:Castle
Development Plan:Part of site within Conservation Area
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Town Council:No comments
Representations:One letter from neighbour opposite – object if signs face property – impact on outlook. Also concerned at impact of any illumination.

Description of Site/Background

Barnett and Small is situated on the south-western corner of the junction of West Street and Crondall Lane. The property is divided into two sections with a modern showroom building on West Street, prominent in the Conservation Area.

The Proposal

Advertisement Consent is sought for a total of four signs which are as follows:

1. An illuminated flag sign mounted on the showroom fronting West Street. This would measure 1.1 m x 0.9 m. It would be silver and blue and would be backlit after dark.

2. A VW name clip on the north-eastern elevation of the workshop building. This would be silver and blue.

3. An illuminated name plate "Barnett and Small" on the north-eastern elevation of the workshop building. This would be black lettering on a silver/grey background. The outlines would be backlit after dark.

4. An illuminated flag sign on the north-eastern elevation of the workshop building. The details of this are the same as No. 1 above.

Relevant Policies

Policy C11 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan

Policy HE8 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999


Main Planning Issues

Officers are concerned about the overall impact of these signs in terms of their size and illumination. Officers are particularly concerned at the visual impact of the projecting "flag" signs. The one on the frontage would be within the Conservation Area, the other signs would be visible from the Conservation Area. It is considered that, overall, the scheme would have a detrimental impact on this part of the Conservation Area.

Recommendation

That Advertisement Consent be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. Standard Conservation Area (22.5)

2. The proposed signs, by reason of their size and illumination, would fail to preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. The proposal would thereby conflict with Policy PE12 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2001, Policies DE12 and C11 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policies D10 and HE8 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999
* * * * *
B.10WA00/0670
Cannons Health & Fitness Limited
03.05.00
Erection of a two-storey extension and use of land for the construction of an extension to existing car park at Cannons Health Club, Weybourne Road, Farnham (as amplified and amended by letters dated 14.11.00, 19.01.01 and 23.01.01 and plans received 16.11.00)
Grid Reference:E: 485412 N: 148575
Town:Farnham
Ward:Weybourne and Badshot Lea
Development Plan:Rural Area, Farnham/Aldershot Strategic Gap
Highway Authority:Recommend conditions – see report
Drainage Authority:Environment Agency recommends conditions and informatives
Town Council:Concerned at loss of trees – if application is permitted, would like to see replanting
Consultations:Blackwater Valley Recreation and Countryside Management Service – recommend site is surveyed for botanical and ecological value prior to permission. Extension of building and car park would further encroach into Strategic Gap. Recommend tree and hedge planting.
Representations:One letter of objection – environmental impact; impact on allotments; increased car parking would result in more traffic.
One letter of concern - welcome extra parking to relieve parking congestion; concerned about noise; removal of trees should be restricted.
Farnham Society – do not object in principle but extended car park should be adequately landscaped and screened.


Relevant History

WA80/1458Erection of eight squash courts and ancillary facilities
Permitted
January 1981
WA81/0017Erection of squash club
Permitted
March 1981
WA94/0483Alterations to elevations
Permitted
May 1994
WA95/0495Change of use of land to provide extension to car park
Permitted
May 1995
WA96/0916Erection of extension to provide swimming pool
Permitted
January 1997
WA97/0225Alterations to elevations and construction of entrance canopy
Permitted
June 1997
WA98/0174Erection of conservatory extension
Permitted
March 1997
WA98/1524Extension to provide crèche, exercise and changing facilities
Permitted
November 1988

Description of Site/Background

Cannons Health Club (which has formerly been known as the Waverley Club and the West Surrey Health and Fitness Club) is located on the south-east side of Weybourne Road, adjoining the Village Hall. The club was originally built as a squash club in the 1980s. The building has since been altered into a general health and fitness club.

The building has been the subject to alterations and some additions over the years. Most notably, in 1997, permission was granted to construct an attached swimming pool to the rear, that addition has been built.

The Proposal

Permission is sought for an extension to the building and for an extension to the car park.

The proposed extension would be on the northern side of the building. It would provide new male changing facilities on the ground floor and a new aerobics studio above. The existing club has a footprint of 1,123 sq m and an overall floorspace of 1,803 sq m. These figures include a swimming pool extension of 280 sq m.

The proposed extension would have a footprint of 237 sq m and an overall floor area of 474 sq m. These represent increases over the existing of 21% and 26% respectively. Permission has previously been granted for a single-storey extension on this side of the building. That permission was not implemented (WA98/1524). That extension would have added 80 sq m.


