OFFICER REPORT
1.
SUMMARY
|
RECOMMENDATION
|
|
Planning permission be granted subject to conditions in Section 11
of this report
|
2
REASON FOR REPORTING APPLICATION TO COMMITTEE
2.1 This application is
reported to committee as more than 5 objections have been
received.
3.
PLANNING STATUS AND SITE DESCRIPTION
|
PLANNING STATUS
|
|
Outside the settlement boundary
|
|
Sited within 5km of the Thames Basin
Heaths SPA
|
3.1
The site is a
greenfield site outside of the defined settlement boundary of
Binfield, located within the countryside with the site area
measuring 0.30ha. It is bounded to the north by the southern edge
of Foxley Lane. On the northern side of Foxley Lane is residential
development which falls within the settlement boundary.
3.2 The
access to the site would be from the east, which is bounded by the
western side of Murrell Hill Lane. The eastern side of Murrell Hill
Lane comprises residential development within the settlement
boundary. To the east of the site itself is Whitehouse Farm
Cottage, which is a Grade II Listed Building; to the south is
Mosscroft and to the west is The Barn. These are residential
properties.
3.3 The site
is a former farmyard and comprises unmaintained grass and scrub.
The boundaries consist of hedgerow and timber fence to the west,
hedgerow to Foxley Lane to the north, and a brick wall to the west
separating the site from Whitehouse Farm Cottage.
3.4 The site is within
5km of the SPA.
4.
RELEVANT SITE HISTORY
4.1 There is
no recent planning history relevant to the site. However, the
following application was dismissed at appeal in 2018 on land south
of Foxley Lane, to the west of the application site:
16/01196/OUT: Outline planning application in respect of up
to 350 residential dwellings, land for a one-form entry primary
school, a medical centre including pharmacy (1,200 sq m), a sports
pavilion (140 sq. m), open space, landscaping, Suitable Alternative
Natural Greenspace (SANG) and drainage on land to the south of
Foxley Lane, Binfield with vehicular access from Foxley Lane (means
of access into the site to be considered, all other matters
reserved).
5. THE
PROPOSAL
5.1 Planning permission
is sought for the erection of one, ‘barn style’
dwelling. The proposal would be located to the southern side of the
site, with access from Murrell Hill Lane. The dwelling would be
orientated east west with the rest of the site used for private
amenity space. A double carport would provide 2 parking spaces with
space for a more vehicles and turning space upon the
driveway.
5.2 The proposed
dwelling would be a simple rectangular form with a footprint
measuring 15.5m by 7.9m and a height of 7.1m. to the ridge. The car
port would be sited to the south of the dwelling, facing the access
and proposed gravel driveway.
5.3 The original
application was submitted for two dwellings, but has been
subsequentially amended to the single, simplified dwelling and
carport using the existing field access point off Murrell
Hill.
6.
REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED
Binfield Parish Council
6.1 Binfield
Neighbourhood Plan Policy BF1 states that: development proposals
shall:
4. have a similar form of development
to properties in the immediate surrounding area; (this is
particularly the case for applications for two or more dwellings on
a site currently or previously occupied by a single
property);
6.2 The committee does
not feel this proposal is consistent with the setting of
neighbouring properties in both scale and choice of materials
indicated in the documentation.
6.3 The scale of the
dwellings is overdevelopment of the site and will affect the area
for all users of Foxley Lane/Murrell Hill Lane.
Other
Representations
6.4 5 letters of
objection have been received raising the following
concerns:
i) The site
is out of settlement. It has been offered for inclusion within the
next local plan but not been taken up.
ii) It is important
that the height and position of the buildings do not overwhelm
White House
Farm Cottage and The Barn - whose roofline was lowered to avoid
detracting from White House Farm Cottage.
iii) Although this
site is classified as low flood risk, properties surrounding the
site have had to
mitigate recurring high-water table and surface water problems by
installing pumping
systems.
iv) The plain brick
elevations and angular glazed areas seem out of place in this rural
setting. [Officer notes: this comment refers to the proposal as
originally submitted and not the revised scheme]
v) The position of
gateway to unit 01 does not allow access to the side of WHFC for
maintenance. [Officer notes: the access to unit 1 is the access
from Murrell Hill Lane which remains
within the proposal].
vi) The land is
immediately adjacent to a Grade II Listed Building and it is not
felt that
this
proposed design is consistent with the setting of neighbouring
properties in both scale and specifically the choice of
materials.
vii) Not happy to see more
buildings in such an already developed part of the village and to
see listed and older properties destroyed. Does the village
heritage count for nothing?
viii) The proposal would result in
overlooking and loss of light to the surrounding properties.
