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 24/03/2004
AGENDA




14

Fax No: 01483 523475
Your ref:
Our ref:
When calling please ask for: Mahasti Ghavami
Direct line: 01483 523224
E-Mail: mghavami@waverley.gov.uk
Date: 15th March 2004


To: All Members and Substitute
Members of the WESTERN
AREA DEVELOPMENT
CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
(Other Members for information)

Membership of Western Area Development Control Sub-Committee
Mr V Duckett (Chairman)Mrs P Hibbert
Mr W M Marshall (Vice-Chairman)Mrs M V M Hunt
Capt P G BurdenMrs S R Jacobs
Mrs C CockburnMrs A E Mansell
Mr S D EdgeDr P M Marriott
Miss G B W FergusonMs M Taylor
Mrs P M FrostVacancy
Substitute Members
Liberal DemocratConservative
Mr V K ScrivensDr M-G Lane
Mr C H MansellMr L C Bate
Mr M A Clark
Mrs P N Mitchell
Dear Sir/Madam

A meeting of the WESTERN AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE will be held as follows:-

DATE: WEDNESDAY, 24TH MARCH 2004

TIME: 7.00 P.M.

PLACE: COUNCIL CHAMBER, FARNHAM COUNCIL OFFICES, SOUTH STREET, FARNHAM

The Agenda for the Meeting is set out below.

Yours faithfully

CHRISTINE L POINTER

Chief Executive
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 25th February 2004 (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 INTERESTS

To receive from Members in relation to any items included on the agenda for this meeting, disclosure of any interests which are required to be disclosed by Section 94(1) of the Local Government Act 1972 and in accordance with the Waverley Code of Local Government Conduct.

4. 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 Procedure Rule 10.

5. PLANNING APPLICATIONS - SITE INSPECTIONS

5.1 Applications for Consideration Following Site Inspections

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 the report on the application is submitted for the Sub-Committee’s consideration.

In considering this 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.

(i)WA03/1387
Hutchison 3G UK Ltd
07.07.03
Erection of a 20 m tree-style telecommunications mast, equipment cabinets and compound, together with associated works on land at Victoria Reservoir, Frensham Road, Farnham (as amplified by letters dated 18.07.03, 06.08.03, 26.09.03, 19.12.03, 17.02.04 and 03.03.04, photographs received 22.12.03 and plans received 18.02.04)
Grid Reference:E: 484416 N: 145633
Town:Farnham
Ward:Farnham Bourne
Development Plan:Developed Area; Tree Preservation Order (No. WA280); Great Austins Conservation Area adjacent
Highway Authority:No requirements
Drainage Authority:No requirements
Town Council:Concerned at the proximity to residential dwellings
Representations:40 individual letters of objection/concern, including letters from The Bourne Residents’ Association and The Ridgeway School and one petition of 125 signatures against the proposal based on the following grounds:-
1. too high and visible;
      2. contrary to Government advice for mast sharing;
      3. located close to The Ridgeway School for special children;
      4. impinge greatly on the Conservation Area;
      5. eyesore in prominent position;
      6. tower above the surrounding trees;
      7. previous application rejected in 1993;
      8. close proximity to dwellings;
      9. health and safety concerns;
      10. loss of residential amenity (e.g. outlook);
      11. unconvinced by ‘tree’ design;
      12. intrusion into attractive residential environment;
      13. electrical interference;
      14. reduce quality of life;
      15. not benefit the local community and already have adequate coverage in the area;
      16. should make use of existing Aveley Lane mast;
      17. information suggests that further masts will be required in the South Farnham area.
      One letter of support.

Relevant History

WA93/013T
      Part 24 GPDO; erection of 15 m aerial tower and radio equipment cabin (submitted on behalf of Mercury One-One, now T-Mobile)
Refused
02.04.93
WA01/010T
      GPDO Part 24; siting of a 12.5 m telecommunications mono-pole with ancillary equipment cabin on land rear junction of Frensham Road and Old Farnham Lane (submitted on behalf of BT Cellnet, now MM O2)
Refused
29.05.01
Appeal Allowed
04.03.02
(not yet implemented)

Description of Site/Background

The Victoria Reservoir is located on the eastern side of the Frensham Road, at its crossroads with Ridgeway Road and Old Farnham Lane, in South Farnham. The Reservoir site is bordered by a number of mature trees, many of which are the subject of a Tree Preservation Order.

The area is predominantly residential in character. However, there are other uses in the area, which include The Bourne Tennis Club, St Thomas on the Bourne Church, The Ridgeway School and some commercial premises along The Ridgeway. The rear of the site adjoins the Great Austins Conservation Area.

The Proposal

The application is for the proposed installation of a 20 m high ‘Cypress Tree’ style mast and associated equipment to accommodate both Orange and Hutchison 3G (now trading as “3”), two of the five main mobile phone operators.

The proposed installation is shown to be sited on the northern side of the covered Reservoir site, some 2 m in from the boundary. The site would be some 45 m in from the frontage and some 14 m from the rear garden boundaries of residential properties which back onto the site in Swingate Road. The installation would be set within a compound measuring 13 m x 6.5 m. Each ‘system’ would consist of three antenna and two transmission dishes located at between 14.2 m and 19.0 m above ground level.
Use would be made of the existing vehicular access off the Frensham Road.

Supporting Information

The applicant’s agent has submitted a full planning/design statement and other information in support of the proposal. This consists of the following:-

1. a statement providing background; technical justification; visual assessment; consideration of alternative sites; policy position and health/safety considerations;

2. a ‘photo-montage’ of the mast in situ;

3. photographs of similar types of mast constructed elsewhere;

4. examples of alternative ‘streetworks’ telegraph pole style masts;

5. radio coverage and ‘drive-trial’ coverage charts to show the gap in coverage;

6. radio emissions profile;

7. declaration of conformity with ICNIRP Public Exposure Guidelines;

8. plan showing alternative sites considered/proposed by Orange.

The arguments put forward by the applicant's agent can be summarised as follows:-

1. the site is required to provide both 2G and 3G coverage to the Frensham, Middle Bourne and Lower Bourne areas of South Farnham, to provide coverage to both businesses and residential properties;

2. the radio plots clearly show the complete lack of coverage in the local area and that there is a need for a further installation in the area (it is recognised, however, that the proposal will not complete coverage of the entire area). The agent has further argued that a structure of the height proposed is required to provide adequate radio coverage.

3. in order to minimise the visual impact of the proposal, a tree-style mast design has been utilised;

4. the site chosen is adjacent to trees and viewed in context of these trees, rather than as an isolated or incongruous feature;

5. the trees would provide screening from various directions and would not have an unduly detrimental impact on residential amenity;

6. the site share option has been selected because it is felt that it affords the best coverage, whilst having minimal impact on the character and appearance of the area;

7. Orange have carried out extensive investigations into alternative sites in the area (reference is made to some 21 sites) over the last few years. These were rejected for technical, planning or landowner reasons;

8. The agent has emphasised that a site at Bourne Woods would not remove the need for a further structure in the area currently under consideration. Indeed, a previous application and subsequent appeal have been dismissed in the Bourne Woods area.

9. it is suggested that alternative proposals, for streetworks, would be more intrusive;

10. the proposal would be in accordance with Central Government guidance and planning policies and it is argued that, given the technical constraints and the characteristics of the area, the site chosen provides the best solution to the network requirements.

Relevant Policies

Surrey Structure Plan 1994 – Policies PE9, PE10, PE12 and DP8
Surrey Structure Replacement Plan (Deposit Draft) 2002 – Policies SE4, SE5 and SE9
Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 – Policies D1, D4, D6, D7, D11 and HE8

Main Planning Issues

The main issue to be considered is to balance the environmental impact of the proposal against the technical need for a further facility in this area. Of particular importance will be the appropriateness and visual impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of the area, its effect on the amenities of nearby residential occupiers and impact on the setting of the adjacent Conservation Area.

The officers are aware of the background to this proposal and that Orange have been seeking a site to cover this part of South Farnham for a number of years. The officers are also aware that a proposal for a telecommunications mast on the site was refused in 1993 and that a more recent proposal was allowed on appeal on the verge area to the front of the Reservoir site. The officers are also fully aware of the strong local opposition to this proposal and, in particular, its proposed siting close to some residential properties and the adjacent Conservation Area to the rear. Given the topography and high quality of the area, it is acknowledged that it represents a very sensitive proposal.

Proposals for telecommunications development need to be assessed against Policy D11 of the Local Plan 2002, of which criteria a – c are most relevant to this proposal. Government Guidance is set out in PPG Note 8 on ‘Telecommunications’.

The proposed installation is shown to be sited towards the rear of the Reservoir site on the northern side close to the Old Farnham Lane. The mast would have a total height of 20 m and be designed in the style of a Cypress tree. Illustrations have been provided by the applicant’s agent of similar masts which have been erected. Whilst your officers accept that the proposed mast would be visible from outside the site by virtue of the height and the gaps in tree coverage around the perimeter of the site, it is not considered that it would be overly intrusive or to have a material adverse impact on the general character of the area. The proposal would be seen in the context of a site which is used as a reservoir with buildings and structures and to be relatively well-treed site of mixed evergreen and deciduous trees. It is also accepted that the proposal would be higher than some of the surrounding trees and that the mast may be visible from some public vantage points further afield, but it is argued that these views would be more limited.