The proposed car park extension is located on the southern side of the site. The club has recently completed the second phase of an earlier approved car park extension (WA95/0495 refers). The car park extension now proposed would further enlarge the car park in this southerly direction towards the allotments. As a result of negotiations, and in clarifying the extent of the previously approved car park, it is now clear that the existing car park accommodates 118 spaces and the proposal would add 32, giving a total of 150. This is a reduction from the figure of 174 originally proposed in the application.

Submissions in Support

The applicants have stated that it is the intention to upgrade the existing facilities, especially in respect of changing facilities, crèche facilities and parking, to a similar standard to other clubs in their portfolio. Thus, for example, they state that the space given over to changing facilities would increase from 185 sq m to 383 sq m.

With regard to parking/transportation issues, the applicants commissioned a traffic assessment, which indicates that, even with the recent extension to the car park, the 118 spaces are inadequate at peak times and, as a result, there is parking on the verges.

With regard to landscape/environmental issues, the applicants refer to the amendment to the size of the extension to protect the area of conservation interest. They also refer to plans to provide additional planting.

They have also drawn attention to the fact that the aerobics studio would have mechanical ventilation/cooling and would therefore have sealed windows, thereby minimising noise break out.

Planning Policies and Considerations

The site lies within the rural area and the Farnham/Aldershot Strategic Gap. Policy C2 of the Replacement Local Plan sets out the criteria for assessing development proposals in the countryside. It identifies that small scale expansion of existing commercial development may be acceptable. It adds that all development must be appropriate in layout, scale, height, materials, form, impact and siting and should not adversely affect the landscape, wildlife, ecological, environmental, archaeological or historic resources.

Officers have identified two key issues. Firstly, whether the development is in accordance with Policy C2 and secondly, whether the development is acceptable from a traffic/transportation point of view.

With regard to the first point, officers have concluded that this addition is relatively small in scale given the overall size of the existing facilities. The extension is at the side of the building and, whilst some trees in this area would be removed, it is not considered that the overall effect would be unacceptable, particularly if some replacement planting is carried out.

It is acknowledged that the enlarged car park would have a greater visual impact in this sensitive location. However, it is a relatively small extension over what is already there. Officers are mindful of the work that has taken place to assess the ecological value of the area, especially in the vicinity of the ponds to the rear of the club.

However, the revised plans for the car park addition show this to be clear of the area of interest. Subject to suitable screen planting and subject to approval of the proposed surface water drainage, it is not considered that the extended car park would affect adversely the visual amenity of the area or the conservation interest of the adjoining land.

With regard to highway matters, the applicants commissioned a Transportation Impact Assessment. This concluded that the extension itself would only provide a small increase in the amount of activity space at the club. It stated that there would be no potential to increase the number of member visitors at peak times. It argued that the present access road is adequate and that the scheme would not lead to an increase in trips by car.

Given the revisions that have been made, the increase in parking from 118 spaces to 150 spaces represents an increase of 27%. Officers consider this to be a relatively small increase. In addition, the present activity at the site results in car parking on verges at peak times and an increase in parking would help to relieve this. The Highway Authority has considered the additional highway information and has recommended approval with conditions.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard matching materials (5.4)

2. Standard surfacing materials (5.3)

3. Standard landscape scheme (8.9)

4. Before development is commenced, details of the proposed means of surface water drainage, to include surface water source control measures, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

5. Standard on site permanent parking etc - detailed (H14) *(a, b, c, d)

6. Standard construction related loading and parking (H15) *(a, b, c)

Reasons

1 – 3. Standard (4.55)

4. To prevent the increased risk of flooding and to improve water quality and having regard to the nature conservation interests of the adjoining site.

5. Standard (HR1) *(insert at end "in accordance with Policies MT2 and MT5 of the 1994 Surrey Structure Plan)

Informative

1. The applicants' attention is drawn to the contents of the letter from the Environment Agency dated 13th September 2000.
* * * * *

B.11WA01/0127
P Longford
19.01.01
Erection of a link extension with basement storage area at Griffens, Green Lane, Churt, Farnham
Grid Reference:E: 485884 N: 137996
Parish:Frensham
Ward:Frensham, Dockenfield & Tilford
Development Plan:MGB, AONB, AGLV (within settlement boundaries)
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Parish Council:Object – overdevelopment of site; concern over loss of on-site parking which may result in additional on-street parking
Representations:One letter received from a neighbour objecting on the following grounds:
1. loss of light;
      2. proposed basement could undermine their garage;
      3. overdevelopment of plot.

