Agenda item

Demolition of existing buildings in mixed use and construction of single detached family dwelling.

 

Public Participation

 

Ms Kate Fielden from the Campaign to Protect Rural England,  spoke in objection to the application

Mr Richard Cosker from RCC Town Planning, spoke in support of the application.

Ms Sandra Lovell, Architect, spoke in support of the application.

Mr James Purves, Applicant,  spoke in support of the application.

Cllr Julia Lloyd-Hughes of Marden Parish Council spoke in support of the application.

 

The Planning Officer Nick Clark, introduced a report which recommended that the application for the demolition of existing buildings in mixed-use and the construction of a single detached family dwelling be refused.

 

The officer read the definition of ‘infill’ to the committee as it was pertinent to the application. The definition stated that infill was ‘the filling of a small gap within the village that was only large enough for not more than a few dwellings; generally only one dwelling. The development must also be within the built area of the village.

 

Key details were stated to include the following:

 

The site was not within the recognised Limits of Development of the village, was outside of the built area of the village and was not within a small gap. Therefore it could not be considered ‘infill’. As such it would be contrary to WCS CP1, CP2 and Core Policy 18 of the Pewsey Community Area Strategy.

 

Consultation responses were summarised by the officer. There had been 10 letters of support from local residents and the parish council supported the application. The Conservation Officer, the Campaign to Protect Rural England and 5 local residents had objected to the application.

 

The officer stated that a redevelopment of the site that reflected the agricultural nature of the site and the character of the village may potentially be considered favourably. However, it was felt that the proposal was of excessive size and scale and that the Georgian design would be out of keeping. As such, it did not meet the requirement of WCS CP57 and CP58.

 

Therefore it was stated that the application was contrary to policy and as such it was recommended for refusal.

 

Members of the public then had the opportunity to present their views to the committee as detailed above.

 

The unitary division member, Cllr Paul Oatway, spoke in support of the application. Cllr Oatway thanked members for visiting the site. He stated that Hawthorn Farm was derelict, it would never farm again and the current buildings were an eyesore. The applicants were not developers but were active members of the village community who would live in the proposed dwelling. There was a unique mix of buildings in the vicinity of the site and it was not felt that the application would stand out. In fact the high quality design of the dwelling would meet with CP57.

 

Cllr Paul Oatway, QPM, proposed a motion to approve planning permission with conditions (against officer recommendation), with the final wording of the conditions delegated to officers. This was seconded by Cllr Stewart Dobson.

 

A debate followed where the main issued raised were:

 

If the application was just in a field then it would be unacceptable, however, it was noted that there were other buildings nearby. The issue seemed to be the scale and design of the dwelling, as even officers had stated that something more appropriate could be built there so it was hard to see how WCS CP1 and CP2 could be used to refuse the application. It was felt that as the site was large, a small building would be inappropriate.

 

It was stated that although officers had made the recommendation in accordance with policy, it was very hard to apply the policy consistently to different villages as they were all different in make-up. Some members stated they were surprised by the variety and number of large complimentary houses close to the site and thought that this application would complement the village.

 

Other members felt the proposed dwelling was too big and was out of context.

 

At the conclusion of the debate it was;

 

Resolved:

 

That planning permission be granted with conditions (against officer recommendation), with the final wording of the conditions delegated to officers.

 

Reason

The application was felt to be ‘infill’ and as such was not contrary to WCS CP1 and CP2. The application was high quality design and therefore was not contrary to WCS CP57.