It is also acknowledged that the proposed installation would be located in relative close proximity to residential properties, particularly to the north, south and east of the site. The installation would also be visible from certain properties and gardens, such as from the Priory Court flats to the south (on lower ground) and Foxacre and Heatherbank to the east. The officers argue, however, that the fact the proposal may be visible should not be a reason in itself for refusing permission, as all telecommunications development need a ‘line of sight’ in order to work.

In response to officer concerns over the visibility of the structure from the east (Swingate Road direction) and in views from the two adjacent residential properties (Foxacre and Heatherbank), it is felt that some additional tree planting is required on the eastern part of the site. The applicant’s agent have submitted an initial planting scheme and subject to final agreement on species, preferably evergreen, it is considered that this would assist in reducing the impact of the development from this sensitive direction. In any event, it is argued that the mast would be perceived as a “tree” in the context of a relatively well-treed area.

Policies state that, where a new mast is required, it is located in the least environmentally damaging position and is appropriately designed, coloured and landscaped. The officers consider that the proposal satisfies these test.

The Reservoir site is located adjacent to the Great Austins Conservation Area. Policies state that proposals for new development should preserve and enhance the character and appearance of such areas. Whilst it is accepted that there may be some views of the proposed mast due to its height, it is felt that its design would help soften its impact and would not cause material harm to the setting of the Conservation Area.

In the case of proposals for ground-based masts, there needs to be evidence to demonstrate there is a need for the development as part of the operator’s network and that there is no reasonable possibility of adding the apparatus to an existing building or structure (or other mast). Having regard to the history of past proposals for telecommunications development in this area, and the information submitted as part of the application, it is considered that the proposal satisfies these tests. It is clear that there is a need for a further facility in the area for both Hutchinson 3G and Orange and that, in the case of the latter, this proposal forms part of a wider rollout plan. Alternative sites have been considered and rejected by either the operators or the Borough Council over a number of years. Reference has been made by residents to an existing facility in Aveley Lane but this has been the subject of a redevelopment for a larger mast and dismissed on appeal. In the officers’ view, this proposal would provide a solution to providing radio coverage to the South Farnham area.

Health and Safety

Other issues relate to the perceived risk to public health, which can be a material planning consideration. The serious concerns expressed by local residents and the nearby Ridgeway school are fully acknowledged by the officers. But the current position of the Government, as expressed in PPG Note 8, is clear. The advice is that it is not the place of the planning system to determine health safeguards and that if a proposed mobile phone installation meets the ICNIRP Guidelines for public exposure, it should not be necessary to consider further the health aspects and concern about them. The Council accepts the submitted declaration of conformity with the ICNIRP Guidelines.

The issue was addressed by the Inspector in appeal application WA01/010T in 2002. Whilst the Inspector appreciated the concerns of local residents, he considered that this perceived fear must be balanced with other material factors, such as the need for the development and environmental considerations. He considered that the perceived harm in that case was outweighed by the need for the development and its limited effect on visual and residential amenity. The officers take the same view on this current proposal.

The Ridgeway School raised concern about possible interference with a ‘sound field system’ installed at the school, which is a special community school. The applicants have clarified with the manufacturers of the sound system that the proposal will not result in any such problem.

Conclusions

Having regard to the guidance set out in PPG Note 8 and to the technological and topographical constraints, your officers consider that an appropriate balance has been struck between the likely environmental impact of the proposal and the technical need for a further facility in this area. In coming to this conclusion, the officers fully understand the concerns raised by local residents to this proposal. The proposal is considered to be acceptable in the context of the site and to be in accordance with the policies of the Development Plan and guidance in relation to telecommunications development. This is subject to the substantial planting of trees and shrubs at the base of the mast and the periphery of the site.

Recommendation

That permission be GRANTED subject to the following condition:-

1. Standard landscaping scheme (25.9) as set out below:

“The approved landscaping scheme shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the agreed details and shall be carried out within the first planting season after commencement of the development or as otherwise may be agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The landscaping shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority for a period of 5 years after planting, such maintenance to include the replacement of any trees and shrubs that die or otherwise becomes, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, seriously damaged or defective. Such replacements to be of the same species and size as those originally planted.”

Reason

1. Standard (RC10)

Background Papers (DoPD)

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


5.2 Site Inspections arising from this meeting

In the event of site inspections being necessary as a result of consideration of the applications before this meeting, these will now be held on Wednesday, 7th April 2004.

6. APPLICATIONS FOR PLANNING PERMISSION

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

7. PLANNING APPEALS

7.1 Appeals Lodged

The Council has received notice of the following appeals:-

WA03/1159Erection of a double garage/store with store room over at Ashby House, Star Hill, Churt
WA03/1290Erection of a two storey extension and alterations following demolition of existing porch at 12 Bourne Grove, Lower Bourne, Farnham
WA03/1571Erection of a new dwelling and detached garage on land at Pine Ridge Drive, Lower Bourne, Farnham
WA03/1611Erection of a two storey extension at 1 Elm Crescent, Heath End, Farnham
WA03/1698Erection of a detached dwelling following demolition of existing garages on land adjacent to 2 Lower Weybourne Lane, Farnham
WA03/1736Erection of a detached outbuilding to provide garaging and garden maintenance equipment store at Randalls Cottage, Crondall Lane, Dippenhall, Farnham
WA03/1748Erection of extensions and alterations following demolition of existing garage and lean-to at 91 Weybourne Road, Farnham
WA03/1867Erection of extensions and alterations to existing dwelling to provide two independent dwellings at 15 Green Lane, Farnham
WA03/1999Erection of a conservatory at Craig-Y-Barns at 35 Frensham Vale, Lower Bourne, Farnham
WA03/2155Erection of a two storey extension at 49 Aveley Lane, Farnham
WA03/2399Erection of extensions at 26B Jubilee Lane, Wrecclesham, Farnham
WA03/2601Erection of a building to provide two x two bedroom houses and six x two bedroom apartments together with ancillary works following demolition of an existing dwelling at 31 and 33 Hurland Close, Farnham

Background Papers (CEx)

Notification of appeals received on 17.02.04, 20.02.04, 10.02.04, 25.02.04, 16.02.04, 18.11.03, 20.02.04, 11.02.04, 19.02.04, 01.03.04 04.03.04 and 04.03.04 respectively.

7.2 Appeal Decisions

WA01/1824Erection of extensions and alterations at Kilima, Batts Corner, Dockenfield, Farnham
(ALLOWED)
WA03/0218Erection of three detached houses at ‘Kelmscott’, School Lane, Farnham
(DISMISSED)
WA03/0405Erection of detached dwelling and detached single garage at Rowhills Cottage, Rowhills, Farnham
(DISMISSED)
WA03/0483Erection of new house and a replacement garage following the demolition of existing garage at Kilcradin, Tilford Street, Tilford
(DISMISSED)
WA03/0595Erection of a first floor extension to provide a separate bedroom and shower room at Crooksbury Cottage, Tilford, Farnham
(DISMISSED)
WA03/0629Single storey extension to the side and detached single garage at 6 Elm Crescent, Farnham
(DISMISSED)
WA03/0678Protective hoarding at the front of the site for health and safety reasons at Cricketers, Upper Hale Road, Upper Hale, Farnham
(ALLOWED)
WA03/1736Erection of a car store for 3 antique cars and garden machinery store at Randalls Cottage, Crondall Lane, Farnham
(DISMISSED)



Background Papers (CEx)
7.3 Inquiry Arrangements

9th June 2004
WA03/1171
Committee Room 2
Godalming
(Informal Hearing)
Retention and completion of a two storey linked building attached to The Bothey Cottage and servicing Runfold House at Runfold House, St George’s Road, Badshot Lea, Farnham

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. ENFORCEMENT ACTION - CURRENT SITUATION

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

(b) 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, 8.7.96 and 5.12.02)

In relation to land at the front, 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. Changed Use Enforcement Notice rejected by Inspector, but operational development notice upheld. Letter sent to owner/occupier indicating that if compliance with notice has not been achieved by 13.3.03, then prosecution proceedings will commence.

In relation to land at the rear, 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 confirmed on appeal. Partial costs awarded to the Council. A late High Court challenge has failed – time for compliance altered accordingly to cessation of use by 13th October 2001 and removal of unauthorised ground works and buildings by 13th January 2002. A further planning application refused in 2002. Letter sent to owner/occupier indicating that if compliance with notice has not been achieved by 13.3.03, then prosecution proceedings will commence. Appeal held 20.3.03. Appeal dismissed. Prosecution statement being prepared.