Relevant History

WA74/0987Erection of a single-storey extension to provide porch and extension to bedroom; erection of detached garage with tool shed
Permitted
28.11.74
WA98/0610Alterations and extensions to existing bungalow to provide chalet bungalow
Permitted
26.05.98
WA98/1980Demolition of existing porch and erection of a conservatory
Permitted
03.02.99

Description of Site/Background

Griffins is a detached property situated on the corner of the junction of Green Lane and Parkhurst Fields. The property has been significantly extended in recent years.

The Proposal

The application is for a timber-framed conservatory with a basement store below that would link the house with the existing garage. The conservatory would have a floor area of 27 sq m.

Relevant Policies

Policy DE1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan

Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999


Main Planning Issues

Whilst the objections of the neighbour and Parish Council are noted, officers consider the proposals to be acceptable. It is accepted that the property has been the subject of considerable extensions in recent years, but the current proposal is small-scale. Officers consider the linking of the house to the garage with a conservatory would not adversely affect the residential amenities of the neighbouring property to an extent that would warrant a refusal of planning permission, nor leave the property with inadequate parking. Parking for at least two vehicles would remain on site. At present, the garage to Rose Cottage, the neighbouring property, lies adjacent to the boundary where the new conservatory would be. In addition, last year, permission was granted for extensive alterations to this property which have yet to be built. The area where the proposed conservatory would be currently forms part of the rear yard area.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard external materials (5.2)

Reason

1. Standard (4.55)
* * * * *
B.12WA01/0202
Mr Sundel
26.01.01
Retention of modified garage at Corn Cottage, Tilford Road, Tilford, Farnham (revision of WA00/0976)
Grid Reference:E: 487357 N: 140734
Parish:Frensham
Ward:Frensham, Dockenfield & Tilford
Development Plan:MGB, AONB, AGLV
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Parish Council:No objection

Relevant History

WA79/1689Erection of Marley garage
Permitted
November 1979
WA88/1842Alterations to roof, erection of porch and erection of detached garage
Permitted
September 1988
P43/11/20Enforcement action in respect of erection of two-storey outbuilding
Appeal against
Enforcement Notice
Dismissed
December 1999

WA99/0286Substantial demolition of building and erection of new two-storey ancillary building
Refused
April 1999
WA00/0976Retention of outbuilding following removal of roof and upper flank walls and construction of a 5 degree hipped roof and brick parapet
Refused
September 2000

Description of Site/Background

Corn Cottage is located on the western side of Tilford Road at the junction with Wellesley Road. Members will be familiar with the recent history of this property in respect of the garage/outbuilding. In March 1999, the Council took enforcement action in relation to unauthorised additions to the detached garage building. In essence, both the footprint and height of the building were increased such that it resulted in a substantial two-storey structure. It was considered that the resulting building was excessive in size given the policies of restraint applying in the area. The owner made a retrospective planning application that was refused and also appealed against the Enforcement Notice.

In dismissing the subsequent appeal, the Council's concerns were endorsed by the Inspector. He upheld the Enforcement Notice. The owner was therefore required to reduce the size of the building such that it conformed to the dimensions of the building that had previously existed (as permitted under reference WA88/1842).

The owner made a further application which sought to modify the building such that it effectively was single-storey, with a flat roof, but retaining the enlarged footprint. That application was refused in September last (WA00/0976).

The owner has since made further modifications to the building, with a view to complying with the requirements of the Notice.

The Current Application

It has become apparent that the modified building does not comply precisely with the profile and dimensions of the original building. The original building was permitted in 1988 (see WA88/1842). It had overall dimensions of 7.7 m by 8.2 m. It had a ridge height of 4.8 m. In essence it comprised a double garage with pitched roof, attached to which was a lean-to store that ran for almost the entire length of the building.

The owner has modified the building such that it now complies with the overall dimensions of the original. The height has also been reduced to 4.8 m as required. Where it differs from the original is that the pitched roof spans the full width of the building. In the original case, the main pitched roof spanned only the garage. The lean-to element had a lower shallow mono-pitched roof.

Planning Policies and Considerations

The key test remains whether or not this is an acceptable development given the policies of restraint that apply in this area.


It is acknowledged that the profile of the building is not exactly the same as the original. In this respect, it does not strictly comply with the requirements of the Enforcement Notice. However, the building now has the same dimensions and is no higher than the original. It only differs in the profile of the roof and it is the officers' view that these differences are not significant. It certainly represents a significant change from that which had previously been unacceptable. It is not considered that this revised building would have any more impact on the Green Belt or Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty than that which originally stood in this location.