[Officer Note: The design and position of the proposed dwelling and
windows have been amended since the comments were
received].
ix) The Heritage
statement which deems a ‘low impact’ does not take into
account that the
visibility of the proposed site, and impact with regards to this
Grade II Listed
Building, is limited by a recently constructed boundary wall. If
there is any question
regarding its planning, listed buildings requirements, curtilage,
and heights - the survey and analysis is flawed, and its accuracy
should be considered very carefully
x) Taking
Whitehouse Farm Cottage above (Grade II listed), the Barn and
Whitehouse Farm- the
proposed buildings do not appear to be subservient to the
surrounding buildings in terms of
height and construction
xi) There appear to be a
number of trees and hedging that provide significant cover from
the ground floor views at Whitehouse Farm,
and would need to be maintained to maintain
the character and appearance.
xii) The area is subject to
regular flooding – with the pond at the Barn providing a
balance during the wet seasons and the driveway regularly flooding.
It is a significant concern that the runoff from a built area will
negatively affect these issues further, resulting in impact on the
neighbouring properties.
7.
SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION RESPONSES
Highway Officer
7.1 No objection
subject to conditions
Bio-diversity Officer
7.2 No objection
subject to conditions
Principal Conservation Advisor
7.3 No objection
subject to conditions.
8.
DEVELOPMENT PLAN
8.1 The key policies and
guidance applying to the site and the associated policies
are:
|
|
Development Plan
|
NPPF
|
Weight to be attributed, with
reference to para.
213 of NPPF
|
|
Sustainable development
principles
|
SALP Policy CP1
CSDPD Policy CS1
|
Para. 11(d) refers to ‘policies
which are most important for determining the
application are out-of- date’. CP1 wording differs to
this.
Furthermore, the PPG states that there is
no need for a policy to directly replicate para. 11.
Consistent (Paras. 7, 8,
11, 12, & 117 - 119)
|
Limited (policy not used in
planning application decision-making)
Full
|
|
Principle
of development
- outside
settlement
|
CSDPD Policy CS2
CSDPD Policy CS9 and BFBLP
‘Saved’ Policy EN8
BFBLP
‘Saved’ Policy H5
|
Consistent (Para. 17 & 117 -119)
Elements are acknowledged to not be fully
consistent (para. 170 a) and b) however the thrust of these policies remains consistent (paras.
78-
79, 103, 104a, 117
&
170)
Generally Consistent (paras. 79, 103, 117,
170, 213)
|
Full
Not fully consistent therefore
not full weight
Limited, but
relevant
|
|
Housing Provision
|
CSDPD Policy CS15
|
Inconsistent – utilises now outdated
evidence base as basis for policy requirements.