 

1.    The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

 

REASON

To comply with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

 

2.    The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved drawings and documents:

 

- Location Plan (2677-000)

- Block Plan (2677-PR001)

            - Topographic Survey (SU-01)

            - Detail Floor Plans (SU-01)

            - Elevations (SU-01)

 - Ground Floor & First Floor Plans (2677-PR002)

 - Attic Plan (2677-PR003)

 - Proposed Front Elevation (North-West)  (2677-PR004)

 - Proposed Side Elevation (South-West)  (2677-PR005)

 - Proposed Back Elevation (South-East)  (2677-PR006)

 - Proposed Side Elevation (North-East)  (2677-PR007)

 - Section A-A  (2677-PR008)

 - Section B-B  (2677-PR009)

 - Proposed Car Port  (2677-PR010)

 - Landscape Strategy (18.759)

 - Protected Species Survey & Mitigation Strategy (13th September 2018)

 

REASON

For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

 

3.    The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out other than in full accordance with the requirements (including pre-demolition requirements) of the Mitigation and Enhancement Strategy as set out in the approved Protected Species Survey & Mitigation Strategy.

 

REASON

To ensure the protection of bats and birds affected by the development, in the interests of the biodiversity of the area.

 

4.    i) No development of the new dwelling or car port shall commence above ground floor slab level until details of the following have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority:

 

a)         external bricks,

b)        the timber cladding and finish to be used on the exterior of the car port,

c)         details of materials and finishes to be used in all soffits, fascias and bargeboards, and

d)        detailing, materials and finishes to be used on the chimneys;

 

such details to include for example, written descriptions, product literature and photographic examples, and if requested, samples to be made available for inspection on-site.

 

ii) The development shall not be carried out other than in accordance with the so-approved details.

 

REASON

In the interests of visual amenity and the setting of the adjoining conservation area and nearby listed buildings.

 

5.    i) The materials, finishes, facing brick bond, mortar and detailing to be used in the development hereby permitted shall not be other than as shown and specified on the approved drawings.

 

ii) Rainwater goods shall not be other than of cast metal construction with a painted black finish.

 

iii) Windows in the main body of the dwelling shall not be other than sash windows of timber construction with a painted finish.

 

iv) Windows and doors in the rear single storey of the dwelling shall not be other than of timber construction with a painted finish.

 

REASON

In the interests of visual amenity and the setting of the adjoining conservation area and nearby listed buildings.

 

Prior to first occupation of the development there shall have been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority full details of all  boundary treatments including details of any existing fences to be retained and the details of any new front gates.

 

REASON

In the interests of certainty and the rural character of the area and the setting of the Marden Conservation Area and nearby listed buildings.

 

6.    i) All soft landscaping as detailed on the approved drawings shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding season following the first occupation of the building or the substantial completion of the development whichever is the sooner.

 

ii) All shrubs, trees and hedge planting shall be maintained free from weeds and shall be protected from damage by vermin and stock.

 

iii) Any trees or plants (including those shown to be retained on the approved drawings) which, within a period of five years, die, are removed, or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of a similar size and species, or as otherwise agreed in writing by the local planning authority. 

 

iv) All hard landscaping as shown on the approved drawings and boundary treatments and gates as approved under the condition above shall be carried prior to first occupation of the development.

 

REASON

To ensure a satisfactory landscaped setting for the development and the protection of existing important landscape features in the interests of the rural character of the area and setting within the North Wessex Downs AONB.

 

7.    Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting or amending that Order with or without modification), there shall be no additions to, or extensions or enlargements of any building forming part of the development hereby permitted.

 

REASON

In the interests of the amenities of the area and to enable the Local Planning Authority to consider individually whether planning permission should be granted for additions, extensions or enlargements.

 

8.    i) No external lighting shall be installed on site until plans showing the type of light appliance, the height and position of fitting, illumination levels and light spillage in accordance with the appropriate Environmental Zone standards set out by the Institute of Lighting Engineers in their publication "Guidance Notes for the Reduction of Obtrusive Light" (ILE, 2005)", have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. 

 

ii) The so-approved lighting shall be installed and shall be maintained in accordance with the approved details and no additional external lighting shall be installed.

 

REASON

In the interests of the amenities of the area and North Wessex downs AONB and to minimise unnecessary light spillage above and outside the development site.