(c) Century Farm, Green Lane, Badshot Lea, Farnham (24.7.95)
(d) Land Opposite the Packhouse, Tongham Road (3.10.01)

(e) Little Acres, St George’s Road, Runfold, Farnham (28.11.01)

(f) Old Park Stables, Old Park Lane, Farnham (24.5.02)
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. EXCLUSION OF PRESS AND PUBLIC

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

Recommendation

That, pursuant to Procedure Rule 20 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 the following paragraphs of Part I of Schedule 12A to the Act, namely:

Item 10

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)

10. LEGAL ADVICE

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


For further information or assistance, please telephone Mahasti Ghavami,
Trainee Committee Secretary, on ext. 3224 or 01483 523224 or
Rosemary Hughes, Committee Secretary on ext. 3225 or 01483 523225
comms/western/2003-04/050 36249
G:\planning\Planning Committee Index Lists\Index of Western Applications.doc
INDEX OF APPLICATIONS
WESTERN AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
24TH MARCH 2004
PAGE ITEMPLAN REFLOCATION
    Site Inspection:
    WA/2003/1387
    Victoria Reservoir, Frensham Road, Farnham
    1
    B01
    WA/2003/1890Avalon Orchards, Old Barn Lane, Churt, Farnham
    6
    B02
    WA/2003/2464The Princess Royal Public House, Guildford Road, Runfold, Farnham
    8
    B03
    WA/2003/2447Steepgate Cottage, 13 Gardeners Hill Road, Farnham
    12
    B04
    WA/2003/2645Mallards, 5 Monks Well, Farnham
    16
    B05
    WA/2003/2486Castle House, Bear Lane, Farnham
    21
    B06
    WA/2003/2676Land Adjacent to 50 Boundstone Road, Farnham
    WESTERN 25
    SCHEDULE “B” TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
    WESTERN AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
    24TH MARCH 2004

    Applications where the considerations involved are clearly defined.

    Background Papers (DoP&D)

    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.1WA/2003/1890Removal of condition 4 of WA/1977/1507 (condition relates to agricultural occupancy restriction) at Avalon Orchards, Old Barn Lane, Churt, Farnham.
    Mr & Mrs Evans
    05/09/2003
    Grid Reference:E: 486812 N: 138247
    Parish :Churt
    Ward :Frensham, Dockenfield and Tilford
    Development Plan :Green belt, AONB & AGLV
    Highway Authority :No requirements
    Drainage Authority: No requirements
    Parish Council:Not inclined to favour the proposal in view of potential created
    for further future development

    Relevant History

    HM/R 21021Detached dwelling house for agricultural worker.
    Refused
    15/12/72
    Allowed on appeal
    05/07/1974
    HM/R 21626Erection of cold store for fruit storage
    Permitted
    29/06/1973
    WA 77/3Detached dwelling for agricultural worker (subject to revocation of HM/R 21021)
    Permitted
    21.06.1977
    WA/77/1507O/A for erection of 167 sq. m. farmhouse
    Permitted
    12/04/1978
    WA/78/281Approval of detailed drawings pursuant to Outline Planning Permission WA/77/1507
    Permitted
    10/05/1978
    WA/00/1788Use of land for construction of outdoor riding area and associated works
    Permitted
    11/01/2001
    WA/02/0002Modification of condition 4 of WA/77/1507 to allow occupation by persons employed in equestrian pursuits.
    Refused
    28/03/2002

    Description of Site/Background

    The site is a 2ha rural property at Old Barn Lane, Churt. It is part of an undulating rural landscape with a patchwork of woodland, small fields and farmhouses.

    The site contains a complex of small single storey farm buildings which are currently used as stables, storage and to house a small number of chickens. A large brick bungalow lies a little distance away. The remainder of the holding is divided into small fields and with a sand school sited just beyond the dwelling.

    Fields and orchards surround the site. Avalon House lies to the north of the property.


    The Proposal

    The applicant is seeking consent to remove Condition 4 from WA/77/1507. This condition relates to agricultural occupancy and states:

    “The occupation of the dwelling shall be limited to a person wholly employed or last wholly employed, locally in agriculture as defined in Section 290(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1971, or in forestry or a dependant of such person residing with him.”

    Background

    Avalon Orchards was originally part of Avalon Farm, an intensive cropping and horticultural unit. The farm was owned by a Mr Rhodes for a number of years until his retirement in the 1990’s.

    In the 1970’s Mr Rhodes wished to develop Avalon Farm by establishing a cold store and required accommodation for an additional farm worker. The dwelling at Avalon Orchards was originally given consent on appeal in 1974. At the appeal, the Inspector accepted that there was a “clear need for two full time workers on the holding in view of its current size and type and future growth. He imposed a number of conditions on the consent including an agricultural occupancy condition and a requirement that the dwelling not be commenced until the cold store was completed.

    Mr Rhodes subsequently acquired a further holding (Packhouse Farm) which included a refrigerated store. Planning permission was granted to relocate the dwelling to Packhouse Farm in 1977 and planning consent HM/R 21021 was revoked. As a consequence, the cold store approved under HM/R 21626 was never built.

    In April 1978 Mr Rhodes sought to revert to the original site of the dwelling in Barn Lane. Outline consent was granted for this (WA/77/1507) and WA/77/3 was revoked. At this time, Avalon Farm extended to some 72 acres. Full permission for the agricultural dwelling was given in May 1978 (WA/78/281). By this time the farm employed three workers and they were accommodated in Avalon House, Avalon Orchards and 2 Orchard cottages.

    In the 1990’s, Mr Rhodes broke up the farm and sold it to various purchasers. The bungalow at Avalon Orchards was left with a holding of around 2ha and remained vacant for some time. The current applicants bought the site in 2000 aware of the agricultural occupancy condition. In 2002 the owners sought consent to extend the agricultural occupancy condition to include equestrian uses. This was refused on the grounds of loss of an agricultural dwelling and possibility of setting a precedent.

    Submissions in Support

    When the applicants purchased Avalon Orchards in 2000 it was intended that Mrs Evans would farm the unit on a full time basis raising rare breeds of chickens. A business plan was prepared in September 2000 and this document formed part of the information supporting the application.

    The applicants have submitted that owing to floods and the Foot & Mouth outbreak no work could be undertaken and the business plan could not be commenced. Once the chickens were on the site the applicants realised they had underestimated the amount of damage that could be done by foxes. Problems with mortality rate and deformity were also much higher than anticipated and they realised that there was no way they were going to be able to meet the demands of the suppliers they had endeavoured to secure. It was apparent to the applicants that they could not achieve the levels of production they hoped for by virtue of the limited land and buildings. The applicants have indicated that they are unable to provide accounts for the business as it did not reach a level where accounts were necessary. No clear dates have been given for the commencement and cessation of the business.

    The applicants have submitted an independent assessment by a Farm Management Consultant of the likelihood of being able to run a farming business at Avalon Orchards. The Consultant’s report concluded:

    Once it was realised that they could not comply with the condition they sought to sell the property. The applicants have submitted information showing that the property was actively marketed for 12 months from 11th October 2002. The asking price had a very substantial reduction applied (33 – 40%) to take account of the condition. No sale resulted during the marketing period. A letter from the Estate Agent (Lane Fox) confirmed that it was the agricultural occupancy condition which proved the problem in finding a suitable buyer.

    The applicants have concluded that:

    i) It is not possible to occupy the property in compliance with the requirements of the agricultural occupancy condition;
    ii) It has not proved possible to expand the occupancy condition to include equestrian uses;
    iii) It has not proved possible to sell the property with the occupancy condition.

    They request that the condition be removed.


    Relevant Policies

    Policies PE2 and RU5 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994
    Policies LO4 and LO5 of the Surrey Structure Replacement Plan (Deposit Draft) 2002
    Policies C1, C3 and RD12 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002

    Main Planning Issues

    The application involves the removal of an agricultural occupancy condition on a bungalow within the Green Belt and AONB. The key planning issues to be considered are as follows:

    1. Is the dwelling required for long-term agriculture or forestry purposes?
    2. Has a suitable marketing strategy been pursued to sell the property?
    3. Will the removal of the agricultural occupancy condition have an adverse effect on the openness of the Green Belt and AONB/AGLV?
    4. Will a precedent be created?

    Agricultural need for the dwelling

    Agricultural occupancy conditions are used to ensure that isolated residential development approved in the countryside to house agricultural workers near to their place of work is kept available for this purpose.

    Advice is given in PPG7 to LPAs considering applications to have such conditions removed. LPAs are reminded that changes in the scale and character of farming in response to market changes may effect the long-term requirement subject to agricultural occupancy conditions. Such dwellings should not be kept vacant or their present occupants be unnecessarily obliged to remain in occupation simply by virtue of planning conditions restricting occupancy which have outlived their usefulness.

    It is clear from the proceeding information that the dwelling at Avalon Orchards was legitimately required to house one of three agricultural workers associated with the 29ha intensively farmed Avalon Farm. It is unfortunate that when the farm was divided up, Avalon Orchards was left with such a small land holding. Both the Council’s and the applicant’s independent agricultural advisors agree that the tiny amount of land associated with the dwelling renders the holding unviable as an agricultural unit

    It does appear as if Mr & Mrs Evans genuinely believed they could comply with the agricultural occupancy condition and made an attempt do so. However, the independent agricultural advisors both noted that the business plan Mr & Mrs Evans drew up was optimistic. They realised very quickly that the agricultural holding was unviable – hence the reason why the business attempt did not appear to last very long – possibly a year at the most.

    Humberts, the Council’s agricultural advisors, have been asked to consider the question as to whether the agricultural occupancy condition had outlived its usefulness. They have concluded that it has on the basis that there is no requirement for someone to be readily available at most times on the holding and there is little existing need in the wider area for agricultural housing.

    Accordingly, officers are of the opinion that the planning condition has outlived its usefulness. The applicants have satisfactorily demonstrated that the agricultural unit is not viable and that the dwelling is no longer required for long term agricultural or forestry purposes within the area.