|
None (policy not used in
planning application decision-making)
|
|
Design
&
Character
|
CSDPD Policy CS7
BFBLP ‘Saved’ Policy
EN20
|
Consistent (Chapter 12)
“
|
Full
Full
|
|
Trees
&
Landscape
|
CSDPD Policies CS1 & CS7
BFBLP
‘Saved’ Policies EN1, EN2 &
EN20
|
Consistent (paras. 127
& 170) “
|
Full
Full
|
|
Residential Amenity
|
‘Saved’ Policies EN20 &
EN25 of BFBLP
|
Consistent (paras. 127,
170 & 180)
|
Full
|
|
Transport
|
CSDPD
Policies C23
BFBLP ‘Saved’
Policies M8 & M9
|
Consistent (Chapter 9)
“
|
Full
Full
|
|
Drainage
|
CS1 of CSDPD
|
Consistent (paras. 163
& 165)
|
Full
|
|
Biodiversity
|
CSDPD Policies CS1 & CS7
BFBLP
‘Saved’ Policies EN1, EN2 &
EN20
|
Consistent (paras. 170
& 175)
“
|
Full
Full
|
|
SPA
|
SEP
‘Retained’
Policy NRM6
CSDPD Policy CS14 BFBLP
‘Saved’ Policy EN3
|
Consistent (paras. 170,
171,
173, 175, 176,
177) “
“
|
Full
Full Full
|
|
Noise and Pollution (including
Land
Contamination)
|
CSDPD Policy CS1
BFBLP ‘Saved’ Policy
EN25
|
Consistent (paras. 118,
170, 178 & 180)
“
|
Full
Full
|
|
Sustainability of build (Renewable Energy and
Water Use)
|
CSDPD Policies CS10 & 12
|
Consistent (para. 149)
|
Full
|
|
Heritage
|
CSDPD Policies CS1 & CS7
|
Consistent (paras. 189
to 197)
|
Full
|
|
Securing Necessary
Infrastructure
|
CSDPD Policy CS6
|
Consistent (para. 54 to 56, 92 and 94)
|
Full
|
|
Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD):
|
|
|
Character Area Assessments SPD
(2010)
Design SPD (2017)
Parking Standards SPD (2016) Planning
Obligations SPD (2015) Streetscene SPD (2011)
Sustainable Resource Management SPD (2008) Thames
Basin Heaths SPA SPD (2018)
|
|
|
Other publications:
|
|
|
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (2019)
National Planning Policy Guidance (NPPG) (2019)
Bracknell Forest Borough Landscape
Character Assessment (LUC) (2015)
Landscape Sensitivity Appraisal of
Potential Housing and Employment Sites in Bracknell Forest (2018)
(including Executive Summary)
|
|
8.2 In addition, the
Binfield Neighbourhood Plan was adopted in 2016. The relevant
policies from this which are considered consistent with the NPPF
are:
Policy
CO1: High Speed Broadband
Policy
BF1: Infill and Backland Development
Policy
BF2: Protection of Heritage Assets
9. PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS
9.1 The key
issues for consideration are:
(i) Principle of
the Development
(ii)
Impact on the character and appearance of the area
(iii)
Heritage matters
(iv) Impact on
residential amenity
(v) Transport
Implications
(vi) Thames Basin
Heaths SPA
(vii) Biodiversity
(viii) Drainage
(ix)
Community Infrastructure Levy??
(ix) Planning
Balance
i. Principle
of Development
9.1 Section
38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires
that applications for planning permission must be determined in
accordance with the Development Plan, unless material
considerations indicate otherwise, which is supported by the NPPF
(paras. 2 and 12). Policy CP1 of the Site Allocations Local Plan
sets out that a positive approach should be taken to considering
development proposals (which reflects the presumption in favour of
sustainable development set out in the NPPF), and that planning
applications that accord with the development plan for Bracknell
Forest should be approved without delay, unless material
considerations indicate otherwise.
9.2 Core
Strategy Policies CS1 (Sustainable Development) and CS2 (Locational
Principles) are relevant and consistent with the objectives of the
NPPF. In particular, Policy CS2 permits development within defined
settlements.
9.3 The
proposed dwelling would be located outside of a defined settlement
in an area of countryside as designated by the Bracknell Forest
Borough Policies Map. Development in the countryside is contrary to
the provisions in saved BFBLP policies EN8 and H5 which relate to
development on land outside of settlements and new dwellings
outside settlements. This is also contrary to CSDPD Policies CS2
and CS9 (relating to locational principles and development on land
outside of settlements). Policy CS9 of the CSDPD seeks to protect
land from development that would adversely affect the character,
appearance or function of the land. 'Saved' Policy EN8 seeks to
permit development only where it would not adversely affect the
character, appearance or function of the land. 'Saved' Policy H5
seeks to restrict the development of new dwellings unless it can be
demonstrated that it would cause no harm to the character of the
area.
9.4 The
above policies effectively seek a blanket restriction of new
housing in the Countryside. The NPPF at para 170 aims to protect
and enhance valued landscapes and recognises the intrinsic
character and beauty of the countryside, however it is acknowledged
it does not specifically preclude residential development in the
countryside.