In conclusion, therefore, it is considered that this is an acceptable alternative to that which was previously permitted.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED.
* * * * *
B.13WA00/2230
Dr R Pearson
20.12.00
Erection of a single-storey and first floor extension and alterations, together with boundary fences and gates at Chedworth, Tilford Road, Tilford, Farnham (as amended by plans dated 15.03.01)
Grid Reference:E: 487457 N: 140881
Parish:Frensham
Ward:Frensham, Dockenfield & Tilford
Development Plan:MGB, AONB, AGLV
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:Not yet received - to be reported orally
Parish Council:No objection provided extensions do not contravene rural development policies and 40% rule. Consider fences/gates inappropriate to the rural scene.

Introduction

Members may recall that consideration of this application was deferred at the Sub-Committee meeting on 31st January. This was principally in order to clarify some factual information with the applicant.

The Site

Chedworth is a detached dwelling situated on the eastern side of Tilford Road. The dwelling has no previous planning history and the original floor area (which includes the converted roof space and the conservatory) has been calculated to be approximately 229 sq m. The first floor area has been calculated from the submitted drawings to be 43.76 sq m and excludes those areas where the floor to ceiling height is less than 1.5 m.

The Proposal

The proposal is for part single-storey and part first floor extensions, a replacement conservatory, double garage and fencing to all boundaries of the property. The proposals would provide a net increase in habitable floor area of approximately

96 sq m. The calculations exclude areas on the proposed first floor which have a restricted ceiling height. The proposals have been significantly altered since originally submitted and are now considered to be acceptable. The applicants have reduced the overall bulk and massing of the extensions, the conservatory has been removed and the link to the garage has been removed. In addition, the maximum ridge line of the roof has not been raised above the height of the existing ridge line. Whilst the bulk of the roof would be greater than existing, and whilst the percentage increase exceeds 40%, nevertheless it is not considered that the scale and character of the dwelling is altered to the extent that it would warrant a refusal of planning permission.

The Main Planning Issues

The property lies within the Metropolitan Green Belt, the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and the Area of Great Landscape Value. The property lies outside of any settlement boundaries. As such, the proposals should be judged against Policy HS7 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy RD2 of the Replacement Local Plan. The proposals would result in a cumulative increase of 41.8% over the original dwelling.

In addition, the proposals for the fencing to the property have also been amended. As originally submitted, the applicants proposed a 1.8 m high timber fence along the 80 m frontage of the property which was considered inappropriate in this location. The revised proposals show the fencing to the front of the property would be part timber close-boarded fencing and part deer fencing. In addition, the close-boarded fencing to the north of the entrance of the property would be set behind the existing rhododendron bushes. Officers consider the revised fencing is more appropriate in this rural location.

Recommendation

That, subject to the consideration of any representations received prior to the expiry of the reconsultation period on 02.04.01, the Borough Planning and Development Manager be authorised to GRANT planning permission.
* * * * *


Western 56
SCHEDULE 'C' TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
WESTERN AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
28TH MARCH 2001

Applications determined in accordance with the approved terms of delegation to the Borough Planning and Development Manager.

Background Papers (BP&DM)

There are no background papers (as defined by Section 100D(5) of the Local Government Act 1972) relating to this report.

Plan No.
Applicant
Development Proposed
Site Description
Decision
WA00/1583
G Riddock
Erection of extensions and alterations at Quest, Tilford Road, Tilford (as amended by plans date stamped 09.02.01)GRANTED
WA00/2262
Sainsbury's
Supermarkets Ltd
Erection of twelve covered trolley bays at J Sainsbury, Water Lane, FarnhamGRANTED
WA00/2264
R Church
Erection of extensions and alterations following demolition of old toilet block and conservatory at Willey Place, Chamber Lane, Farnham (as amended by plan received 16.02.01)GRANTED
WA00/2265
R Church
Application for Listed Building Consent for the demolition of an existing conservatory and a toilet block and the erection of extensions and alterations at Willey Place, Chamber Lane, Farnham (as amended by plan received 16.02.01)GRANTED
WA00/2278
D Davies & D Evans
Construction of a new access at 27 St Georges Road, Badshot Lea, FarnhamREFUSED
WA00/2324
Mrs L J Hamilton's
Sett. Trust
Erection of an extension to existing outbuilding on land at The Clockhouse, The Dovecote and Crooksbury House Cottage, Crooksbury Road, FarnhamGRANTED
WA00/2325
Mrs L J Hamilton's
Sett. Trust
Application for Listed Building Consent for the erection of an extension to existing outbuilding on land at The Clockhouse, The Dovecote and Crooksbury House Cottage, Crooksbury Road, FarnhamGRANTED
WA00/2339
D Atkins
Erection of a single-storey extension at 91 West Street, FarnhamGRANTED