    Suitable Marketing Strategy

    When considering applications to remove agricultural occupancy conditions, Policy RD12 of the Local Plan requires applicants to prove to the satisfaction of the Council that the dwelling has been offered for sale or rent to the agricultural community for a period of not less than 12 months at a price that reflects the existence of the occupancy condition.

    The applicants have marketed the property widely since October 2003 for in excess of 12 months. The asking price was some 30-40% below market value and they have used specialist newspapers and rural land agents.

    Humberts are of the opinion that satisfactory efforts had been made to sell the property and officers concur with this view.

    Impact on Green Belt and AONB/AGLV

    As the building is already existing and Planning Consent WA/78/281 restricts the size of the dwelling to 167 sq.m, it is felt that removal of the agricultural occupancy condition would be very unlikely to have any effect on the openness of the Green Belt and visual character of the area. Any other development on the holding would be subject to the need for planning consent when issues relating to openness and visual character could be assessed.

    Creation of a Precedent

    Concern has been expressed that the removal of the occupancy condition could create a precedent. The break up of Avalon Farm created the existence of at least one unviable agricultural holding. Unfortunately, this type of subdivision lies outside the scope of planning control. Typically, it is hoped that the market would limit this type of subdivision - the occupancy condition and size of holding putting off potential buyers.

    The circumstances of this application are very site specific and, it is felt that they would not set a precedent for the removal of occupancy conditions on other properties throughout the area.

    Conclusions

    The proposals are in accordance with Local Plan policy and there are no planning grounds on which to resist the removal of this condition.

    Recommendation

    That planning permission be GRANTED

    Summary of reasons for permission

    The development hereby recommended to be granted consent has been assessed against the Development Plan policies PE2 and RU5 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policies LO4 and LO5 of the Surrey Structure Replacement Plan (Deposit Draft) 2002 and policies C1, C3 and RD12 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 and material considerations, including third party representations. It has been concluded that the development would not result in any harm that would justify refusal in the public interest.
    * * * * *
    B.2WA03/2464
    George Gale & Co Ltd
    26.11.03
    Display of illuminated and non-illuminated signs at The Princess Royal Public House, Guildford Road, Runfold, Farnham (as amended and amplified by letter dated 25.02.04)
    Grid Reference:E: 486326 N: 147575
    Town:Farnham
    Ward:Farnham Moor Park
    Development Plan:Countryside beyond the Green Belt; Farnham/Aldershot Strategic Gap; Area of Special Advertisement Control; Site/Area of High Archaeological Potential – outside developed area
    Highway Authority:No requirements
    Drainage Authority:No requirements
    Town Council:No objection
    Consultations:Blackwater Valley Partnership - objects to signs 3a/3b being illuminated. Policy to reduce lighting and its urbanising effect. Questions siting of signs/encroachment beyond site.

    Relevant History

    WA83/1590Display of illuminated pole sign and one externally illuminated free-standing sign (note – no objection to pole sign (existing)
    Consent Refused 10.01.84

    Site/Location

    The public house is situated in a rural location to the west of Runfold between the old A31 Guildford Road and new A31.

    The Proposal

    Retrospective advertisement consent is sought for the display of signs as follows:

    i) replacement of the pole sign on the frontage (sign 1) This would measure 4.5m to the top of the sign with trough lights over the two sign boards

    ii) display of a non-illuminated entrance sign on the forecourt (or front elevation described by agent) (sign 2). This would measure 1.7m high by 1.83m in width. It would be positioned at the eastern entrance to the site.

    iii) replacement of two non-illuminated signs at the rear of the site, facing onto the new A31 (signs 3A and 3B). These would measure 1.8m in width by 1.7m in height.

    Relevant Policies

    Surrey Structure Plan 1994 – PE3, PE5
    Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2002 – LO5, SE4
    Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 – C2, C4, D10, HE14


    Main Issues

    The site is located within the countryside outside of any developed area. Policies seek the protection of the countryside for its own sake; to resist inappropriate development and to promote the enhancement of the landscape in the Strategic Gap; and that signs should respect the amenity of the area and have regard to public safety, and that advanced/illuminated signs will not be allowed unless essential for highway safety.

    The main issue to be considered is whether the siting, size, design and materials of the signs proposed are appropriate in this setting, and their impact on the visual amenities of the Strategic Gap and rural area.

    In its original form, the scheme included a further entrance sign and trough lighting to the signs upon the rear boundary. Following concerns expressed by third parties and officers, the scheme was amended.

    In the officer’s view, there is not considered to be an objection to the proposal as amended. Notwithstanding the policy presumption against illumination, the lighting of the pole sign is considered to be acceptable since it replaces a previous illuminated sign, albeit that the current proposal has larger signs at the top. Concerns were expressed over the two replacement signs at the rear, but the objection raised by the Blackwater Valley Group has now been largely overcome by the omission of the illumination. The officers’ site visit confirms that the signs appear to be within the grounds of the premises.

    The agent has explained that the applicants are negotiating to have ‘brown signs’ on the highway in order to direct traffic off the A31 to the premises. Access to the public house has clearly been affected by the new road and it is not considered that the signs proposed would be too unreasonable in the circumstances.

    Conclusions

    Recommendation

    That consent be GRANTED subject to the following conditions.

    1. Standard 12.1

    All advertisements displayed, and any land used for the display of advertisements, shall be maintained in a clean and tidy condition to the reasonable satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

    2. Standard 12.2

    Any hoarding or similar structure, or any sign, placard, board or device erected or used principally for the purpose of displaying advertisements shall be maintained in a safe condition to the reasonable satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

    3. Standard 12.3

    Where any advertisement is required under these regulations to be removed, the removal thereof shall be carried out to the reasonable satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

    4. Standard 12.4

    No advertisement is to be displayed without the permission of the owner of the site or any other person with an interest in the site entitled to grant permission.

    5. Standard 12.5

    No advertisement shall be sited or displayed so as to obscure, or hinder the ready, interpretation of any road traffic sign, railway signal or aid to navigation by water or air, or so as otherwise to render hazardous the use of any highway, railway, waterway or aerodrome (civil or military.

    6. Standard 12.6 Non-Intermittent

    7. The pole sign (1) shall be illuminated during normal business hours only.

    Reason

    1-7 Standard (RC4) *1(the character and amenities of the area) *2(PE3, PE5) *3(LO5) *5(C2, C4, D10)
    * * * * *
    B.3WA03/2447
    Mr and Mrs P Moran
    24.11.03
    Erection of a replacement dwelling following demolition of existing dwelling (revision of WA03/0092) at Steepgate Cottage, 13 Gardeners Hill Road, Farnham
    Grid Reference:E: 483700 N: 143928
    Town:Farnham
    Ward:Bourne
    Development Plan:Within developed area - ASEQ
    Highway Authority:No requirements
    Drainage Authority:No requirements
    Town Council:No objection
    Representations:One letter of objection from No. 6 Longdown Road
    1. application is oversized and out of character;
    2. additional traffic;
    3. affect wildlife;
    One subsequent letter withdrawing previous objection.



    Relevant History

    WA02/0080Erection of replacement dwelling following the demolition of existing dwelling

    Permitted
    28.03.02
    (not yet
    imple-
    mented – extant)
    WA03/0092Erection of a replacement dwelling following demolition of existing dwelling using existing secondary access onto Gardeners Hill Road
    Refused
    03.04.03

    Description of Site/Background

    Number 13 is a detached house located on the eastern side of Gardeners Hill Road. The present dwelling, which is estimated to have a floor area of 205 square metres, stands close to the road with a terraced garden to the south-east. The land beyond the property, to the south-east, is undeveloped and open in character.

    Ground levels fall away steeply to the south and the site is well treed along the roadside. The property has two residential access points close to the existing house and a third field access on lower ground to the south.

    The Proposal

    Full permission is sought to replace the existing dwelling and garage/store buildings, with a new and larger house located on lower ground further to the east. The application is, in effect, an alternative to that permitted under applications WA02/0080 and WA03/0092.

    The proposed house has been calculated to have a total floor area of some 833 square metres, with accommodation on three floors. The ground and first floors would comprise habitable accommodation. The lower ground floor (basement area) would comprise a swimming pool, associated plant room, pool equipment, shower/WC and store and integral triple garage. Of the total floor area, some 337 square metres would comprise the lower ground area.

    The new house would be sited on one of the lower terraced lawns, some 30 m away from the location of the present dwelling. It would be in a similar position to the dwelling approved under application WA02/0080, but set further back into the rear bank.

    The new house is of an individual and traditional design. The house is indicated to be built of natural brick and clay tile with heavy oak joinery. The high chimneys and leaded windows give the house a particular “Arts and Crafts” character.

    To accommodate the natural changes in ground level, the garden areas around the existing house have been terraced with retaining embankments.

    One significant difference with the previous scheme is that the formation of a new access driveway across the lower part of the site has been omitted from the current application. Use would be made of the existing main vehicular access at the northern end of the site.

    Submissions in Support

    The applicant’s agent has submitted a statement in support of this revised proposal. The main arguments can be summarised as follows:-
    Relevant Policies

    · Surrey Structure Plan 1994 - Policies PE9, PE10
    · Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2002 - Policies SE4, SE9
    · Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 - Policies D1, D4, D7, BE3

    Main Planning Issues

    The main issue to be considered is the potential impact of the proposed development on the semi-rural character of the area.