9.5 The
Inspector for appeal decision APP/R0335/W/18/3206527 (application
reference 17/01123/OUT) at Beaufort Park found that:
"LP Policies EN8 and H5 and CS Policy CS9, in
expressing that the countryside is to be protected for its own sake
is, in that regard, inconsistent with the National Planning Policy
Framework. As such the weight to be attached to these policies is
reduced. In the absence of any harm, the benefits of this proposal
outweigh the limited conflict with the development
plan."
9.6 The implications of
this appeal decision are that the acceptability of the proposed new
dwelling in the countryside falls to be determined through a
planning balance of the benefit of the proposal against the harm to
the countryside and the character and appearance of the area and
other material planning considerations including the impact on the
Grade II Listed Building.
9.7 In this
case, the proposal would provide an additional dwelling on a
greenfield site. The site is surrounded on all sides by residential
properties and is largely screened from views from the surrounding
area due to the existing Whitehouse Farm Cottage buildings and the
vegetation to the northern boundary.
9.9 While
the Council is able to demonstrate a five year Housing Land Supply
(5.2 years as of 1 April 2020), as set out above this does not
preclude new housing within the countryside. The site is bounded by
residential development and provides a natural infilling between
the development on Murrell Hill Lane and Foxley Lane. While the
developments to the eastern side of Murrell Hill Lane and northern
side of Foxley Lane are within the settlement boundary, development
on the proposed site would not be out of context with the pattern
of development in the area. Furthermore, there are residential
dwellings to the east, west and south of the site and therefore
development on this site would not lead to further spread of
development on to areas of open countryside.
9.10 The site is within the grounds
of White Farm Cottage, which is a Grade II Listed Building. The
acceptability of the principle of development therefore also
depends on the impact on the Listed Building as a material planning
consideration.
9.11 It is therefore concluded that
the principal of infilling with one residential unit is acceptable
in this location, subject to the material planning considerations
set out below.
ii Impact on character and appearance of
area
9.12 CSDPD Policy CS7
states that development will be permitted which builds upon the
local character of the area, provides safe communities and enhances
the local landscape where possible. BFBLP 'Saved' Policy EN20
states that development should be in sympathy with the appearance
and character of the local area. It further states that the design
of the development should promote local character and a sense of
local identity.
9.13 Policy BF1 of the
Binfield Neighbourhood Plan sets out criteria for infill and
backland development, stating that it shall reflect the scale,
mass, height and form of neighbouring properties. It also sets out
that it should not lead to over-development of a site and avoid the
appearance of cramming and should retain historic
buildings.
9.14 It is considered
that there are limited views into the site from both Foxley Lane
and Murrell Hill Lane and that the site is relatively well screened
to the boundaries through existing vegetation as well as by
Whitehouse Farm Cottage itself.
9.15
There is residential development to the north of Foxley Lane and
east of Murrell Hill Lane, which is within the settlement boundary.
However, there is also small-scale residential development to the
east and west of the site. Small scale residential development is
therefore considered to be in keeping with the general character of
the area. The pattern of development in the immediate locality i.e.
on the southern side of Foxley Lane and west of Murrell Hill Lane,
is loose grain and spacious.
9.16 It
is therefore considered that one dwelling on this site respects the
loose pattern of development and would be in keeping with the
character of the area.
9.17
The proposal has been designed as a simple ‘barn’ with
limited window openings and horizontal timber cladding. It is
therefore of simple form, of modest height (7.1m to the ridge) and
understated design which is considered to be in keeping with the
loose urban grain, low density, scale and mass of the surrounding
area. Whilst comments have been received objecting to the mass,
scale, design and ultimately over development of the site, these
were received in response to the original scheme of two suburban
estate type dwellings. Whilst a full re-consultation was undertaken
on the single dwelling scheme, these comments were not withdrawn
and therefore have to be reported. However, it is not considered
that the proposal now would result in over development, the
reduction in height means it is comparable with the neighbouring
properties, and lower than Whitehouse Farm Cottage. The proposal is
therefore considered to reflect the scale, mass and height of
neighbouring properties.
9.18
Objections have been raised regarding the height restrictions
imposed upon the neighbouring property, The Barn, when it was
constructed in the 1980’s.
