Waverley Borough Council Home Page Waverley Borough Council Home Page


Waverley Borough Council Committee System - Committee Document

Meeting of the Central Area Development Control Sub Committee held on 04/04/2001



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 of the Central Area Development Control Sub-Committee held on 7th March 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. PLANNING APPLICATIONS – SITE INSPECTIONS

In the event of site inspections being necessary as a result of consideration of the applications before this meeting, these will be held on Thursday, 12th April 2001.

5. APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

To consider the reports at Schedules A, B and C attached. Plans and letters of representation, etc., will be available for inspection before the meeting.

6. PLANNING APPEALS

6.1 Appeals Lodged

The Council has received notice of the following appeals:-

WA00/2193 Removal of Condition 1 of Consent to allow use of premises as a takeaway facility at 20A Farncombe Street, Farncombe.

WA00/1716 New shop front and shutters at 20 Farncombe Street, Farncombe.

WA00/2211 Demolition of existing single garage and erection of a five bedroom house with associated garaging and access on land adjacent to Merrions, Tuesley Lane, Godalming.

P43/16/4 The construction of two glazed extensions at the rear of 3 Park Avenue, Peper Harow. (DISMISSED AND
ENFORCEMENT NOTICE UPHELD)

Background Papers (CEx)

Notification received on 28th February, 5th, 12th and 26th March, 2001.

6.2 Appeal Decisions
Background Papers (CEx)

Letters received from the Planning Inspectorate dated 26th February, 1st, 5th and 21st March, 2001.

6.3 Inquiry Arrangements
7. ENFORCEMENT ACTION - CURRENT SITUATION

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

(a) Majorland Rew, Godalming Road, Loxhill, Hascombe (19.6.96 and 20.8.97)

To secure cessation of the use of the land for the stationing of residential caravans and as a contractor’s depot. Enforcement Notices served taking effect 14.11.97. Further Notices served relating to the barn, mobile home, playhouse and other matters. Appeals lodged. Dismissed.

Notice varied to allow retention of barn. Time for compliance expires 16.7.00 for most things. Letter clarifying compliance requirements sent. Planning application received and position on site being monitored. Residential accommodation position being clarified. Letter of offer sent to occupants, who have asked Council to pursue possibility of housing accommodation.

(b) Gochers Yard, Culmer Hill, Witley (11.3.98)

To secure cessation of the use of land adjoining Gochers Yard, Witley for commercial purposes and the removal of the unauthorised extension to the existing building. Notice in respect of extension served. Appeal lodged.

(c) Croft Nursery, Hookley Lane, Elstead (15.12.99)

To secure the cessation of the unauthorised storage use on the site together with removal of the stored items. Enforcement Notice issued and an appeal lodged. Enforcement Notice appeal dismissed, but notice varied to exclude dwellings. Enforcement Notice (as amended) upheld. Lawful Development Certificate appeal dismissed. Award of costs to the Council in respect of ground (d) of enforcement appeal and whole of costs in respect of Lawful Development Certificate appeal. High Court challenge withdrawn, costs paid, Notices come into effect 19.8.01.

(d) Marsh Farm, Station Lane, Enton, Witley (8.2.00)

To secure the cessation of the unauthorised storage and industrial uses of the site and removal of the stored items and any other items of equipment used in connection with the unauthorised uses. Enforcement notices issued and appeal lodged. Appeals allowed in part and dismissed in part. Car repair required to cease and building C and silos adjacent to buildings E, F and G to be demolished by 29th November 2001. Certain buildings allowed for storage use until 31st December 2003. If fishing development implemented, building J to be demolished.

(f) Park Avenue, Peper Harow (24.5.00)

To secure the removal of the two unauthorised glazed extensions. Enforcement Notice served taking effect on 30th September 2000. Appeal against Enforcement Notice dismissed and Enforcement Notice upheld 26.3.01.

(g) Croft Nursery, Hookley Lane, Elstead (21.6.00)

To secure the demolition of the unauthorised timber building and the removal of any demolition materials from the site; the cessation of the use of the additional haulage area, removal of the hard standing and restoration of the land to grass and, the cessation of the material change of use of the site from a use by three rigid lorries to a use by six lorries and three trailers. Retrospective application for timber building refused at meeting on 16th August 2000. Enforcement Notices in process of preparation.

(h) Fairfield Autos, Gochers Yard, Witley (16.8.00)

To secure the cessation of the unauthorised use of buildings for car repairs, servicing and maintenance. Certificate of Lawfulness application refused at January 2001 meeting. Enforcement Notice served and taking effect on 12th April, 2001.

(i) 18 King’s Road, Farncombe (13.12.00)

To secure the cessation of use of the land and buildings, including the carport building and new timber shed, for the storage of builder’s materials, rubble or any other associated non-domestic paraphernalia, including any office facility; the removal of the timber cladding which has been attached to the previously existing carport building and, the removal of the timber shed which has been erected between the carport and the house. Legal interests being established.

(j) The Applestore, Foxbury, Upper Vann Lane, Hambledon (13.12.00)

To secure the cessation of self-contained habitable use of ‘The Applestore’ and reversion to use as storage and garaging ancillary to Foxbury; the removal of all fixtures and fittings associated with self-containment; the demolition of the extensions, alterations and roof to the water tank and, the removal of all demolition materials from the site. Requisition of Information received.

(k) Heath Hall Farm, Bowlhead Green, Thursley (13.12.00)

To secure the cessation of the use of the front barn building for storage purposes unconnected with the agricultural holding and, the removal of the new agricultural building (cattle building) at the rear. Requisition of Information received.

(l) Wareham Brickworks, Haslemere Road, Brook (17.1.01)

To secure the cessation of the use of the land for the stationing of any mobile homes or caravans and vehicles or equipment connected with this use and also remove the articulated lorry trailer and, legal proceedings or an injunction be sought to secure the removal of the mobile homes or caravans and other items of residential occupation and the prevention of further mobile homes/caravans or other unauthorised structures being brought on to the land. Requisition of Information served.

(m) 48-56 High Street, Godalming (6.2.01)

To secure removal of sign; prosecution authorised. Legal interests being established.

Background Papers (CEx)

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

8. 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.

9. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

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

Recommendation

That pursuant to Standing Order 48(4) and in accordance with Section 100A(4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the press and public be excluded from the meeting during consideration of the following item on the grounds that it is likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted or the nature of the proceedings, that if members of the public were present during the item, there would be disclosure to them of exempt information (as defined by Section 100I of the Act) of the description specified in Paragraph 12 of Part 1 of Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972, namely:-

10. LEGAL ADVICE

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

For further information or assistance, please telephone Jean Radley, Senior Committee Secretary on extension 3400 or 01483 869400


SCHEDULE 'A' TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
CENTRAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
4TH APRIL 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.1WA00/1044
Elstead (Thursley Road)
Recreation Trust
28.06.00
Erection of a pavilion for sport and community use following demolition of existing pavilion on land at the Recreation Ground, Peat Common, Elstead (as amplified by letters dated 08.08.00, 29.08.00, 13.10.00 and 07.11.00 and amended by letters dated 05.12.00 and 28.02.01 and plans received 05.12.00 and 02.03.00)
Grid Reference:E: 490240 N: 142845
Parish:Elstead
Ward:Elstead, Peperharow, Thursley
Development Plan:MGB, AONB, AGLV – within settlement - Replacement Local Plan
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Parish Council:No objection on original or revised plans
Consultations:Sport England – no objection providing pitch is not reduced in size.
Borough Environmental Health Officer – recommends imposition of conditions regarding hours of use, sound insulation and noise limiting on any amplification.
Countryside Officer – no objection providing new pavilion does not encroach beyond the village green boundary.
Surrey County Council – Day Care Regulation Team express support for improvement of playgroup facilities.
Surrey County Playing Fields Association – express support.
Representations:Original Submission
62 letters have been received, 28 expressing support on the following grounds:
      1. will improve visual appearance of building and area;
      2. encourages youth sport;
      3. good quality of cricket pitch maintenance;
      4. present facilities for pre-school day group are inadequate;
      5. would improve playschool;
      6. no objection to pavilion being used only for sports and playgroup;