    On the first issue, the key tests, as set out in Policy BE3 of the Local Plan 2002, are whether the development would:-
    Officers acknowledge that permission has already been granted for a larger replacement dwelling on the site and in a similar position to that now proposed. In addition, in its new position, this proposal has the effect of extending built development further to the south and away from the main development area of Farnham.

    In respect of the previous scheme, whilst this presented a larger and wide-fronted elevation to the south, it was not felt that it would unacceptably compromise the semi-rural character of the area. However, in relation to the current proposal concerns are expressed over the increased size, scale, height and likely visual impact. It is not considered to overcome the objections raised in respect of the previously refused scheme and the officers do not consider that the proposal would meet the policy tests set out above.

    The officers have considered all the arguments put forward by the applicant and, in particular, the reasons advocated for the more compact design approach. The officers argue that the proposal will result in a significant increase in built development on the site, a more dominating building and one which will, in effect, present a three-storey façade on the south facing elevation.

    Whilst it is recognised that the surrounding mature trees and vegetation afford significant screening to the site, the proposed building would still be visible, particularly after leaf-fall. It may be argued that, as the new dwelling would not be as close to the road, in this respect, it would be less visible. However, it is argued that the size, scale and overall visual and physical impact of development now proposed would be far greater than the approved scheme.

    The officers have carefully considered the points made by the applicants’ agent in respect of the proposed finished slab level of the development. It is not accepted that the consented scheme would have been at the indicated level of 94.5 AOD, but it is clear from that report that that development was to be sited ‘on the plateau’. It is therefore argued that the current scheme has been proposed at a higher finished ground level and that the overall ridge level of the current scheme would be some 3.6 m higher than that of the consented scheme.

    The officers would argue that if this was indeed to be the case in the approved scheme, this would represent a variation to this scheme or to be a separate engineering operation requiring planning permission.

    It is argued that the overall size and floor area of built development on site would be significantly increased. The total floor area would be increased from 463 sq m to 833 sq m. and whilst it is acknowledged that a significant part of this would be at lower ground level, it is nevertheless reflected in the increased scale, height and bulk of building on the site.

    In visual terms, whilst it is recognised that the current proposal would represent a more compact scheme, there is continued concern over the three-storey form of the development, in combination with its increased height, bulk and massing. It is also argued that the ground works and bunding would add to the impact of the scheme and that this would be clearly visible from the road.

    Conclusions

    The officers do not dispute that the application would involve a development of high quality in both design and materials. It is also recognised that there may be examples of large dwellings in the area, but question whether there are any of the scale proposed. In addition, the proposal should be assessed on its merits and in the context of the particular characteristics of the site. Clearly, the issue of impact is a matter of planning judgement. The officers take the view that the increased size and scale of this proposal would dominate the site and materially detract from the semi-rural character of the locality.

    Recommendation

    That permission be REFUSED for the following reasons:-

    Relevant History

    WA01/0449Erection of a replacement dwelling following demolition of existing
    Permitted
    19.7.01
    WA02/1800Erection of a new dwelling following demolition of existing
    Permitted
    5.12.02
    WA03/1552Erection of a replacement dwelling and garage on a cleared site
    Withdrawn
    9.10.03

    Site/Location

    ‘Mallards’, No. 5, is a detached house situated on the south-western side of Monks Well. The present property comprises a dwelling of 130 square metres and a detached single garage/store building of 14 square metres on its eastern side.

    The property occupies a plot of some 0.48 hectares (1.18 acres). The plot slopes away from Monks Well and is generally well screened by mature trees and vegetation. The south-western part of the garden comprises a steeply wooded slope, on which the trees are covered by a Tree Preservation Order. There is a footpath at the end of the rear garden with the Wey Valley beyond.

    The Proposal

    Full permission is sought for a replacement dwelling house on the site, together with a detached garage/store building on the frontage. The proposal is a revision to the previous application (reference WA03/1552) which was withdrawn in October last year.

    The proposed dwelling would be sited in a similar position to the previous dwelling, but further back into the plot. The proposed dwelling would have a total floor area of 512.1 sq m and the detached garage/store building would have a total floor of 123.1 sq m (of which 40.7 sq m is estimated for the roof void). This would give a total built development of some 635.2 sq m floor area.

    The proposed development would be constructed in traditional materials. It is designed in an ‘Arts and Crafts’ style with a dominant roof form. The dwelling features both gabled and hipped roof projections and roofs set at a pitch of 47º.

    This revised scheme also proposes the creation of a new point of vehicular access towards the north-eastern corner of the site. The existing more centrally positioned access would be closed and partly used as a turning area within the site.

    The submitted application shows that the majority of the existing trees and boundary vegetation to be retained. This is shown to be reinforced by new planting, particularly along the frontage. The application does show, however, that some trees are to be removed in the areas of the proposed garage building, the new vehicular access and an area to the east of the house to create an open ‘glade’. The position of the dwelling does not require the removal of any trees.

    Submissions in Support

    In support of the application, both planning and design statements have been submitted, together with an Arboricultural Report dated December 2003.

    The principle of a replacement dwelling on this site has been established by previous planning permissions on this site. The current scheme is believed to address the officers’ concerns in relation to the last application.

    The proposed dwelling has been very carefully designed having regard to the criteria of Policy BE3 in order that it will not adversely affect the character of the area. Careful attention has been paid to position, levels, trees and all site characteristics.

    The driveway is altered to provide greater privacy and screening. Enclosures for the site will be maintained by existing trees, vegetation and new planting. Some tree work and removal is recommended in the interests of good arboricultural management of the site.

    Relevant Policies

    Surrey Structure Plan 1994 - Policies PE7, PE9 and PE10
    Surrey Structure Plan (Deposit Draft) 2002 - Policies SE4, SE8 and SE9
    Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 - Policies D1, D4, D7, BE3 and C3

    Main Planning Issues

    The main issues to be considered are the impact of the proposed development on the character and appearance of this semi-rural area and its effect on the amenities of neighbours.

    It should be stressed that planning permission has already been granted for a substantial dwelling on this site under application references WA01/0449 and WA02/1800. A different layout, form and style of dwelling are now proposed. A broad comparison of the current scheme and the previously approved schemes is set out in the table below:-

    Approved
    Scheme
    WA01/0449
    Approved
    Scheme
    WA02/1800
    Current
    Scheme
    1.Total Development
    Ground Floor Area (‘Footprint’)
    226.4 sq m
    320 sq m
    364.8 sq m
    2.Gross Floor Area
    507.3 sq m
    600 sq m
    635.2 sq m
    House
    3.Built Frontage
    19m
    21.5m
    23.3 m
    4.Ridge Height
    9 m
    10.7 m
    10.5 m
    5.Distance to Boundaries

    i) road frontage
    ii) north-west
    iii) south-east
    19m
    11.5 m
    23+ m
    16 m
    15 m
    20+ m
    22 m
    17 m
    14+ m
    Garage Building
    6.Ground Floor Area (‘Footprint’)
    48.6 sq m
    44.8 sq m
    82.4 sq m
    7.Gross Floor Area
    69.3 sq m
    74.5 sq m
    123.1 sq m
    8.Distances to Boundaries

    i) road frontage
    ii) north-west )
    iii) south-east )
    7.3 m
    (sited to NE of house)
    12.5m
    7.5 - 11.5 m
    6.3m
    12 m
    5.5 - 8.0 m
    7 m

    It is can be seen from the above comparison, that the size of the current scheme is greater than the two previously approved applications. This is in terms of footprint of buildings, the total floor area and, in particular, the size of the detached garage/store building. However, the proposed dwelling has been moved further back into the site and has a reduced ridge height compared with the previous scheme. The detached garage building has, however, moved closer to the north-west boundary and has a increased ridge height of 7 m.

    In your officers' view, the siting, scale and design of the proposed dwelling are acceptable and it is not considered that the proposal would have a materially greater visual impact on the site or the wider area than the previously approved schemes.

    There are considered to be advantages in relocating the position of the vehicular access. Whilst there would be some tree loss in this area, there would be some replacement planting elsewhere along the frontage. It is argued that this could achieve a greater sense of visual enclosure of the site and development proposed.

    In relation to trees, the Council's Tree Officer has raised no objection to the proposed development. However, he has sought clarification of tree protection measures and the extent of ‘no-dig’ construction for the new vehicular access.

    The officers have, however, expressed some concern over the increased size and scale of the detached garage building. This would be significantly larger than in previous schemes. Whilst it is noted that there is a large detached outbuilding in a similar position at No. 6 to the north-west, this is set well within the ground. The officers have therefore sought some reduction in the scale and impact of this building. It is anticipated that a response will have been received by the time of the meeting and an oral report will be made.

    Monks Well is characterised by dwellings of different types, sizes and styles. There are some large houses, with those properties on the south side sited on lower ground and on generally larger plots. Nos. 4 and 6 Monks Well to the south-east and north-west are large detached houses. Whilst large, it is considered that the development proposed would not be out of keeping with the pattern and scale of other development in the road.

    Conclusions

    In conclusion, the officers consider that the size, scale and general form of development proposed are acceptable for this site and the proposal would not cause material harm to the semi-rural character or landscape of the area. The proposal is therefore considered to be compliant with Policy BE3 of the Local Plan 2002.