9.19
The proposal would have a higher ridge height than The Barn of
0.47m, but a lower ridge height than Whitehouse Farm by 1.33m. The
proposal therefore sits between the two buildings. The only
restriction on the height would be due to the impact upon the
settling of the listed building. There is no objection from the
Conservation Consultant and no request to reduce the height further
(the height has been reduced by 0.9m).
9.20 The proposal is therefore
considered to be acceptable and in line with CSDPD Policy CS7,
'Saved' Policy EN20 of the BFBLP and BF1 of BNP.
iii Heritage Matters
9.21 Section 66(1) of the
Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (LBA
1990) provides that when considering whether or not to grant
planning permission for development that affects a listed building
or its setting, the local planning authority (LPA) is required to
have special regard to the desirability of preserving any of the
following:
- The building itself.
- The building's setting.
- Any special architectural or historic
features.
9.22 Working methodically
through the relevant sequence of paragraphs in the NPPF (
paragraphs 193 to 196), in accordance with their terms, is the
approach recognised in Jones v. Mordue and
others[2015] EWCA Civ 1243 at [28] (per Sales LJ) as
giving effect to the statutory regard in Section 66(1).
9.23 The underlying
statutory obligation is that the decision maker must pay
“special regard to the desirability of preserving the
building or its setting”. ‘Preserving’ in
this context means doing no harm. If it is judged that harm to the
heritage asset would arise from the proposed development, the
decision maker must attribute considerable importance and weight to
that harm in the decision, in order to comply with the statutory
duty.
9.24 The proposed site is located
to the west of the Grade II Listed Whitehouse Farm Cottage which
comprises a garden area formed from a former farmyard with a wall
running around it. Whitehouse Farmhouse and Whitehouse Barn are
located to the west of the proposed site. The Whitehouse and the
attached modern house with a barn and Mosscroft are located to the
south the proposed site.
9.25 The Grade II Listed Whitehouse
Farm Cottage was built as a farmhouse in the late 16th century,
altered and extended 17th century and 18th centuries, and restored
in c1980; the entrance (east) front faces onto Murrell Hill
Lane.
9.26 The Listed Building is two
storeys high with an attic and cellar and is built of exposed
timber frame with brick infill under a plain tile gabled roof. The
plan was originally rectangular of two framed bays with a 1 x 2
framed bay extension on south, a pent and stair turret added on
west elevation. It has one large ridge chimney near the centre with
cornice and clay pots and with date 1687 carved into one brick.
There are 19th century and 20th century casement
windows.
9.29 The entrance (east) front
faces Murrell Hill Lane and has a single bay gable on left with
two-light window on first floor and three-light window on ground
floor. There is a two-bay gable on right with two, two-light
windows on first floor, three-light window and two-light window on
ground floor. The small centre section has small two-light window
above 20th century wooden door in plain surround, to the
left of centre.
Setting
of Whitehouse Farm Cottage
9.30 Whitehouse Farm Cottage is
located immediately adjacent to the proposed site’s eastern
boundary at the junction of Foxley Lane with Murrell Hill Lane. The
Listed Building faces onto Murrell Hill Lane with a small front
garden and mature tree planting to the rear garden plot. There is a
great deal of inter-visibility between from the Listed Building to
the proposed site even though a wall has been built to the rear of
the property.
9.31 To the north of Foxley Lane
there is a mix of suburban estate housing dating from the
1980’s through 2000’s. The centre of Binfield village
in general has a mix of architectural styles which are
predominately two-storey domestic housing of red brick, with plain
red clay tiled roofs.
9.32 The amended proposals consist
of a development for 1 dwelling, which would infill the area
between the Grade II Listed Whitehouse Farm Cottage and the newer
dwellings to the west of it; the total area of the site is 0.3ha.
The proposed site is currently an area attached to Whitehouse Farm
Cottage which formed part of its garden and which is bounded by a
hedgerow to the north along Foxley Lane. A wall has been built to
the west of Whitehouse Farm Cottage.
9.33 The design for the proposed
dwelling shows a large, rectangular, 2 storey
‘barn-like’ building with single storey separate
carport.