      7. will enhance community and sporting facilities;
      8. support in principle although size is large.
      34 raising objection on the following grounds:
      1. greater footprint than existing;
      2. lacks clarity on future use and meaning of "community use";
      3. excessive size for village sports pavilion;
      4. no need for this facility in view of existing facilities;
      5. increased noise and disturbance;
      6. require use conditions restricting weekdays and Sundays to 10.00 p.m. and weekends to 12.00 p.m;
      7. out of proportion with locality;
      8. excessive height/disproportionate;
      9. more prominent;
      10. use should be restricted to current uses;
      11. threat to trees;
      12. contrary to MGB and AONB policies;
      13. car park extension is an encroachment;
      14. proposed space exceeds needs of existing users;
      15. excessive traffic generation;
      16. threat to children's safety;
      17. inadequate parking provision/traffic congestion;
      18. seek a TPO on trees;
      19. inadequate consultation with residents;
      20. loss of outlook;
      21. Beacon View Road is in poor state of repair;
      22. use of first floor for late night parties;
      23. views of residents should be taken into account;
      24. outside toilets required;
      25. coniferous planting is undesirable.
First Amendment 05.12.00 (Reduction in roof massing and repositioning)
Seven letters have been received raising objection on the following grounds:
1. previous objections not overcome;
      2. repositioning means now no overlap with existing building;
      3. replacement siting is desirable;
      4. loss of two trees harmful to character of the area;
      5. natural grass replaced by tarmac;
      6. relocation of children's play equipment not mentioned;
      7. contrary to Replacement Local Plan policies;
      8. no reduction in height has been achieved;
      9. "community use" has not been clarified adequately;
      10. excessive size and height;
      11. out of keeping/detrimental of character;
      12. adequate existing supply of community facilities;



Description of Site/Background

The application site measures some 0.148 ha and is located on the east side of Thursley Road at the junction of Beacon View Road. The site forms the south-west corner of the Peat Common Recreation Ground. It is currently occupied by a single-storey timber pavilion building measuring 210 sq m in floor area, in a fairly poor state of repair. There are a number of mature trees on the frontage of Beacon View Road and Thursley Road and two relatively smaller oaks in the centre of the site. A children's play area is sited to the north-west of the pavilion. The land around the pavilion is an unmade but compacted surface, shown on the survey plan to provide ten car parking spaces. The parking area is separated from the play area by a post and chainlink fence.

The Proposal

Planning permission is sought for the demolition of the existing pavilion building and its replacement by a one and a half storey building. The new building would measure some 556 sq m in gross external floor area and measure 3.9 m to the eaves and 9.4 m to the ridge. The building would convey a local vernacular style with a cross-shaped footprint featuring a fully hipped roof on its north-west and south-east sides and half hips on its north-east and south-west sides. It would be constructed in brick upon a plinth with a plain clay tiled roof. At ground floor, the building would provide a club room with ancillary facilities (including a reception area, kitchen, changing rooms and w.c's). At first floor (within the roof) a members' room, children's room, committee room and bar would be provided. 18 parking spaces would be provided. The plan indicates that the two oak trees in the centre of the site (Nos. 4 and 5) would be removed but that all other trees would be retained. New hedging would be introduced upon the Beacon View Road and Thursley Road frontage.

Relevant Policies

The site is located within the Metropolitan Green Belt, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and an Area of Great Landscape Value. It lies within the settlement of Elstead as defined by the Replacement Local Plan. As such, Policies GB1, RE1, RS1 and DE1 of the adopted Local Plan and C1, C3, RD1, D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan apply to this proposal. These state, inter alia, that new development may be acceptable providing it is small-scale and does not result in any detrimental impact upon the residential or visual amenity of the rural area or the quality of the landscape. Policies CF2 and LT6 of the Replacement Local Plan also apply to this proposal. In summary, these indicate that within defined settlements, permission will be granted for the expansion of community and leisure facilities respectively providing that the scale of the development is appropriate to the needs of the community; does not introduce a level of activity and disturbance which would detract from the character of the area; the location is sustainable and accessible to people with disabilities and the design is of a high quality. Local Plan policies in respect of tree protection and provision of adequate parking are also relevant.

Submissions in Support

In support of the scheme, the applicants have put forward the following arguments:

"The Thursley Road Pavilion is essentially a sports pavilion servicing the Thursley Road Recreation Ground. Its three main users are the Cricket and Football Clubs and the Peter Pan Pre-School (which is itself a charity). Other organisations use it from time to time, including a small church youth group, the Parish Council, local businesses (e.g. for rounders competitions and associated barbecues) and the organisers of village fêtes and galas. The new pavilion would be owned and managed by a charitable trust – The Elstead (Thursley Road) Recreational Trust ………

I understand from the objection letters which have been presented that there is some concern about the precise use of the new pavilion. In particular, there is concern that the new building would be widely used for parties, discotheques, wedding receptions and other similar functions.

The Trust has no intention of managing the new building in such a way as to promote its use for events such as these. Its aim is that the building should be used primarily for the benefit of the existing main users, namely the Cricket and Football Clubs and the Pre-School. As our business plan demonstrates, the Trust would have no need to generate substantial additional income from non-sporting use. Indeed, since the main demand for social events would be on a Saturday, the use of the pavilion for such events on this day would be in conflict with the interests of both the Cricket and Football Clubs, who use the pavilion on Saturdays (including evenings) virtually every week of the year. This point has been explained to local residents at each of the three public meetings held to explain the purpose of the pavilion redevelopment; but clearly, doubts remain.

It has been suggested by some objectors that the use of the new pavilion should be restricted to the three main current users. There are three reasons why this would be undesirable. First, there are already a number of other less frequent users who would no doubt feel aggrieved if they were denied use of a much-improved facility.

Second, the Trust is a charity whose objects are 'to provide facilities for recreation and leisure time occupation for the inhabitants of Elstead and the immediately surrounding area'. I doubt that it would be compatible with these objectives if the use of the new building were to be restricted to the three named organisations.


Third, substantial amounts of public money are likely to be required to build the new pavilion, to be raised from a number of sources. It would not seem proper to restrict the use of a building, constructed from such funds, to defined organisations. Indeed, public policy would suggest that the building should be available for wider recreational use, subject to appropriate safeguards to protect the legitimate interests of near neighbours …….

The present car park is not large enough to cater for the traffic which uses the pavilion at peak times. It can, at most, accommodate about nine cars according to the standards set out in the planning application. This can give rise to problems for local residents when the overflow of cars is parked in Beacon View Road.

The new pavilion would not significantly increase the amount of traffic using the pavilion under normal circumstances. Only one cricket or football match can be played at the recreation ground at any one time. The pre-school use seldom gives rise to parking problems. The greatest number of people using the pavilion at any one time is during youth cricket practice on Saturday mornings, when up to 50 children aged between 8 and 15 are present; but on these occasions, I have counted at most four or five cars in the car park, simply because most of the children live in the village and many arrive on foot or by bicycle.

The proposals for the new pavilion should go a long way to dealing with any parking problems around the recreation ground. The parking provision would be increased from 9 to 17 cars. Under normal circumstances, this should be sufficient to cater for likely demand. For cricket and football matches (when the current problems tend to arise), the number of players and officials involved usually amounts to no more than 30. Most spectators arrive on foot. Visiting teams share cars to an extent, seldom using more than five or six. Most of the home team members live in the village and several arrive on foot. Generally, there is rarely a need for more than 15 car parking spaces, so the proposed provision should, in normal circumstances, be more than adequate. Where there is likely to be exceptional demand (e.g. when the Cricket Club hosts a league cup final, usually no more than once a year), the Parish Council is kind enough to allow car parking on the perimeter of the inside of the recreation ground, to avoid problems for local residents.

Against this background, the Trust's plans for the new pavilion should alleviate rather than increase parking problems around the recreation ground".

Representations

As Members will be aware from the report heading, the application has attracted a great deal of interest from local residents, culminating in the receipt of some 74 letters of representation by the Council.

A residents' meeting, organised independently of this Council, was also held in September 2000 attended by 26 people. The minutes were sent to the Council as a further expression of representation on the application. All residents attending were in favour of the principle of a new pavilion but the meeting formed the following principal conclusions:


a) a single-storey building only is preferred with roof use being restricted to storage;

b) new building to be unobtrusive and restricted to footprint of current building;

c) restriction on use should be to existing three main users with evening events after 6.00 p.m. restricted to six per year and for the clubs only;

d) hours of restriction to be Sunday to Thursday 10.30 p.m. and Friday and Saturday to be 11.00 p.m;

e) music should be limited to the six events a year;

f) trees or grass should not be lost to development;

g) times of construction should be restricted by condition.

The main concerns of residents fall into a number of clear categories, namely, size and scale of the building; potential users and times of use; impact on trees; traffic and parking generation.