    Recommendation

    That, subject to the receipt of satisfactory additional tree information and satisfactorily revised plans in relation to the detached garage building, permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:-
    Reasons
    * * * * *
    B.5WA03/2486
    M l Forster
    S H McKenzie
    B D White

    04.12.03
    Change of use of existing office building and internal alterations to provide 12 residential units at Castle House, Bear Lane, Farnham
    Grid Reference:E: 484031 N: 147034
    Town:Farnham
    Ward:Farnham
    Development Plan:IC2
    Highway Authority:No objections.
    Drainage Authority:No comments received
    Town Council:No objection, the Town Council welcome these small residential units close to the town centre.
    Representations:7 letters of objection have been received, comments can be summarised as follows.
      1. The building is only 2m away from neighbouring properties and will result in overlooking.
      2. The use is currently confined to office hours Monday to Friday and the change of use would result in a loss of privacy.
      3. Parking is a major problem in this area, the proposal provides no car parking for 12 flats.
      4. The cottages at the rear are within a conservation area and have no garaging or parking facilities themselves.
      5. Parking is very difficult even with parking permits.
      6. Concern regarding a shared emergency exit with the building sited at the rear of No 14 Bear Lane.
      7. The proposal will result in increased noise and disturbance.
      8. The proposal would have a significant impact on the living conditions of neighbours.
      9. No consideration has been given to bin storage. The current bins are unable to cope with rubbish generated by the occupants of the office building.
      10. It is unrealistic in this day and age that potential occupants and visitors would not own a cars.
      11. The proposed mix of flats would accommodate the buy to let market, particularly the local SIAD college students.
      12. Castle House completely overshadows the Mews and other houses in Bear Lane.
      13. Cannot see why these offices can not continue to be let. St Georges Yard across the road has all 10 units fully let.
      14. To allow change of use from commercial to residential will inevitably lead to a ghost town for industry.
      15. How is this development compatible with the East Street development?
      16. Significant impact on property prices and the enjoyment of town centre life.
      17. The Council must ensure that Farnham remains a lively market town with a healthy mix of residential and business properties.
      18. The applicants should clarify whether they have control over the adjacent car park which is rented out to the Inland Revenue in Woolmead.
      19. The applicants state that the lack of dedicated parking provision for the office use is indeed a factor in dissuading commercial tenants from renting the property, although this does not seem to be the case for residential.

      Relevant Planning History

      WA82/0539Change of use of part of building from light industrial to offices.
      Granted 10/06/82
      WA83/0925Internal refurbishment and external alterations.
      Granted
      11.08.83

      Description of Site/Background

      The Proposal · An agents To Let board has been prominently displayed on the front of the building since November 2002.
      · A sales brochure was circulated to known companies in May 2003
      · The building has been advertised in the local press since July 2003
      · All members of the Farnham Chamber of Commerce were targeted with a mail shot
      · Letting agents marketing panel has been retained in the reception area of Castle House promoting the building.
      · Information kept with local letting agents.
      · Various views have taken place without success.

      The lack of interest is due to a number of factors including the fact that office accommodation around the region is at an all time high yet take up is near its lowest level. Within the Farnham area there exists an oversupply of office accommodation. Companies are generally downsizing their business requirements to smaller and smaller units and working from home. The building is relatively inflexible in nature, constrained internal space, no parking provision.

      The applicants state that whilst no car parking can be provided on site baring in mind that the exist use would have generated a greater car parking requirement there would effectively be a reduction in demand for off-street parking. The site is well served by the public transport and is close to many local services and as such is in accordance with both PPG3 and PPG13.

      The applicants contend that there would not be any loss of privacy as office workers are often seated at windows to maximise light


      Relevant Policies
      Main Planning Issues

      The main issues are considered to be as follows:-

      The main issues are considered to be as follows:-

      · Whether the proposal conflicts with Council policy IC2 whereby the Council seek to retain suitably located Industrial and Commercial land? · The impact of the proposed conversion on the surrounding area and the character and appearance of the locally listed building.
      Residential amenity


      Recommendation

      That permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:- 1. Standard 23.36 Plumbing and Ductwork

      Reason
      * * * * *
      B.6WA/2003/2676Erection of a detached dwelling (revision of WA/2003/1036) at land adjacent to 50 Boundstone Road, Farnham (as amended by letter dated 13.2.04 and plans received 16.2.04)
      R L A Simpson
      31/12/2003
      Grid Reference:E: 483205N: 143861
      Parish: Farnham
      Ward: Farnham Shortheath and Boundstone
      Development Plan: Within the developed area – no site-specific planning policies.
      Highway Authority: Recommends conditions
      Drainage Authority: No requirements
      Town Council:Original scheme: No objection
      Amended scheme: No objection
      Representations:Original scheme: letters have been received raising objection on the following grounds:
      1. Overdevelopment of the site,
      2. A dwelling would appear unduly cramped on the site,
      3. Floor plan is larger than the previous refused planning application WA03/1036,
      4. Increase in footprint compared to refused planning application WA03/1036,
      5. Inaccuracies in the agent’s covering letter to the plans,
      6. Concern over road safety and parking,
      7. The replanting of the site is misleading,
      8. Detrimental impact on local environment,
      9. Out of keeping with the streetscene
      10. Contrary to Local Plan Policies D1 and D4,
      11. Flooding, soak away and run off problems,
      12. Contrary to PPG3,
      13. Loss of amenity to the neighbouring properties,
      14. Small amenity space (garden),
      15. Loss of mature hedge and trees.
      Amended scheme: 4 letters have been received raising the following additional grounds:
      1. Need to remove “Permitted development rights”
      2. Inaccurate plans

      Relevant History

      WA81/1053 Erection of one detached house on part of the existing garden (outline)
      Refused.
      18/08/81
      WA81/1574Erection of a two storey extension to provide sitting room, kitchen, bedroom and bathroom
      Permitted
      04/11/81
      WA/03/1036Erection of a detached dwelling
      Refused
      07/07/03

      Description of Site/Background

      The site is 0.0264 hectares in size and currently forms the western part of the garden of 50 Boundstone Road. A hedgerow and a couple of unprotected trees currently screen the south west and south east boundaries. 50 Boundstone Road is a semi-detached property, which is typical of many in the locality.

      The Proposal

      Full planning permission is sought for the erection of a detached dwelling to be positioned in the new plot to the west of the existing semi detached property. The dwelling would be a two storey dwelling with 4 habitable rooms (2 bedrooms, a dining room and a lounge) and would have a total floor area of 109.28metres square. Two car parking spaces would be provided to the east of the dwelling. The vehicular access would require the removal of part of the part of the hedge along the frontage and two small apple trees.

      Relevant Policies

      Policy PE10 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994
      Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Replacement Plan (Deposit Draft) 2002
      Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002

      Main Planning Issues

      The site is located within the developed area of Farnham where new dwellings can be acceptable subject to its impact upon visual and residential amenity.

      The main planning issues are as follows:

      1. Whether the reasons for refusal for WA81/1053 and WA/2003/1036 have been over come,
      2. The impact of the proposal on the amenities and privacy of the neighbours,
      3. The impact on the streetscene,
      4. Whether the proposal is considered to be an over development of the site.

      In comparison with the previously refused planning application WA/2003/1036, the following specific changes have been made:

      1. The habitable floor area has been reduced from 115.37sqm to 109.28sqm
      2. The maximum height of the dwelling (rear section) has been reduced from 7.2 metres to 6.8 metres,
      3. The length of the proposal has be reduced from 12 metres to 10.3 metres,
      4. The separation distance from the western boundary has increased from 2 metres (nearest point) to 3.25 metres,
      5. The reduction in the overall scale of the proposal results in a larger garden,
      6. The reduction of car parking spaces from 3 to 2 car parking spaces,

      In the officers’ view, having regard to these changes, it is considered that the current proposal overcomes the previous concerns and the previous reasons for refusal. It is considered that the proposal would not have a detrimental impact in terms of loss of light, over-shadowing, loss of privacy or loss of amenity to the surrounding dwellings. The proposal would fit in satisfactorily with the streetscene. The County Highway Authority has recommended conditions to be attached to any permission granted.

      Conclusions

      Overall, the proposal is considered acceptable, subject to appropriate conditions. It would not cause a detrimental impact on the street scene, the surrounding area or the neighbouring properties and is compliant with the relevant policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002. Importantly, the proposal is considered to over-come the objections of the previously refused planning application and it is considered that it should be supported.

      Summary of Reasons for Granting Planning Permission

      The development hereby granted has been assessed against the following Development Plan policies: Policy PE10 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Replacement Plan (Deposit Draft) 2002 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002 and material considerations, including third party representations. It has been concluded that the development would not result in any harm that would justify refusal in the public interest.

      Recommendation

      That planning permission be GRANTED subject to following conditions:

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

      2. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any other order revoking or re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no enlargement to any dwelling house shall be constructed, without the written permission of the Local Planning Authority.

      3. 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 further new windows or other openings shall be formed in the first floor or roof area of the south west or north east elevations without the written permission of the Local Planning Authority.

      4. No development shall take place until a detailed landscaping scheme has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The landscaping scheme shall be carried out strictly in accordance with the agreed details and shall be carried out within the first planting season after commencement of the development or as otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. The landscaping shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority for a period of 5 years after planting, such maintenance to include the replacement of any trees and shrubs that die or have otherwise become, in the opinion of the Local Planning Authority, seriously damaged or defective. Such replacements to be of same species and size as those originally planted.