9.34 The proposed building has a
‘multi-red’ brick ground floor with a first floor clad
in ‘engineered timber’ under a plain tile roof. The
separate single storey car port would have a similar design with
brick and timber cladding.
9.35 The proposed windows would be
powder coated aluminum (PPCA) material throughout, with PPCA
rainwater goods. A gravel entrance would link the dwelling to
Murrell Hill Lane, running alongside the side of Whitehouse Farm
Cottage.
9.36 The ridge height would be
below the height of the existing Whitehouse Farm and c.20m from the
Listed Building at its closest point. The building would be
approximately 8m wide x 15.5m x 8m high with a double garage c.6m x
6m x 5m high.
9.37 A previous iteration under
this application proposed 2, four bedroom houses on this site,
which was considered to detract from the open and rural character
of the setting thereby damaging the significance of the Listed
Building.
9.38 The proposed site is within
the grounds of Whitehouse Farm Cottage, a Grade II Listed Building,
and this part of its setting makes a strong contribution to its
significance. It provides spacious grounds which, in addition
to the garden area, has a semi-rural character which makes the
Listed Building’s former historic function as the centre of
an agricultural land-holding, more legible.
9.39 The proposed development is
for 1 house, which whilst relatively large, would be seen as a more
natural and less cramped development of the available land within
the site. The footprint of the proposed building has been
restricted and regularised to a more vernacular and
‘barn-like’ appearance and the separate single storey
car port has reduced the appearance of multiple
‘extensions’. The reduction of paved areas and use of
gravel for the driveway further reduces the suburbanising
appearance of the building.
9.40 Based on the design and the
reduction in the number of proposed dwellings and a design more
sympathetic to the character of the Listed Building, there would be
‘less than substantial harm’ as defined in the NPPF, to
the Listed Building from development within the setting. Within the
category of ‘less than substantial harm’, the harm
would be of a low order within that category.
9.41 There would therefore no
longer be an objection in principle to the proposed development,
although any harm must be given ‘great weight’ in the
decision making process (Paragraph 193 of the NPPF) Great
weight should be given to the asset’s conservation , with any
harm weighed against the public benefits of the proposal, including
securing its optimum viable use (para. 196).
9.42 Conditions are therefore
recommended to control the external materials of the proposal to
ensure that they are sympathetic to the settling of the Listed
Building.
iv. Residential
Amenity
9.43 Saved Policy EN20, criterion
vii states that new development should not adversely affect the
amenities of neighbouring residents.
9.44 The nearest residential
dwellings are The Barn, located to the west; Whitehouse Farm
Cottage, located to the east and Moss Croft to the
south.
9.45 The Council’s Design SPD
provides guidance on what are considered acceptable distances
between rear facing windows to secure acceptable levels of privacy.
Para. 3.9.31 of this document states that;
‘For two storey houses a minimum back to back
distance of 22m between facing windows is accepted as providing a
reasonable degree of privacy for the occupants of both
dwellings’.
9.46 It goes on to state that;
‘overlooking impacts can be mitigated by oblique siting
relationships…’
9.47 Through the planning process,
a number of windows have been removed from the plans and some
replaced with high level roof lights, where natural light is
required to a room.
9.48 Whitehouse Farm Cottage is
located to the East with an elevation to elevation distance of 20m
at the nearest point, increasing to 24m. There are no first-floor
windows proposed on the eastern elevation of the proposal which
would directly face the rear elevation of Whitehouse Farm
Cottage. Views from the ground floor windows would be
obscured by the 1.8m wall between the two properties.
9.49 There is an outbuilding within
the grounds of Whitehouse Farm Cottage, which does not have a
separate address point, parking or separate curtilage. It is
therefore assumed that this is part of Whitehouse Farm. The
distance to this building is 22m, and therefore is considered to be
an acceptable relationship.
9.50 The Barn is located to the
west of the site. The property has a side facing bedroom window on
its eastern elevation which would be approximately 17m from the
nearest window to the rear of the proposal. However, there would be
an acute angle of approximately 20 deg. Given this it is considered
that this relationship is at such an angle as to reduce overlooking
between windows significantly, and therefore is considered to be an
acceptable relationship.