Main Planning Issues

Impact upon Visual Character/Size and Design of Building

In its original form, the proposal involved a building with gabled ridge ends on the north-west and south-east sides. Following the concerns expressed by residents, the roof form has been reduced by the introduction of full hips and the building resiting of the building further away from neighbouring properties to the north by some 3 m. The continuing concerns of neighbouring occupiers to the size of the building are noted. In relation to this, the applicants have argued that "the dimensions of the proposal are based on the identified requirements of the three main users which, in turn, are based on statutory requirements relating to childcare and disabled facilities and on national guidelines for sports facilities".

The officers have carefully weighed up the issue of size, having particular regard to the concerns of the residents. Whilst the new building would clearly be significantly higher than the existing building and visible from a number of adjacent properties, the officers consider that it would not cause any material loss of light or outlook to adjoining occupiers. Many residents' objections, whilst clearly deeply felt, amount to the interference of a view which itself is not a planning consideration. Whilst the new building would encroach further into the recreation ground than the existing building, it would not, in the officers' view, cause material harm to the open rural character of the landscaped setting nor to the village streetscene. The proposal would, conversely, replace a rundown unsightly building with a new pavilion of vernacular design and high quality materials which could be regarded as a visual enhancement.

Use of Pavilion

A clear concern of local residents is that the new building would be used on an unfettered basis and be available for hire for social and community purposes which could result in an anti-social impact upon amenity, e.g. discos, wedding receptions etc in terms of noise generation. A further concern is that extended potential for letting at this site could compete with other existing facilities within Elstead to the detriment of their viability. In response to the first issue, the applicants have estimated that less than 5% of usage could be taken up by bookings unconnected with the three main users (the Cricket and Football Clubs and the Playgroup) due to the regular and fixed commitments of the existing groups. In response to residents' concerns, the applicants have agreed to the inclusion of a number of restrictive conditions to control use of the new building.

The applicants were asked to consider the residents' preference for restriction on hours of use as expressed at the public meeting. Whilst accepting the principle, the applicants have required a variation to include:

Sunday to Thursday – no use after 10.30 p.m.

Friday, Saturday and Bank Holidays – no use after 12.00 midnight.

They have further agreed that the building shall not be used by a non-sporting organisation (except the Playgroup) after 6.00 p.m. on Friday, Saturday, Sunday or Bank Holidays. In this, fears that the building could be let for noisy events such as discos and parties etc should, it is considered, be satisfied. In addition, the applicants have agreed to the inclusion of conditions regarding sound insulation and noise limitation on any amplification equipment. Following discussions with the Borough Environmental Health Officer, the officers consider that the proposed building, if controlled by such conditions, should not give rise to harm to neighbouring amenity to the extent that permission should be withheld.

Impact on Trees

In its original form, the application indicated the removal of four trees upon the site in order to enlarge the car park facilities. However, the applicants have indicated the desirability of minimising tree loss. The general view of local objectors has been against the removal of any trees.

Following consideration of the scheme by the Arboricultural Officer, it is clear that the majority of trees on the site are significant and worthy of protection. Following protracted negotiation on this subject, the amended plans, prepared by an arboricultural consultant, demonstrate that the car park and building could be constructed without giving rise to material harm to the important trees upon the site. In its amended form, two oaks in the centre of the site would be removed but the officers conclude that those could be lost without material harm to the overall visual quality of the site. These two trees are considered to be poor specimens relative to those to be retained and their loss is not considered to be materially detrimental, particularly as a new tree would be planted on the Thursley Road frontage in compensation. Subject to detailed implementation of the amended plan, there is no further arboricultural objection to the proposal.

Parking/Traffic Generation

There is a clear concern on the part of many local residents that the new building would cause a material increase in parking and traffic pressure in the area due to the increased size of the building. The officers note these concerns. However, these matters have been subject to careful scrutiny in conjunction with the County Highway Authority. Whilst the size of the new building would exceed that of the existing pavilion by some 346 sq m, that, in the officers' view, does not result in the need for an associated number of additional parking spaces. An assessment has been made of the average maximum number of users of the premises at any one time. The applicants have indicated that the three main uses of the building would be, as at present, mutually exclusive in their use of the building. It is estimated that the maximum number of players at any one time would be 30 attracting a parking requirement of 16 spaces, which is exceeded by the provision of 18 by the proposal. The County Highway Authority acknowledge that at times, for example exceptional functions or events attracting spectators, there may, as at present, be some overspill of parking onto the public highway. However, the officers consider that such an infrequently occurring scenario would not cause harm to highway safety to the extent that permission should be refused.

Conclusions

The officers acknowledge that many residents remain concerned about this amended proposal. Nevertheless, many local people have also expressed overt support for the scheme. The balance of considerations is such that the officers feel that permission should be granted, since the main concerns would, it is considered, be satisfactorily overcome by the imposition of safeguarding conditions. Moreover, this project would provide a well needed new building for the local sporting community which is consistent with Local Plan policies to encourage community and leisure provision.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Standard external materials (5.2)

2. Standard surfacing materials (5.3)

3. Standard levels (5.1)

4. Prior to the occupation of the building hereby permitted, the existing pavilion building shall be demolished and all demolition materials removed from the site.

5. Prior to the occupation of the building hereby permitted, details shall first be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority of the design and layout of the replacement play equipment and play area which shall be installed adjacent to the pavilion as indicated on the plan hereby permitted. Following approval, the play equipment and play area shall be implemented and thereafter maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

6. The building hereby permitted shall not be used after 10.30 p.m. on Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday or after 12.00 midnight on Friday, Saturday or Bank Holidays unless otherwise first agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

7. The building hereby permitted shall not be used after 6.00 p.m. on Friday, Saturday, Sunday or Bank Holidays by any non-sporting organisation or users without the prior written agreement of the Local Planning Authority.


8. Prior to the commencement of works on site, details shall first be submitted and approved in writing of sound insulation measures proposed for the building. Following approval, those measures shall thereafter be implemented and maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

9. No amplification equipment shall be used in the building hereby permitted without noise limiting measures first being put in place, the details of which to have been first agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority in conjunction with its Environmental Health Department.

10. Standard landscaping (8.9)

11. Standard method statement and supervision (8.5) *(insert all)

12. Standard tree protection (8.2)

13. No external lighting of any kind shall be installed upon the building or within the site without the prior written agreement of the Local Planning Authority.

Reasons

1 & 2. Standard (4.55)

3. Standard (4.55)

4. Standard (4.55)

5. Pursuant to Policy LT6 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan to encourage the provision and maintenance of leisure facilities.

6 - 9. Standard (4.53)

10-12. Standard (4.55)

13. In the interest of amenity and character of the rural area.
* * * * *

Central 33
SCHEDULE 'B' TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
CENTRAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
4TH APRIL 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.1WA01/0217
Aid to Children Everywhere
12.02.01
Retention of and use of building for storage/sorting facility by the Charity 'Aid to Children Everywhere' on land at The Croft, Hookley Lane, Elstead
Grid Reference:E: 491251 N: 143430
Parish:Elstead
Ward:Elstead, Peperharow, Thursley
Development Plan:MGB, AONB, AGLV within settlement - Replacement Local Plan
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Parish Council:The Council object to the application generally. However, it does recognise the need for temporary accommodation and possible permission for the Charity in question.
Representations:Two letters have been received, one stating no objection, the other raising objection on the following grounds:
1. close proximity to residential properties;
2. noise and disturbance;
3. few feet only from adjacent residential property;
4. HGVs cause disturbance;
5. intrusive;
6. loss of outlook;
7. loss of agricultural land;
      8. back door means of achieving industrial storage on site;
      9. undesirable precedent;
      10. this use is more suited to an industrial estate;
      11. pre-planning enquiry for one dwelling was not supported.