      5. No development shall take place until details of all proposed screen walls or fences, or similar structures, have been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing and such walls or fences or similar structures as may be approved by the Local Planning Authority shall be erected within a period of one month from the date of first occupation of any part of the approved development, and thereafter be maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority.

      6. Standard highways MC1 (*Boundstone Road)

      7. Standard highways HC8 (c) (storage of plant and materials)

      8. Prior to the occupation of the dwelling hereby permitted, two parking spaces shown on the plan shall be provided and thereafter maintained for the use for parking of domestic vehicles clear of the highway.

      Reasons

      1. In the interest of the amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

      2. Having regard to the restrictive nature of the site and to accord with Policy PE10 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Replacement Plan, (Deposit Draft) 2002 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

      3. To prevent the overlooking of the adjoining properties and to accord with Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

      4. To safeguard the character of the area and to accord with Policies PE9 and PE10 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policies SE4 and SE8 of the Surrey Structure Replacement Plan, (Deposit Draft) 2002 and Policies D1, D4 and D7 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

      5. In order to retain control over the development hereby permitted and to accord with Policy PE10 of the Surrey Structure Plan 1994, Policy SE4 of the Surrey Structure Replacement Plan, (Deposit Draft) 2002 and Policies D1 and D4 of the Waverley Borough Local Plan 2002.

      6. – 7. Standard highways HR1 *MT2 *DN2 and M2

      8. Standard highways HR1 *M14

      Informatives

      Standard H(Inf) 7 – No signs within Highway Limits
      Standard H(Inf) 13 – No works on Highway
      * * * * *




      comms/western/2003-04/052 36270
      WESTERN 26
      SCHEDULE ‘C’ TO THE AGENDA FOR THE
      WESTERN AREA DEVELOPMENT CONTROL SUB-COMMITTEE
      24TH MARCH 2004

      Application determined in accordance with the approved terms of delegation to the Director of Planning and Development