9.51 This side bedroom window of
The Barn would overlook the private rear amenity patio area of the
proposed dwelling. Whilst this relationship is not ideal, there are
mitigating circumstances in this instance. There are other areas
close to the proposed dwelling which cannot be overlooked and
therefore can be private, and future residents will occupy the
proposal aware of the existing situation and therefore will have an
element of choice in the situation. These are not considered
sufficient grounds upon which to refuse the application.
9.52 Moss Croft is located to the
south at a distance in excess of 22m and therefore it is not
considered that the proposal would detrimentally affect the
residents of this dwelling.
9.53 As the relationship between
the application site and neighbouring properties could result in a
detrimental effect in amenities should other window openings be
inserted, permitted development rights for the insertion of new
window openings are proposed to be removed by condition. Subject to
the implementation of the condition to prevent the insertion of new
window opernings, the proposal would not detrimentally affect the
amenities of neighbouring residents sufficiently to warrant a
refusal of planning permission. The proposal is considered to
comply with ‘saved’ Policy EN20 iv) of the
BFBLP.
v. Transport
Implications
9.54 The site is located on land
that fronts both Foxley Lane and Murrell Hill Lane. Foxley Lane is
subject to a 30mph speed limit at this stretch of the
road.
9.55 The proposal to serve one
dwelling off Murrell Hill Lane utilises a historic field gate
access. Murrell Hill Lane appears to be subject to national speed
limit due to the lack of any formal system of street lighting and
no formal signage. However, speeds are not expected to that
high due to the varying width of the road and only a limited number
of properties being served off this half of the lane. A submitted
speed survey confirmed this and also counted the number of daily
movements along the road. This was found not to be a significant
number, which is to be expected for the amount of properties served
off this half of the Murrell Hill Lane.
9.56 The scheme will add about 6
movements per day to Murrell Hill Lane with around 1 movement
expected in each of the peak hours. Again, this is not considered
to be significant.
9.57 The existing access is very
informal but sightlines from it when exiting are reasonable. The
existing field gate access will be periodically used and with the
introduction of a new dwelling the intensity of use will
increase.
9.58 In relation to the access
arrangements for the site and the adjacent driveway the changes
made have addressed concerns raised and the Highway Authority is
content with the proposal in principle but details of the exact
design and drainage for the access will need to be agreed by a
pre-commencement condition as the access (even in a temporary form)
will need to be in place for the development to safely be
constructed.
9.59 The proposed car port is
slightly below the expected width, however, there do not appear to
be any internal walls (just pillars) and thus access between parked
cars will be easier. There is also space within the site to
accommodate further parking and turning and as such there is no
objection with regard to off street parking provision.
9.60 In conclusion subject to
relevant conditions to secure details of the site access, secure
cycle parking, gates set back, site organisation and retention of
the carport for parking the proposal is considered not to result in
a highway danger, provides adequate off-street parking and
accordingly complies with Policy CS23 of the CSDPD and
‘saved’ Policy M9 of the BFBLP.
vi Thames Basin Heath
SPA
9.61 The Council, in
consultation with Natural England, has formed the view that any net
increase in residential development between 400m and 5km
straight-line distance from the Thames Basin Heath Special
Protection Area (SPA) is likely to have a significant effect on the
integrity of the SPA, either alone or in-combination with other
plans or projects. An Appropriate Assessment has been carried out
including mitigation requirements.
9.62 This site is located
approximately 4.6 km from the boundary of the SPA and therefore is
likely to result in an adverse effect on the SPA, unless it is
carried out together with appropriate avoidance and mitigation
measures.
9.63 On commencement of
the development, a contribution (calculated on a per-bedroom basis)
is to be paid to the Council towards the cost of measures to avoid
and mitigate against the effect upon the Thames Basin Heaths SPA,
as set out in the Council's Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection
Area Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). The strategy is for
relevant developments to make financial contributions towards the
provision of Suitable Alternative Natural Greenspaces (SANGs) in
perpetuity as an alternative recreational location to the SPA and
financial contributions towards Strategic Access Management and
Monitoring (SAMM) measures. The Council will also make a
contribution towards SANG enhancement works through Community
Infrastructure Levy (CIL) payments whether or not this development
is liable to CIL.