Relevant History

WA76/0657Outline application for erection of one two-bedroomed bungalow
Permitted
15.07.76
WA76/1630Details pursuant to WA76/0657 for erection of one two-bedroomed bungalow
Permitted
19.01.77

WA91/0330Siting of storage units for agricultural purposes
Permitted
12.06.91
WA99/0520Use of land as nursery and haulage with associated storage and scrap-yard
Withdrawn
WA99/0815Application for a Certificate of Lawfulness under Section 191 for the continued use of Area A as a horticultural nursery, Area B haulage and associated activities and Area C for outside storage/scrap associated with haulage and nursery
Appeal against
non-determination
allowed in respect
of Areas A and B
Refused in respect
of Area C
21.02.00
WA99/1139 &
WA99/1140
Erection of 22 new dwellings following demolition of existing buildings with the retention of one dwelling, together with the erection of a detached garage
Withdrawn
WA99/1383Application for a Certificate of Lawfulness under Section 191 for the continued use of Area A as a horticultural nursery, Area B haulage and associated activities and Area C for outside storage/scrap associated with haulage and nursery (resubmission of WA99/0815)
Certificate of
Lawfulness granted
for Areas A and B
with amplification
Certificate of
Lawfulness refused
for Area C
22.12.99
1/95/0060Application for a Certificate of Lawfulness for outside storage/scrap associated with haulage and nursery
Not determined by
Local Planning
Authority
Appeal Dismissed
23.08.00
P43/8/16Enforcement action in respect of unauthorised storage use
Notice served
30.12.99
Appeal Dismissed
Enforcement Notice
upheld
23.08.00
WA00/0423Erection of 28 dwellings
Refused
30.06.00
Appeal Dismissed
30.01.01
WA00/0424Erection of 28 dwellings (duplicate of WA00/0423)
Refused
30.06.00
P43/8/16Enforcement action in respect of:
      (a) the unauthorised erection of a timber building (subject of current application);
Authorised
21.06.00

      (b) the extension in the size of the hardstanding area serving the haulage use;
      (c) the increase in the number of lorries operating from the site.
WA00/0937Retention of storage building
Refused
17.08.00

Description of Site/Background

The application site lies on the western side of Hookley Lane in Elstead and forms part of the wider Croft Nurseries site. The application relates to a single-storey building which has been erected to the west of the bungalow, May Croft.

Members may recall that planning permission was refused for the retention of this building under reference WA00/0937 at the August 2000 meeting of the Sub-Committee (item B1 refers). That application had been submitted by the owner of Croft Nurseries who had claimed that he had not believed he would need permission for the structure. The application made it clear that the building is used to store Charity goods for the Charity "Aid to Children Everywhere". In refusing permission, the Committee's concerns involved an objection to the design, size and siting of this building and its detrimental effect on the character of the periphery of the settlement and on the outlook and amenity of adjacent residential occupiers. Prior to the refusal, the Committee had resolved to take enforcement action in relation to the structure (reference P43/8/16 refers).

The Proposal

The current proposal seeks retention for the building and its use for a storage and sorting facility for the Charity "Aid to Children Everywhere". The building measures 15 m in length, 4.58 m in width to a height of 2.5 m to the eaves and 3.6 m to the ridge. It is constructed in timber with a corrugated metal roof.

Relevant Policies

The sites lies within the Metropolitan Green Belt, an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and an Area of Great Landscape Value. The building lies just inside the defined settlement boundary of Elstead. Whilst the precise boundary line at Elstead may be modified following the Inspector's Report on the Local Plan, the location of the application building within the settlement is not a matter of dispute.

In addition to the overarching policies relating to Metropolitan Green Belt, Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Area of Great Landscape Value, Policies RD1, D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan apply to the site. Policy RD1 states that the Council will only permit small-scale development which does not result in the development of land which, by reason of its openness and its physical characteristics, makes a significant contribution to the character and amenities of the village. Development should also take account of the form, setting, local building style and heritage of the settlement. Policy D1 relates to environmental issues and states development will not be permitted where it has an unacceptable impact on the environment. Policy D4 requires that development should integrate well and complement its surroundings.


Submissions in Support

In support of the application, the applicants have put forward the following arguments:

"After taking over as Chairman of the Charity in November last year, I tried to find ways of unravelling a situation that was clouded by other planning issues relating to Mr Simmons property. Our efforts since then have been to ensure that we have consulted and informed the people of Elstead, particularly those closest to the building. Our decision was to make an application for retention of the building (and use) in the name of the Charity and welcome conditions that tied permission to us, i.e. if for any reason the Charity had to leave the site, the permission would cease and the Charity would have to remove the building.

In addition to the usual planning application forms, I include a copy of the briefing document which is being distributed to all of the neighbours whose boundaries are joint (or close) to the site. A copy will also go to the Elstead Parish Council. All of these communications will include stamped addressed envelopes for those who wish to question our application. The occupants of The Croft (the landowner) and May Croft have been active supporters of the Charity's efforts and continue to be so. They are quite happy with the use that this building has been put to.

So many people from Elstead and surrounding villages were involved in the erection of this building that I have no alternative but to pursue the application. We have been particularly keen to ensure that everybody understands the low levels of traffic involved in our relatively small operation and that the conditions we wish to be included will protect the Charity and its neighbours in respect of precedent etc".

Main Planning Issues

The application has been submitted in an attempt to overcome the Council's previous concerns in relation to this building. In comparison with the previous application, it is noted that the applicants are, in this case, the Charity themselves, rather than the owner of the land, as previously. The applicants have suggested that if the Committee are minded to approve the application, they would be happy to accept either a personal condition to the Charity or a time-limited condition (regarding the duration of retention of the building upon the site).

The officers note the arguments put forward by the applicants, including the suggestion regarding a temporary consent. However, it is considered that these arguments do not overcome the Council's previous concerns in respect of this building.

The development comprises a large building used for a non-agricultural use, which is unconnected with the use of any dwelling. In terms of its unattractive appearance and siting to the rear of residential dwellings, it is considered to appear materially incongruous and detrimental to the outlook and amenity of neighbouring occupiers. As such, the proposal conflicts with Policies RD1, D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan and PE10 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994. Whilst the officers have some sympathy with the needs of an apparently good cause, i.e. the Charity, there remains a concern that the application site is an inappropriate location for a storage use, having regard to its proximity to residential dwellings and adjacent to a nursery site within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Area of Great Landscape Value. Whilst the wider Croft Nurseries site does contain an element of established haulage use, and much of the remainder is of an untidy unkempt appearance, this is not considered justification for endorsing an unauthorised storage use and building upon the site which further contributes to the run-down character of the wider site. The Council's previous resolution to enforce against this building is noted and the officers continue to endorse this. It is considered that storage uses, including that of the current applicants, should be located within established storage/commercial areas which are both more sustainable and environmentally acceptable. Finally, the suggested inclusion of a personal or temporary condition is not considered to overcome the officers' concerns. Such conditions could give rise to expectations and pressures for an extension of siting of the building or a more permanent building. In any event, officers note that Government guidance within Circular 11/95 indicates that personal conditions will seldom be desirable as permission runs with the land and should not reflect an individual's circumstances which will generally be transient.

Recommendation

That permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. The site is situated within the Metropolitan Green Belt and the development is considered to be inappropriate development which conflicts with the policies which relate to such areas. In particular, the development conflicts with Policy PE2 of the Surrey Structure Plan Replacement Plan 1994, Policy GB1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policy C1 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999. Within areas subject to these policies, there is a presumption against development other than that required to meet the essential needs of agriculture or forestry.

2. The site lies in the Surrey Hills Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and the development conflicts with the policies for the control of development in such areas, as set out in Policy PE7 of the Surrey Structure Plan Replacement Plan 1994, Policy RE1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policy C3 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999.

3. The site lies in the Area of Great Landscape Value and the development conflicts with the policies for the control of development in such areas, as set out in Policy PE7 of the Surrey Structure Plan Replacement Plan 1994 and Policy RE1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policy C3 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999.

4. The erection of the building detracts materially from the character and appearance of the area and the amenity of adjacent occupiers contrary to Policy PE10 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy DE1 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 1993 and Policies RD1, D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan (Deposit Draft) 1999.
* * * * *
B.2WA01/0188
R Newman
02.02.01
Erection of extensions at 25 Binscombe Lane, Godalming (revision of WA00/1406)

Grid Reference:E: 497125 N: 145344
Town:Godalming
Ward:Godalming North
Development Plan:No site specific policy – within developed area - Replacement Local Plan
Highway Authority:Recommend conditions
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Town Council:No objection
Representations:Two letters have been received objecting on the following grounds:
1. building line in More Road would be infringed;
      2. existing single-storey extension comes to within 3 feet of the pavement;
      3. would set a precedent for front extensions on More Road;
      4. this application does not overcome previous objections;
      5. intrusive in streetscene;
      6. loss of light to neighbouring property;
      7. incremental additions;
      8. No. 25 is at top of hill and therefore extension would be dominant;
      9. overlooking and loss of privacy;
      10. loss of frontage hedge;
      11. inadequate driveway orientation.