WA00/2340
D Atkins
Application for Listed Building Consent for the erection of a single-storey extension and alterations at 91 West Street, FarnhamGRANTED
WA00/2355
The Signet Group Plc
Display of illuminated signs at 117 West Street, Farnham (as amended by letter dated 29.01.01 and plans date stamped 31.01.01)GRANTED
WA01/0014
Mr & Mrs M Proudlock
Erection of extensions and alterations and a detached garage at Tendring, 15 Greenhill Road, Farnham (as amended by letter dated 08.02.01 and 15.02.01 and amended plans date stamped 19.02.01)GRANTED
WA01/0021
Mr & Mrs Richardson
Erection of extensions and alterations at 49 Shortheath Crest, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0035
Surrey Hampshire
Borders NHS
Alterations to elevations to provide for three new boiler houses to be formed within existing hospital buildings together with siting of a new emergency generator and ancillary works on land at Farnham Hospital, Upper Hale Road, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0042
J D Walker
Erection of a two-storey extension at 14 The Chine, Wrecclesham, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0057
Mr & Mrs M
Edmondson
Erection of a single-storey extension, a semi-underground swimming pool and ancillary works at Mulberry Hill, 8 Compton Way, Moor Park, Farnham (as amplified by letter dated 12.03.01)GRANTED
WA01/0065
Mr & Mrs P Ryan
Erection of a two-storey extension and alterations at 59 Dene Lane, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0066
Mr & Mrs J
Mendelssohn
Erection of extensions and alterations at Manor Cottage, Tilford Road, Rushmoor, FrenshamGRANTED
WA01/0084
S J S Worthington
Erection of a two-storey extension following demolition of existing garage at 12 Marston Road, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0086
T Swage and
I Essackjee
Erection of a single-storey extension at 20 Edward Road, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0094
Mr & Mrs B
Stansfield
Erection of a detached triple garage with store over following demolition of existing garage at 1 Swifts Close, Moor Park, FarnhamGRANTED

WA01/0096
Mr & Mrs P S Weller
Erection of a first floor extension at 3 Byworth Road, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0102
J Hewerdine
Change of use from retail (Class A1) to food and drink (Class A3) at 50 Upper Hale Road, FarnhamREFUSED
WA01/0116
J N Hughes
Erection of a two-storey extension and alterations following demolition of existing extension together with the erection of a pitched roof to existing garage at Karind, Rock Lane, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0125
Mr & Mrs R Twite
Erection of an extension at Heath Cottage, Simmondstone Lane, Churt, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0142
Mr & Mrs Grigson
Erection of a two-storey extension at 11 Windermere Way, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0143
C Mirylees
Erection of a single-storey extension at 15 Burnt Hill Way, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0145
Dr & Mrs Van den
Brock
Erection of a first floor extension at Abbots Cottage, Tilford Road, Tilford, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0148
G T & P M Parker
Change of use from residential home to a single private dwelling at 1A Ridgway Road, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0157
Mr & Mrs Alford
Erection of a conservatory at 10 Stoneyfields, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0160
Mr & Mrs A Pryce
Alterations to elevations to provide for loft conversion at 9 Middle Avenue, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0177
Mr & Mrs A Bills
Retention of conservatory at 71 Aveley Lane, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0178
Mr & Mrs D
Catchpole
Erection of single-storey extensions and alterations following demolition of existing garage at 10 Clifton Close, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0187
Stasys Limited
Continued use of site for ancillary B1 use with associated parking for a temporary period at 54 Southern Way, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0189
M Swage
Erection of extensions and alterations following demolition of existing garage at 1 Hillary Close, FarnhamGRANTED

WA01/0199
Mr Nelson
Erection of an extension following demolition of existing garage at 72 Crooksbury Road, Runfold, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0200
Mr & Mrs Wilson
Erection of extensions and alterations at Bramleys, 49a Middle Bourne Lane, Lower Bourne, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0207
Mr & Mrs Willis
Erection of a single-storey extension at 18 Guildford Road, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0231
D M Blyth
Erection of a chimney and alterations at 17 High Street, Rowledge, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0239
Mr & Mrs J Keighley
Erection of extensions and alterations at 21 Dene Lane, Lower Bourne, FarnhamGRANTED
WA01/0247
Mr & Mrs C J Parratt
Erection of a conservatory at 136 Badshot Park, Badshot Lea, FarnhamGRANTED
TM00/0061
W E Chapman
Works to trees the subject of a Tree Preservation Order No. 4/99 at 3 Longhope Drive, Wrecclesham, FarnhamGRANTED
* * * * *