      Background Papers (DopD)
      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
      TM/2003/0090
      A E Mathew
      Application to fell a beech tree the subject of Tree Preservation Order 12/99 (as amended by revised application form dated 27/1/04 and plan received 30/1/04).
      1, Clare Mead, Rowledge, Farnham.
      TPO Consent
      TM/2004/0007
      G Bates
      Application for works to trees the subject of Tree Preservation Order 49/99.
      4, Douglas Grove, Farnham.
      TPO Consent
      TM/2004/0008
      F James
      Application to fell a Scots Pine the subject of Tree Preservation Order FAR36.
      6, Holland Close, Farnham.
      Consent Granted
      WA/2003/1646
      Mr Bathia
      Erection of a two storey extension to provide additional retail (Class A1) floorspace at ground floor level and additional residential accommodation at first floor level and construction of an access ramp (as amended by letter dated 30/12/03 and plans received 5/1/04).
      43, Weybourne Road, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2003/1888
      Mr & Mrs P Goulder
      Erection of a building to provide 4 flats together with the erection of a pair of semi-detached houses all with associated parking.
      Land At Yatesbury House, Yatesbury Close, Farnham.
      Withdrawn
      WA/2003/1949
      P A Paull
      Alterations and change of use of redundant agricultural buildings to light industrial (Class B1 (c)) and complementary therapy and sports injuries clinic (Class D1).
      Manor Farm, Old Lane, Dockenfield.
      Withdrawn
      WA/2003/2138
      Birch Corporation Ltd
      Erection of a building to provide 8 two bedroom flats following demolition of existing building.
      53a, Frensham Road, Lower Bourne, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2003/2195
      Mr & Mrs Wagstaff
      Erection of extensions and alterations (as amplified by letter dated 7/11/03 and plans received 10/11/03).
      Stocksfield House, Tilford Road, Churt.
      Full Permission
      WA/2003/2277
      Heath End Wanderers Fc
      Alterations to vehicular access including the provision of a dropped kerb together with alterations to existing club house (additional drawings received on the 12/02/04).
      College Recreation Ground, Upper Weybourne Lane, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2003/2305
      Rmc Aggregates (Southern) Ltd
      Consultation under Regulation 3; submission of details pursuant to Condition of 36 of WA/1999/0223.
      Alton Road Sandpit, Alton Road, Farnham.
      No Objection
      WA/2003/2331
      A Walker
      Alterations and construction of dormer windows to existing garage (renewal of WA/1998/1801).
      Holmwood, Farnham Road, Tilford, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2003/2334
      J Burrage
      Erection of a two storey extension (as amended by letter dated 15/01/04 and plans received 16/01/04).
      16, Peakfield, Frensham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2003/2362
      Rmc Aggregates (Southern) Ltd
      Consultation under Regulation 3; submission of details of groundwater monitoring scheme pursuant to Condition 18 of WA/1999/0223.
      Alton Road Sandpit, Alton Road, Farnham.
      No Objection
      WA/2003/2426
      G
      Hpe Services
      Alterations to elevations.
      5, Mead Lane, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2003/2427
      G
      Hpe Services
      Application for Listed Building Consent for internal and external alterations.
      5, Mead Lane, Farnham.
      Listed Blg Consent Granted
      WA/2003/2437
      Peak Quality Homes Ltd
      Erection of 12 new dwellings with garages and associated parking following demolition of number 17 St. Johns Road.
      Land To Rear Of 13 To 21, St Johns Road, Farnham.
      Withdrawn
      WA/2003/2460
      G Humphrey
      Erection of a detached dwelling (revision of WA/2003/1191).
      120, Upper Hale Road, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2003/2517
      R Wade
      Erection of a two storey extension following demolition of existing garage (as amended by letter dated 9/1/04 and plans received 12/1/04).
      20, Stoneyfields, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2003/2534
      Housing Department
      Consultation under Regulation 3; erection of two blocks of garages and the provision of additional parking areas (revision of WA/2003/1203) (as amended by letter dated 5/2/04 and plans received 9/2/04).
      Land At Rear Of, Beaufort Road, Farnham.
      WBC Reg 3 Granted
      WA/2003/2549
      M Symers
      Erection of extensions and alterations (revision of WA/2003/2009).
      38, Castle Street, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2003/2550
      M Symers
      Application for Listed Building Consent for the erection of extensions and internal and external alterations (revision of WA/2003/2010).
      38, Castle Street, Farnham.
      Listed Blg Consent Granted
      WA/2003/2572
      Rmc Aggregates Ltd
      Details of hedgerow survey and assessment pursuant to Condition 43 of planning permission WA99/0223 dated 13 September 2002.
      Alton Road Sandpit, Alton Road, Farnham.
      No Objection
      WA/2003/2573
      Rmc Aggregates Ltd
      Details of surface water control measures pursuant to Condition 19, location and design of drainage ditch pursuant to Condition 21, details of redesign of ponds and ditching pursuant to Condition 22 of planning permission WA99/0223 dated 13 September 2002.
      Alton Road Sandpit, Alton Road, Farnham.
      No Objection
      WA/2003/2574
      Rmc Aggregates Ltd
      Details of leachate management and control system pursuant to Condition 17 of planning permission ref. WA99/0223 dated 13 September 2002.
      Alton Road Sandpit, Alton Road, Farnham.
      No Objection
      WA/2003/2580
      Insignia Property Partnerships Ltd
      Outline application for the erection of a building to provide 12 flats with part basement parking following demolition of existing dwelling.
      Land At 64, Ridgeway Road, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2003/2600
      Rmc Aggregates Ltd
      Revised details of acoustic fencing pursuant to Condition 41 of planning permission ref. WA99/0223 dated 13 September 2002.
      Alton Road Sandpit, Alton Road, Farnham.
      No Objection
      WA/2003/2612
      S R Best
      Erection of a detached garage following demolition of existing garage and car port.
      Pippins, Vine Way, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2003/2615
      R & C Rickwood
      Erection of a detached dwelling and detached garage.
      Land Adjacent To Woodview, Bourne Grove, Lower Bourne, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2003/2617
      Rmc Aggregates Ltd
      Details of post and wire fencing around semi-natural woodland pursuant to Condition 20d, scheme of soil stripping, handling, storage and replacement of soils from the semi-natural woodland areas within the site pursuant to Condition 39, details of advance tree planting pursuant to Condition 40 and details of the location of the electricity line and drainage ditch within the buffer zone pursuant to Condition 42 of planning permission ref. WA99/0223 dated 13 September 2002.
      Alton Road Sandpit, Alton Road, Farnham.
      No Objection
      WA/2003/2622
      Mr & Mrs Jones
      Erection of extensions.
      12, Broadwell Road, Wrecclesham, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2003/2635
      Mr & Mrs D O'gorman
      Retention of a single storey extension and erection of a first floor extension.
      The Old Post House, Priory Lane, Frensham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2003/2640
      P Betteridge
      Erection of extensions to existing bungalow to provide a chalet bungalow.
      High Pines, Wood Road, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2003/2646
      Mr & Mrs T Knight
      Erection of a detached garage (as amplified by additional plans received 05/02/04).
      Thornhill Cottage, 4, Upper Bourne Lane, Wrecclesham, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2003/2653
      A Andrews
      Outline application for the erection of an indoor riding school building ancillary to existing riding school use.
      The Kiln Cottage, Badshot Lea Road, Badshot Lea, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2003/2666
      Mr & Mrs R Burrows
      Erection of an extension following demolition of detached garage.
      Hallburrow House, 23, Hazell Road, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2003/2669
      C E Hall
      Erection of a single storey extension for Class A2 use (estate agent) (as amended by letter dated 3/2/04 and drawing received 9/2/04).
      15, Downing Street, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0001
      Mr & Mrs M Hoy
      Erection of a first floor extension and alterations (revision of WA/2003/2272).
      26, Little Green Lane, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0003
      Mr & Mrs A Cordial
      Erection of extensions and alterations (as amplified by plan received 16/1/04).
      Longland House, Forest Drive, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2004/0004
      Mr & Mrs D Rowell
      Construction of dormer windows for attic conversion and erection of a detached garage/store.
      4, Kings Lane, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2004/0008
      Mr & Mrs Titley
      Erection of extensions and alterations.
      Chatsfield, Little Green Lane, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2004/0009
      Mr & Mrs R Jude
      Use of integral garage as habitable accommodation, alteration to elevations and erection of a detached garage.
      Penrose, Laurel Grove, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0010
      N L Humphries
      Outline application for the erection of a new dwelling (revision of WA/2003/1368).
      Land At 65, Aveley Lane, Farnham.
      Withdrawn
      WA/2004/0013
      Mr & Mrs Voice
      Erection of extensions.
      3, Orchard End, Rowledge, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2004/0015
      Gms Estates Ltd
      Renconstruction of unit 6 together with the provision of a retaining wall.
      Unit 6, Grovebell Industrial Estate, Wrecclesham Road, Wrecclesham, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0016
      D Lowther
      Erection of a single storey infil extension.
      3, Brooklands Road, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0024
      Mr & Mrs T Banks
      Erection of a conservatory following demolition of existing extension (as amplified by letter dated 20/01/04 and drawing received 21/01/04)
      Hollowdene House, Shortfield Common Road, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0025
      D Rook
      Erection of a first floor extension.
      10, Queens Lane, Farnham.
      Withdrawn
      WA/2004/0028
      Mr & Mrs R Hockey
      Erection of a first floor extension.
      14, Heathyfields Road, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0030
      Mr & Mrs Mullins
      Erection of a barn style double garage/store following demolition of existing garage.
      Gorsedene Lodge, The Long Road, Rowledge, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0032
      Mr & Mrs M Macnaghten
      Erection of a two storey extension following demolition of existing single storey extension.
      7, Coleson Hill Road, Wrecclesham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0034
      Mr & Mrs T Baldock
      Erection of a two storey extension (revision of WA/2003/1360) (as amplified by letter dated 22/1/04).
      Muddy Boots, Carlisle Road, Tilford, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0035
      D Berridge
      Erection of a detached dwelling.
      Yew Tree Lodge, Lawday Link, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2004/0038
      Mr & Mrs G Wileman
      Alterations and extensions to existing bungalow to provide a chalet bungalow (as amended by letter dated 22/02/04 and drawings received 26/02/04).
      30, Upper Bourne Lane, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0041
      M Masters
      Erection of a conservatory.
      21, Crosby Way, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0044
      Mr & Mrs A Rubio
      Erection of extensions at first floor level and to roof to provide additional first floor habitable loft accommodation.
      20, Waverley Lane, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2004/0046
      L Patten
      Erection of a single storey extension.
      33, Southern Way, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2004/0052
      J Waine
      Outline application for the erection of a dwelling and construction of vehicular access.
      Land At 25, Gong Hill Drive, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2004/0056
      G Haytree
      Erection of an extension to provide an additional dwelling.
      1 Abbotts Cottages, The Street, Dockenfield.
      Refused
      WA/2004/0059
      S Barry
      Erection of a detached garage, fence and vehicular access.
      36, Alma Lane, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0062
      C R Gray
      Erection of a two storey dwelling (incorporating triple garage and indoor swimming pool) following demolition of existing bungalow.
      Woodpeckers, 9, Temples Close, Farnham.
      Withdrawn
      WA/2004/0067
      P Mitchell
      Erection of extensions and alterations.
      5, Ford Lane, Wrecclesham, Farnham.
      Withdrawn
      WA/2004/0068
      L Mcdonald
      Erection of a single storey extension and alterations following demolition of existing extension.
      37, Castle Street, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0069
      L Mcdonald
      Application for Listed Building Consent for the erection of a single storey extension and alterations following demolition of existing extension.
      37, Castle Street, Farnham.
      Listed Blg Consent Granted
      WA/2004/0070
      L Mcdonald
      Erection of a single storey extension and alterations with construction of a dormer window following demolition of existing extension.
      37, Castle Street, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0071
      L Mcdonald
      Application for Listed Building Consent for the erection of a single storey extension and alterations with construction of a dormer window following demolition of existing extension.
      37, Castle Street, Farnham.
      Listed Blg Consent Granted
      WA/2004/0073
      Mr & Mrs J Segar
      Erection of extensions (as amended by letter dated 16/2/04 and plan received 23/2/04).
      Birchlea, West End Lane, Frensham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0074
      Mr & Mrs S Griffiths
      Erection of a two storey extension following demolition of existing garage.
      44, Broomleaf Road, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2004/0078
      Mr & Mrs R Collins
      Use of garage as habitable accommodation, alterations to elevations and the erection of an attached garage together with extension to parking area.
      1 Queens Court, Queens Lane, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0081
      Mr & Mrs C Bull
      Erection of extensions and alterations.
      Bramble Coombe, 5, Gorse Lane, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0086
      Mr P Smith
      Erection of a single storey extension following demolition of existing extension (as amplified by letter dated 5/2/04).
      Corner Cottage, Sands Lane, Tilford.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0094
      V T Johnson
      Erection of a single storey extension and alterations (revision of WA/2003/2280).
      1, River Lane, Wrecclesham, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0098
      Mr & Mrs J Duke
      Erection of a single storey extension following demolition of existing extension.
      Hazel Cottage, 3a Aveley Lane, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0100
      Mr & Mrs P Hoskins
      Provision of a new roof to existing bungalow to provide a chalet bungalow together with a porch.
      Rosemead, 7, Hazell Road, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2004/0102
      A K Russell
      Erection of a conservatory.
      20, Weydon Hill Road, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0107
      N & C Shaw
      Erection of extensions and alterations to existing bungalow to provide a two storey dwelling (as amended by letter dated 17/2/04 and drawings received 18/2/04).
      22, Burnt Hill Way, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2004/0117
      Rmc Aggregates Uk Ltd
      Scheme of Archaeological Investigation pursuant to Condition 4 of planning permission ref: WA/1999/0223 dated 13 september 2002.
      Alton Road Sandpit, Alton Road, Farnham.
      No Objection
      WA/2004/0126
      Mr & Mrs D W Frame
      Construction of a bay window.
      Green Glades, Frensham Vale, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0131
      S Deadman
      Erection of a two storey extension with dormer window in roof above to provide loft accommodation.
      9, Coppice Close, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2004/0139
      Mr & Mrs D Curtis
      Erection of single storey extension and garage following demolition of existing garage (as amplified by letters dated 03/02/04 and 03/03/04 and drawing received 04/02/04).
      7, South Avenue, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0145
      Mr & Mrs M Frisby
      Erection of a two storey extension and construction of dormer window for loft conversion (revision of WA/2003/2285) (as amended by letter dated 04/02/04 and drawing received 04/02/04).
      1a, Lynch Road, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0150
      P G Pym
      Erection of extensions and alterations.
      5, Pottery Lane, Wrecclesham, Farnham.
      Refused
      WA/2004/0158
      J Lovell & K Bishop
      Erection of single storey extension.
      41, Weydon Hill Road, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0163
      Mr & Mrs Sylvester-Evans
      Erection of an extension to provide indoor swimming pool.
      14a, Longdown Road, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0172
      Mr & Mrs A Cameron
      Erection of extensions and part boundary wall following demolition of existing extension.
      102, Shortheath Road, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0173
      Mr & Mrs J Eriksson
      Erection of extensions and alterations (as amplified by letter dated 18/2/04 and plan received 19/2/04).
      Roseland, Tilford Road, Rushmoor.
      Refused
      WA/2004/0177
      R Hills
      Erection of extensions and alterations (revision of WA/2003/2482).
      35, Lynch Road, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0187
      S
      Tate & Co
      Erection of a single storey extension and construction of dormer windows.
      5, Stephendale Road, Farnham.
      Withdrawn
      WA/2004/0191
      Mr & Mrs J Peto
      Conversion of existing garage to additional habitable accommodation and erection of a replacement detached double garage.
      April Cottage, Crosswater Lane, Churt.
      Refused
      WA/2004/0203
      Barclays Bank Plc
      Installation of additional air conditioning units to roof (as amended by plans received on the 04/04/04).
      22, The Borough, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0211
      Mr & Mrs A Stevens
      Erection of a two storey extension following demolition of a detached garage.
      25, Broomleaf Road, Farnham.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0216
      Mr & Mrs G Charlton
      Erection of a single storey extension following demolition of conservatory (as amplified by drawing received 16/2/04).
      2 Parkhurst Cottages, The Old Lane, Churt.
      Full Permission
      WA/2004/0244
      L Johnstone
      Erection of extensions.
      8, Bethel Close, Farnham.
      Refused


      Comms/Western/2003-04/053