Relevant History

WA97/1442Erection of a single-storey extension following demolition of existing outbuilding
Permitted
21.10.97
WA00/1406Erection of extensions
Refused
16.08.00

Description of Site/Background

This application was considered at the last meeting of the Sub-Committee (March 2000 – item B11 refers) when Members resolved to defer making a decision pending receipt of the views of Godalming Town Council and to await the expiry date for neighbour notification of 9th March 2000.

No. 25 is a two-storey detached dwelling situated at the corner of More Road and Binscombe Lane. There is an existing detached garage and a single-storey extension to the side of the dwelling. A 1.8 m close-boarded fence has been erected along the northern boundary.

The Proposal

Planning permission is sought for the erection of extensions. The application consists of three components:


1. The erection of a two-storey extension to the front of the dwelling following the demolition of the existing porch. It would provide a study room on the ground floor and a bathroom over. This extension would measure a total floorspace of 10.6 sq m.

2. The erection of a two-storey extension to the side of the dwelling. This would provide a utility room and storeroom on the ground floor with a bedroom over, measuring 3.3 m in width, 4.2 m in depth and 6.4 m in ridge height. The two-storey extension would be set back by 2 m from the road frontage.

3. Relocation of the garage from the rear garden to the northern side of the dwelling. It would be set back from the frontage by 600 mm. The existing vehicular access at More Road would be closed and a new access formed from Binscombe Lane.

Relevant Policies

The site is situated within the Godalming developed area wherein extensions can be acceptable in principle, subject to their visual impact and effect on the amenities of adjacent occupiers. Policies PE10 of the Structure Plan 1994, DE1 of the adopted Local Plan 1993 and D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan apply to this proposal.

Main Planning Issues

Members may recall that an earlier scheme on this site for a similar proposal was refused in October 2000 (WA00/1406) (item B16 refers). The Committee's concerns in that case were, in particular, the excessive scale, bulk and massing of the side two-storey side extension and its intrusive impact within the streetscene.

In comparison with the previously refused scheme, the following changes have been made:

1. the two-storey side extension has been reduced by 1.2 m in width, 600 mm in depth and 200 mm in ridge height;

2. vehicular access has been relocated to Binscombe Lane.

The officers consider that, as in the previously refused scheme, the two-storey front extension and the relocation of the garage are acceptable. Whilst, in the current proposal, the size and scale of the two-storey side extension have been reduced, it would nevertheless still appear as an overly dominant feature of the dwelling as viewed from the road, resulting in a materially adverse impact upon the visual character of the surroundings. As a result, the officers share the concerns of neighbouring residential occupiers and consider that the scheme should be refused.

Recommendation

That permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. Standard Policy DE1 (22.7) *(insert after 1993 "and Policies D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan")


2. Standard overdominance (22.20) *(insert at end "As such, the proposal would conflict with Policy PE10 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, DE1 of the Waverley Local Plan 1993 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999")
* * * * *
B.3WA01/0240
Mr & Mrs P J Andrews
14.02.01
Erection of a two-storey extension at High Rise, Greenhill Close, Godalming
Grid Reference:E: 496706 N: 143125
Town:Godalming
Ward:Godalming South-East
Development Plan:No site specific policy – within developed area (Replacement Local Plan)
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Town Council:No objection

Description of Site/Background

'High Rise' is a two-storey detached property situated on the south side of Greenhill Close in Godalming.

The Proposal

Permission is sought for the erection of a two-storey side extension measuring some 15.7 sq m in external floor area to a ridge height of 7.6 m. The extension would be positioned on the west side of the dwelling, separated from the common boundary with 'Bali' by a minimum of 2.5 m.

Relevant Policies

The site is located within the developed area of Godalming where the principle of extensions may be acceptable subject to their impact upon residential and visual amenity. Policy DE1 of the adopted Local Plan and Policies D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan therefore apply to this proposal.

Main Planning Issues

The application has been brought before the Sub-Committee as one of the applicants is a member of staff. The extension is considered to be well designed and of subordinate appearance. It would not, it is considered, result in any detrimental effect upon the visual quality of the streetscene. Furthermore, having regard to the adequate separation to the boundary, the extension would not, in the officers' opinion, give rise to any material loss of amenity to neighbouring residential occupiers.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:


1. Standard matching materials (5.4)

2. Standard fenestration (4.13) *(first floor) *(west facing)

Reasons

1. Standard (4.55)

2. Standard (4.53)
* * * * *
B.4WA01/0234
Mr & Mrs A O Buckingham
12.02.01
Erection of a replacement independent dwelling on land at Rockhill House, Rock Hill, Hambledon (variation to consent granted under WA98/0391) (as amended by letter dated 21.03.01)
Grid Reference:E: 496753 N: 138508
Parish:Hambledon
Ward:Busbridge, Hambledon & Hascombe
Development Plan:MGB, AONB, AGLV – outside settlement – Replacement Local Plan, Conservation Area (access only)
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Parish Council:Objection on the following main points:
      1. floor area of WA98/0391 was greater than that indicated on application form;
      2. current proposal is almost double size of existing dwelling;
      3. appeal on WA98/0391 would not have been allowed if greater weight has been placed on Replacement Local Plan;
      4. new dwelling would be visible from new access to Rockhill House;
      5. Waverley Borough Council previously omitted "small dwelling" analysis from its assessment resulting in demand for a further small dwelling in the area;
      6. Waverley Borough Council disregards the limits imposed by extension policy resulting in need for smaller accommodation.

Relevant History

HM/R 14949Erection of house and garage
Approved
25.05.65
HM/R 14949 IIErection of three-bedroomed bungalow for staff at Rockhill House
Approved
26.09.71

WA89/1133Erection of dwelling and double garage of 245 sq m following demolition of bungalow and garage
Refused
24.06.89
WA98/0391Erection of a replacement independent dwelling
Refused
18.09.98
Appeal Allowed
21.09.99
Extant

Description of Site/Background

Rockhill is a substantial dwelling in a curtilage of about 4 ha to the east of Woodlands Road, Hambledon. Orchard Cottage was built as a staff cottage in 1971 and is a low profile bungalow with a floor area of 91 sq m and a detached garage of 21.5 sq m. Planning permission was granted on appeal under reference WA98/0391 for the erection of a replacement dwelling measuring a total of 129.5 sq m habitable floor area plus an attached garage of 30.5 sq m, following demolition of the existing bungalow and garage. To date, that permission has not been implemented.

The Proposal

Planning permission is currently sought for a revision of the scheme allowed on appeal. The application proposes the erection of a two-storey dwelling measuring some 129.5 sq m of habitable floor area plus an integral garage of 30.5 sq m. In addition, an internally accessed basement area is proposed beneath part of the ground floor footprint measuring some 40.74 sq m in area. This basement is indicated as being intended for use solely as storage. The applicants have offered to enter into a legal agreement to ensure that, if permitted, this basement would not be converted to habitable accommodation, that no windows would be inserted in the outside walls and that land re-levelling would ensure that the basement would not be externally visible.

Relevant Policies

The site is located within the Green Belt countryside, outside of any defined settlement and within an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and an Area of Great Landscape Value. Whilst the access to the site lies within the Hambledon Conservation Area, the siting of the new dwelling and Orchard Cottage (the existing dwelling) are outside. Policies HS7 of the adopted Local Plan and RD2A of the Replacement Local Plan apply to the proposal in relation to the replacement of dwellings in the countryside. Policy HS7 requires that the replacement should not result in an adverse change in scale or character. Policy RD2A requires that the new dwelling should not be "materially larger" than the dwelling it seeks to replace and indicates, in the text, that the replacement should not exceed a 10% increase in floor area over the existing dwelling.

Submissions in Support

In support of the scheme, the agent has put forward the following points:


"As you are aware, approval was granted for a house on this site in September 1999. The house then approved had not been amended externally.

Due to the limits imposed on the floor area and volume of the house, storage is restricted.

Therefore Mr and Mrs Buckingham desire a basement which can be used solely for storage. The only amendment therefore to the approved design is a staircase on the ground floor to the basement and the basement which will have no windows or external doors".

Main Planning Issues

The proposal would result in an increase of 42% in habitable floor area over the existing dwelling. It would also result in a dwelling which, in ridge height, would exceed the existing bungalow by 1.9 m. The new dwelling would, it is considered, be materially larger than Orchard Cottage and this would materially conflict with Policy RD2A of the Replacement Local Plan. However, the appeal approval WA98/0391 has established the principle of a replacement dwelling in this siting and that permission remains extant.

The issue for Members to consider in relation to the current scheme is in connection with the new basement area which constitutes the only change over the extant scheme. The basement would add a further area of 40.74 sq m floor area to the dwelling. However, the applicants assert that the area would only be used for storage and not converted to habitable accommodation. Moreover, the plans indicate that no external windows would be inserted and the basement itself would not be externally visible.

Whilst the officers share the concern of Hambledon Parish Council regarding any increase in floor area over the generously sized extant permission, it is considered that, on the basis of the plans submitted, it would be difficult to argue that any demonstrable harm would result from the proposal. The openness of the Green Belt could not be described as being further prejudiced since the basement would lie below the footprint already permitted. Moreover, the bulk and massing would not visibly change over the extant scheme since the basement would not be visible.

In the light of these considerations, officers consider that the most reasonable course of action would be to grant permission subject to the conclusion of a legal agreement to ensure that the basement is not converted to habitable accommodation, no windows are inserted and the re-levelling of land ensures that the basement area would not be visible. The Council's Building Control Section has confirmed that a basement area solely used for storage would not require any external ventilation and the officers consider that such requirements should not be regarded as unreasonable.

Recommendation

That, subject:

(i) to the receipt of no further representations on material grounds not previously considered by 05.04.01; and


(ii) to the prior completion of a Section 106 legal agreement, within six months and at the applicant's own expense, to ensure that:

(a) the area shown as a basement on the plan hereby permitted shall be retained in use as domestic storage and a boiler room and shall not be converted to or used as habitable accommodation;

(b) no windows, doors or any other form of external alteration shall be inserted into the outside walls of the basement area;

(c) following construction works, the land adjacent to the basement shall be re-levelled, to accord with plans which have the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority, to ensure that the basement area is not externally visible

then permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. No development shall take place until details and samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the building hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, such details to include the external facing materials to be used on the retaining walls. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

2. No development shall take place until details of the existing and proposed ground levels of the site and the ground floor levels of the building hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority.

3. No development shall take place until details of earthworks involved in reinstating the site of the existing dwelling have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall include the proposed grading of land areas including the levels and contours to be formed, showing the relationship of the proposed landform to the existing. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

4. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no extensions to the dwelling hereby permitted shall be erected within the curtilage without the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority.

5. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 55(2)(d) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, the garages and basement area hereby permitted shall not be used for habitable accommodation without the prior approval of the Local Planning Authority.

6. No development shall take place until full details of hard and soft landscape works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and these works shall be carried out as approved. These details shall include proposed finished levels or contours, means of enclosure, car parking layouts, other vehicle and pedestrian access and circulation areas and hard surfacing materials.


7. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the occupation of the building or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner, and any trees or plants which, within a period of five years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size and species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation.

8. At no time shall more than one dwelling on the site be occupied and the existing dwelling shall be demolished and all materials from the demolition removed from the site within three months of the completion or occupation of the dwelling hereby permitted, whichever is the sooner.

Reasons

1 – 3. Standard (4.55)

4 & 5. In the interests of Policies PE2 and PE7 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, GB1 and RE1 of the Waverley Local Plan 1993 and Policies C1 and C3 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999.

6 & 7. Standard (4.55)

8. Pursuant to the requirements of Policy HS7 of the Waverley Local Plan 1993 and Policy RD2A of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999.
* * * * *
B.5WA01/0310
Mr & Mrs M Boyle
22.01.01
Erection of an extension to existing bungalow to provide part two-storey, part single-storey dwelling at Barn Field, Hambledon Road, Godalming
Grid Reference:E: 498100 N: 142375
Parish:Busbridge
Ward:Busbridge, Hambledon & Hascombe
Development Plan:MGB, AGLV, outside settlement - Replacement Local Plan
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Parish Council:The Parish Council have considered the above planning application and they are of the view that the proposal will be obtrusive in relation to nearby properties.

Relevant History

WA82/1524Erection of a single-storey extension to provide enlarged dining room
Permitted
05.01.83


WA91/0901Erection of dwelling
Refused
15.08.91
Appeal Dismissed
24.03.92

Description of Site/Background

Barn Field is a detached bungalow measuring 256 sq m in habitable floor area situated on the west side of Hambledon Road to the south of Godalming.

The Proposal

Planning permission is sought for the erection of a first floor extension measuring some 102.34 sq m of habitable floor area. The extension would be positioned on the north-east corner of the dwelling and would increase the eaves height on that part of the building from 2.6 m to 4.6 m and the ridge height from 5.2 m to 7.2 m. An existing single-storey addition of 31.7 sq m would be demolished.

Submissions in Support

In support of the scheme, the agent has offered the following arguments:

"The proposal adds a first floor element to the existing dwelling and at the same time enhances the external appearance. Brickwork to the new section will match or closely contrast with the existing and some 'herringbone or basket weave' panels will be incorporated. Natural timbers will be included to separate the brick panels. All of the windows in the property are going to be changed and the new units will be designed to compliment the house design".

Relevant Policies

The site is located within the Green Belt countryside outside of the developed area of Godalming and within an Area of Great Landscape Value. Relevant policies place strict restraint upon residentially related development. Policy HS7 of the adopted Local Plan and Policy RD2 of the Replacement Local Plan in respect of residential extensions apply to this proposal.

Main Planning Issues

In 1968, the property measured some 256 sq m. Following permission granted in 1983, the property has been enlarged to its present size of 287.7 sq m. Taking into account the previous enlargement and the extension proposed for demolition, the proposal would result in a cumulative net increase of 102.34 sq m or 39.9% over the original dwelling.

The principle of this size of extension is considered to be acceptable in terms of the rural extensions policy. In its design, however, the officers are concerned that the extension would result in a change in scale to a materially higher dwelling. Nevertheless, the dwelling is reasonably well screened from Hambledon Road. It is considered that the proposal would not cause harm to the rural character of the area nor to neighbouring amenity to the extent that permission should be withheld.


Recommendation

That, subject to the receipt of a plan showing the existing sunroom proposed for demolition, permission be GRANTED subject to the following condition:

1. Standard matching materials (5.4)

2. Prior to the occupation of the extension hereby permitted, the existing single-storey sun room, shown on the submitted plan to be demolished, shall be demolished and all demolition materials removed from the site.

Reason

1. Standard (4.55)

2. Pursuant to the provisions of Policy HS7 of the Waverley Local Plan 1993 and Policy RD2 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999.
* * * * *
B.6WA01/0219
Mr Wood
07.02.01
Alterations to existing garage building and erection of external staircase to provide first floor ancillary artist studio at High Leybourne, Hascombe Road, Godalming
Grid Reference:E: 499392 N: 140724
Parish:Busbridge
Ward:Busbridge, Hambledon & Hascombe
Development Plan:MGB, AONB, AGLV outside settlement - Replacement Local Plan
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Parish Council:No objection
Representations:One letter has been received expressing no objection but stating that application should only be allowed on condition that conversion to habitable could not be possible in the future.




Relevant History

WA87/1035Erection of an extension to garage and provision of storage space in new roof
Permitted
07.07.87
WA86/1345Erection of extensions and alterations to provide entrance hall and cloakroom, w.c, tack room and utility room; alterations to roof of garage to provide storage area and alterations to roof
Permitted
05.09.86

Description of Site/Background

High Leybourne is a substantial two-storey detached dwelling situated on the west side of Godalming Road, south of Godalming. There is an existing detached outbuilding of some 124.3 sq m floor area in total comprising a double garage and storage at ground floor with a roof void lit by four existing dormer windows used also for storage. The roof area is currently linked to the ground floor of the garage by an internal loft ladder.

The Proposal

Permission is sought for the erection of an external staircase on the northern end of the garage building and the insertion of a new dormer window within the roof to form a new loft access from the staircase. The application indicates that the loft area would be used as an artist's studio for the applicant's daughter for private use only.

Relevant Policies

The site is located within the Green Belt countryside outside of any settlement and within the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Area of Great Landscape Value. Policies PE2 of the Surrey Structure Plan, GB1 of the adopted Local Plan and C1 of the Replacement Local Plan indicate a firm presumption against residentially related development within the Green Belt. Policies PE7 of the Structure Plan, RE1 of the adopted Plan and C3 of the Replacement Plan state that development should protect and enhance the visual character of the landscape.

Main Planning Issues

The existing garage is an extensive building with a generous roof void with dormer windows set within it dating from a permission granted in 1987. It is considered to be of a scale and form which would be unlikely to currently gain support from the Council in terms of its present most up-to-date policies which indicate a firm presumption against extensive outbuildings in the Green Belt. Whilst the proposal would appear to involve a relatively small-scale structure to this existing building, it would provide a new separate and more convenient access to the loft area which would facilitate its conversion to habitable accommodation. In this, the officers consider that the proposal would represent an undesirable consolidation of habitable accommodation upon the site. With a new separate entrance, it could lead to pressures for the building to be used as separate residential accommodation. Furthermore, the conversion of this storage space could give rise to pressures for new additional outbuildings for storage purposes within the curtilage which would be prejudicial to the openness and character of the site. Finally, the alterations proposed would have the effect of making the building appear more domesticated in appearance and, as a result, more intrusive within the landscape.

Recommendation

That permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. Standard Metropolitan Green Belt: Outside Settlements (20.1) *(insert after 1993 "and Policy C1 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999")

2. Standard Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (21.1) *(insert after 1993 "and Policy C3 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999")

3. Standard Area of Great Landscape Value (21.2) *(insert after 1993 "and Policy C3 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999")


4. Standard Rural Areas (20.5) *(consolidation) *(habitable residential) *(insert at end "As such, the proposal would conflict with Policy GB1 of the Waverley Local Plan 1993 and Policy C1 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999")

5. The proposed staircase and alterations would have the effect of making the existing building appear more domesticated in appearance and, as a result, more intrusive within the landscape to the detriment of the appearance of the rural area. As such, the proposal would conflict with Policy PE7 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, RE1 of the Waverley Local Plan 1993 and Policy C3 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999.
* * * * *
B.7WA01/0214
Charterhouse
09.01.01
Outline application for the erection of eight flats with associated parking on land at Copseland and Sutton Cottage, Charterhouse Road, Godalming (as amended by plan received 26.03.01)
Grid Reference:E: 496675 N: 144888
Town:Godalming
Ward:Godalming North
Development Plan:Within developed area - Replacement Local Plan; Area of Special Environmental Quality
Highway Authority:Recommend conditions
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Town Council:No objection
Representations:Five letters have been received, including one from the Frith Hill Area Residents' Association, objecting on the following grounds:
1. reduction of two flats is insignificant;
2. overdevelopment;
3. cause highway danger;
4. increased use of access onto busy road;
      5. playing field would be preferred site for housing;
      6. congestion during construction;
      7. traffic calming necessary if permission is granted;
      8. loss of residential amenity;
      9. loss of semi-rural environment;
      10. generation of noise pollution;
      11. excessive height;
      12. visually intrusive;
      13. misleading drawings;
      14. if permitted, three storey development is inevitable;
      15. individual houses on frontage would be preferable;
      16. site is not sustainably located;
      17. out of keeping;
      18. landscaping details are not clear;
      19. inadequate parking provision.



Relevant History

WA83/1176Change of use from residential to girls' hostels at Copseland and Edge Hill
Permitted
14.10.83
WA88/2624Change of use of two dwellings to master's house and pupil accommodation at Sandy Lane Cottage/Sutton Cottage
Permitted
24.05.88
WA00/1340Outline application for the erection of ten flats with associated parking
Refused
12.10.00

Description of Site/Background

The application site, which measures some 0.25 ha, is situated on the south-west side of Charterhouse Road. The land, which is owned by Charterhouse School, currently forms the deep front gardens of four two-storey semi-detached properties situated on the south-west (rear) side of the site, set back from the Charterhouse Road frontage by some 45 m. The site slopes steeply up towards the dwellings and contains a number of mature trees. There are two detached garages serving Sutton Cottage and Sandy Lane Cottage at the front of the site.

Outline permission (including siting and means of access) was refused under reference WA00/1340 for a block of ten two-bedroomed flats at the October 2000 meeting of the Sub-Committee (item B.19 refers). The Committee's concerns in that case centred on the scheme being considered an overdevelopment of the site resulting in material harm to neighbouring and visual amenity by reason of its height and massing. The effect on the landscaped character of the area was also of concern.

The Proposal

Outline permission is currently sought for the erection of a block of eight two-bedroomed flats to be positioned in the south-eastern corner of the site. Siting and means of access are proposed for consideration at this stage with other matters being reserved. The access to the site would be via the existing central shared access to the rear dwellings which would be widened.

The indicative details indicated that 15 car parking spaces would be provided to serve the development following demolition of the two existing garages.

Submissions in Support

In support of the scheme, the agents make reference to PPG3 (Housing) which emphasises the importance of making best use of urban land and encourages high density housing development (between 30 and 50 dwellings per hectare). In relation to this, the proposal would have a density of 30 dwellings per hectare. In addition, they state that:

"In our opinion, this current scheme has addressed all previous concerns raised by yourselves, Godalming Town Council and neighbouring residents.


The number of units has been reduced by some 20% (from ten to eight) thereby removing any concerns of over-development. The height of the proposal has been reduced from a mixed two and three-storey building to two stories only, thereby removing any concern of it being over-dominant in terms of its height and mass. The reduction in the number of units has meant that three car parking spaces have been removed allowing a greater distance to trees, thereby ensuring their protection, whilst allowing for increased amenity to the occupiers of the proposed flats".

Relevant Policies

The site is located within the Godalming Developed Area wherein adopted and emerging planning policies indicate that new residential development may be acceptable, in principle, subject to there arising no adverse impact upon visual or residential amenity (Policies DE1 of the adopted Local Plan and D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan refer). In addition, the site falls within the Frith Hill Policy Area and Policies DE2 of the adopted Local Plan and BE2 of the Replacement Local Plan apply to this proposal. These state, inter alia, that limited housing development will only be acceptable where maximum tree cover has been retained to preserve the wooded appearance of the area, on the road frontage on a limited basis and where visual and residential amenity is not materially harmed.

Main Planning Issues

The application has been submitted in an attempt to overcome the Council's previous concerns in relation to WA00/1340. In comparison with that previous scheme, the following principal changes have been made:

1. the number of flats has been reduced by two from ten to eight;

2. the building has been set back further from the frontage by 3 m but extended at the rear by some 2 m;

3. the number of parking spaces has been reduced by three, consistent with the lower number of flats. This is reflected in a reduced hard surfaced parking area on the south-west side of the dwelling;

4. in height, the northern part of the block has been reduced from three to two storeys and by 3 m in ridge height.

The officers note that the scheme provides exclusively two-bedroomed flats and would therefore make a welcome contribution to the supply of small residential units within Godalming. The size of development falls below the threshold for the requirement of affordable housing.

Notwithstanding the changes that have been made, the officers consider that the proposal would still appear as a new development of considerable bulk and massing within the streetscene. Nevertheless, the reduction in the bulk, size and height of the building would make it more compatible with adjacent development and the indicative details indicate that it would appear as an acceptable transition in height between the detached property "Lawn Ends" to the south-east and "Chapel Fields" (three-storey flats) to the north-east. The reduction in height of the building would also mean that less of the existing dwellings at the rear would be obscured from view. The views of local residents are noted. In relation to traffic issues, the access and parking arrangements are regarded by the Highway Authority to be acceptable subject to the inclusion of suitable conditions. The reduced footprint and parking areas would, in the officers' view, allow greater opportunity for tree protection and new landscaping than the previously refused scheme. The Council's previous objection regarding the unsatisfactory impact upon the rear existing dwellings has not been overcome and concern remains that development of the front gardens of these dwellings could result in pressures for encroachment into Green Belt woodland at the rear to create new gardens for the existing properties. Nevertheless, on balance and having regard to the changes that have been made, it is considered that this scheme could be supported.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

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

2. Standard duration (1.3)

3. Standard fenestration (4.13) *(first floor) *(south-east)

4. Prior to the occupation of the flats hereby permitted, the existing garages upon the site, shown on the submitted plan to be removed, shall be demolished and all demolition materials removed from the site.

5. Standard external materials (5.2)

6. Standard levels (5.1)

7. Standard fencing (6.1)

8. Standard landscape scheme (8.9) *(insert after development "or tree removal")

9. Standard tree protection (8.2)

10. Standard forecourt landscaping (8.8)

11. Standard sound insulation (13.2)

12. Standard modified access - detailed (H8)

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

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

Reasons

1. Standard (1.50)

2. Standard (1.51)

3. Standard (4.53)


4 - 6. Standard (4.55)

7. Standard (6.50)

8 - 10. Standard (4.55)

11. Standard (13.51)

12-14. Standard (HR1)

Informatives

1. Standard highways (HF7)

2. Standard highways (HF13)
* * * * *
B.8WA00/2247
Alan Holroyd
20.12.00
Erection of a retail unit with four flats above, together with ancillary parking; erection of linking extension to No. 1 Avenue Row, together with associated works following demolition of existing on land at Honeypot Antiques and 1 & 2 Avenue Row, Milford Road, Elstead
Grid Reference:E: 491026 N: 143580
Parish:Elstead
Ward:Elstead, Peperharow, Thursley
Development Plan:MGB, AONB, AGLV within settlement - Replacement Local Plan
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Parish Council:No objection
Consultations:County Archaeologist - no objection

Description of Site/Background

The application site is located on the south side of Milford Road in Elstead. It comprises a detached part two-storey and part single-storey property occupied by "Honeypot Antiques", a retail unit, on the ground floor with a self-contained two-bedroomed flat over. The site also includes the adjoining property, No. 1 Avenue Row which is a semi-detached two-storey residential property.

The Proposal

The application has three main elements:

1. Erection of a two-storey building to provide a replacement shop unit at ground floor including an office/toilet and rest rooms at the rear;

2. The formation of 2 x 2 bedroomed flats and 1 x 1 bedroom flat on part-first, part-second floor (over the shop). Six parking spaces would be provided for the flats, accessed from the housing estate feeder road at the rear. Three spaces would be positioned beneath the first floor accommodation above.


3. Erection of a two-storey side extension and single-storey rear extension to No. 1 Avenue Row to provide a garage and utility room at ground floor, to the side and kitchen extension to the rear, with bedroom and en-suite shower over.

Relevant Policies

The site is located within the defined settlement of Elstead within the Green Belt. As such, Policy PE2 of the Structure Plan, GB1 and RS1 of the adopted Local Plan and Policies RD1, D1 and D4 of the Replacement Local Plan apply to this proposal. These policies state, inter alia, that redevelopment for residential purposes may be acceptable in principle providing it is small-scale and substantially surrounded by existing development and would not adversely affect the visual or residential amenity of the area.

Policy S2 of the Replacement Local Plan, in relation to local shops, is also relevant which expresses a preference for retaining local shops.

Submissions in Support

In support of the scheme, the applicant has put forward the following arguments:

"The proposal entails the demolition of the existing Honeypot Antiques premises and the construction of a new purpose built retail unit with flats above; an idea that reflects the new chemist and butcher/baker premises recently built on the adjoining site.

Our existing premises are in a poor state of repair, we have very high maintenance costs and the basic fabric of the building and its internal floor layout is in all respects unsuitable for modern day retailing needs.

It is considered most important that village shops such as our own are encouraged to continue. Improvements can only be funded by the residential element of our overall proposal, ensuring the viability of the project as a whole, whilst at the same time providing modern and flexible retail accommodation that will ensure a continued shopping presence in the village for many years to come.

The new building proposed allows for 1 x 1 bedroom flat and 3 x 2 bedroomed flats in a predominantly two-storey structure, with a small element of additional floorspace in the roof at the rear.

The proposal thus provides much needed smaller (and therefore more affordable) residential units, aimed at the first time buyer, in a centre village location, and which the Waverley Local Plan and modern day planning policies all seek to encourage.

Seven parking spaces are proposed in a rear car park area accessed off the adjoining new residential estate access, and with a further two parking spaces reserved in the same area for the retail use.


The parking proposed is little more than a more efficient reorganisation of the existing parking arrangements at the rear, and has been designed to have no effect whatsoever on the total number of parking spaces connected with the new housing that adjoins.

It will be noted that, as a final point on parking provision, No. 2 Avenue Row still has two parking spaces reserved in this rear part of the site and that No. 1 Avenue Row would have a new garage and driveway parking space accessed of Milford Road itself.

In association with the main element of the proposal (i.e. the shop and flats) an extension is also proposed to No. 1 Avenue Row and, where together with No. 2, both properties are also now within my ownership".

Main Planning Issues

The proposal would provide a replacement shop unit for continued occupation by Honeypot Antiques which, although a smaller area than existing, reflects the occupier's current floorspace needs and is considered to be a viable size unit. There is therefore no objection raised under Policy S2. The proposed provision of four 1 and 2 bedroomed flats is fully consistent with adopted Plan Policy HS2 and Replacement Plan Policy H4 which encourage the provision of smaller units of accommodation.

The principal concerns in relation to this scheme are the bulk and massing of the proposed development. On the frontage, the new building would appear materially higher than adjacent development with notably higher eaves and ridge heights. Specifically, the eaves and ridge heights of the building would exceed that of No. 1 Avenue Row by 400 mm and 900 mm respectively. The building would also feature a dominant projecting two-storey front gable. The first floor projection would extend back into the site more extensively than the existing single-storey range and would appear as a prominent building which would be dominant in views from the residential estate at the rear. The second floor 'tower' feature would also appear materially higher than adjacent development to the detriment of the visual character of the area. Finally, officers are concerned that side facing windows proposed within the first and second floors would be likely to result in material overlooking of neighbouring gardens to the detriment of the privacy of their occupiers. The applicant has indicated that he is considering submitting amended drawings to seek to overcome the officers' concerns. An oral report will be made on any amendments received. However, it is considered that, in its current form, permission should be refused for this application.

Recommendation

That permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:

1. Standard Metropolitan Green Belt within settlements (20.2) *(insert after 1993 "and Policies C1 and RD1 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999")

2. Standard Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (21.1) *(insert after 1999 "and Policy C3 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999")


3. Standard Area of Great Landscape Value (21.2) *(insert after 1999 "and Policy C3 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999")

4. Standard overdominance (22.20) *(insert at the end "As such, the proposal would be contrary to Policy PE10 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policies GB1, RS1 and DE1 of the Waverley Local Plan 1993 and Policies C1, RD1, D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Replacement Local Plan 1999".
* * * * *

Central 35
SCHEDULE 'C' TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
CENTRAL AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
4TH APRIL 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
WA01/0051
Mr & Mrs Hunt
Change of use and alterations to existing barn to provide habitable accommodation with link to existing dwelling at 30 Farncombe Street, Farncombe, Godalming (as amended by letter dated 23.02.01 and plans received 27.02.01)GRANTED
WA01/0052
Mr & Mrs Hunt
Application for Listed Building Consent for internal and external alterations and to link barn with dwelling at 30 Farncombe Street, Farncombe, Godalming (as amended by letter dated 23.02.01 and plans received 27.02.01)GRANTED
WA01/0109
A R Emery
Erection of extensions and alterations at 16 Quartermile Road, GodalmingGRANTED
WA01/0110
M J Wilson Assoc
Erection of an entrance porch, walkway and associated works at Busbridge Hall, Home Farm Road, BusbridgeGRANTED
WA01/0120
Mr & Mrs A Hinde
Erection of a two-storey extension and a bay window at Pendleton, Malthouse Lane, Hambledon (revision of WA00/1633)GRANTED
WA01/0122
Mr & Mrs White
Erection of a single-storey extension following demolition of existing garage at Lane End, Llanaway Close, GodalmingGRANTED
WA01/0124
Hascombe Village Hall
Association
Erection of village hall, resiting of children's play area and provision of parking on land at Mare Lane, Hascombe (revision of WA00/0297)GRANTED
WA01/0128
C Stevinson
Change of use of land to provide additional residential curtilage; erection of an extension to an existing garage at Willow Corner, Water Lane, Enton Green, GodalmingGRANTED

WA01/0130
R J Bryant
Erection of a detached garage/store following demolition of existing garage at Kinfauns Cottage, Petworth Road, Witley (as amended by letter dated 28.02.01 and plans received 01.03.01)GRANTED
WA01/0138
T White
Erection of extensions and alterations at 14 Molyneux Road, GodalmingGRANTED
WA01/0156
P J Underwood
Change of use from retail to mixed use retail and veterinary surgery at The Pharmacy, The Green, Elstead (as amended by letters dated 28.01.01 and 20.02.01 and plan received 26.02.01)GRANTED
WA01/0158
Mr & Mrs Hammond
Erection of a conservatory at Midcot, 7 Church Road, Milford (as amplified by letter dated 02.03.01 and plans received 03.03.01)GRANTED
WA01/0170
D G Middleton
Removal of Condition 3 of HM/R 10636(ii) (agricultural occupancy condition) at 2 Hill Farm Cottages, Highfield Lane, ThursleyGRANTED
WA01/0181
Mr & Mrs R Berry
Construction of a dormer window at 28 Ockford Ridge, GodalmingGRANTED
WA01/0183
Mr & Mrs B Jackson
Erection of a conservatory at 4 Alvernia Close, GodalmingGRANTED
* * * * *