9.64 In this instance, the
development would result in a net increase of a single 4-bedroom dwellingwhich results in
a total SANG contribution of £7,645.
9.65 The development is
required to make a contribution towards Strategic Access Management
and Monitoring (SAMM) which will is also calculated on a per
bedroom basis. Taking account of the per bedroom contributions this
results in a total SAMM contribution of £807.
9.66 The total SPA related
financial contribution for this proposal is £8,452 The
applicant must agree to enter into a S106 agreement to secure this
contribution and a restriction on the occupation of each dwelling
until the Council has confirmed that open space enhancement works
to a SANG is completed. Subject to the completion of the S106
agreement, the proposal would not lead to an adverse effect on the
integrity of the SPA and would comply with SEP Saved Policy NRM6,
Saved policy EN3 of the BFBLP and CS14 of CSDPD, the Thames Basin
Heaths Special Protection Area SPD and the NPPF.
vii
Biodiversity
9.67 The Ecological Appraisal has
identified the pond and boundary vegetation as being of local value
for biodiversity. In addition, the site is likely to support some
grass snakes, breeding birds, foraging bats and hedgehogs. The
report does consider the potential for Great Crested Newts (GCN)
but concludes their absence on the basis of pond condition and a
negative eDNA result. However, this species is known to exist in
meta-populations that do not occupy all ponds simultaneously. GCN
are prevalent in the surrounding area and the pond on the site
could be used in future years depending on its
management.
9.68 The recommendations of the
report are basic and the proposed boundary and landscaping plan
lacks detail to demonstrate that biodiversity would be protected
and enhanced. Annotations have been made on the plan to include
areas of wildflower meadow and native shrubs to provide replacement
habitat for reptiles and a range of biodiversity.
9.69 However, there is no objection
raised from the biodiversity officer providing conditions are
imposed to secure, protect and enhance biodiversity in line with
policies CS1 and CS7.
viii Drainage
9.70 Objections have been received
in relation to drainage and surface water flooding which occurs
within the area.
9.71 The site is not within the
flood zones 2 or 3 as defined by the Environment Agency and
therefore there is no statutory reason to request a Flood Risk
Assessment (FRA). In accordance with the council procedures, there
is no requirement to consult with the Lead Local Flood
Authority.
9.72 In light of the objections the
Council’s Engineer (Flood Risk and Drainage) has reviewed the
drawings. It is recognised that the area suffers from
flooding caused by surface water run-off, in part due to the
predominant clay soil in the area and limited or slow infiltration.
The Council’s Engineer noted the large amount of space around
the proposed dwelling and proposed gravel driveway, both of which
will assist the surface water drainage. It is requested that the
applicants are informed of the poor infiltration and therefore in
addition to the standard SuDs condition, an informative is
included.
ix. Community
Infrastructure Levy
9.73 Bracknell Forest
Council introduced charging for its Community Infrastructure Levy
(CIL) on 6th April 2015. CIL is applied as a charge on each square
metre of new development. The amount payable varies depending on
the location of the development within the Borough and the type of
development.
9.74 CIL applies to
any new build (except outline applications and some reserved
matters applications that leave some reserved matters still to be
submitted) including new build that involves the creation of
additional dwellings.
9.75 The site lies within the charging zone
of the Northern Parishes. The proposal is CIL liable.
x. Planning
Balance
9.76 The policies of
the development plan most relevant to this application should be
considered up to date for the purposes of para. 11 of the NPPF and
the application should be determined on the basis of a
‘straight’ planning balance, i.e. in accordance with
the development plan unless material considerations dictate
otherwise. Any conflict with the policies within the development
plan should be given appropriate weight according to their
consistency with the NPPF.
9.77 In this instance
the application proposes new residential development within the
countryside, the principle of which is contrary to the development
plan. However, due to the reduced conformity these policies
have with the NPPF, as explained above, reduced weight is
attributed to these polices. The proposal is considered to
replicate the pattern of development around the site, which is a
lone greenfield site sandwiched between developed plots and well
screened by existing vegetation and built form. It is therefore not
considered that the proposal would harm the character and
appearance of the site. It is therefore concluded that the proposal
does not result in a detrimental impact upon the character of the
area and would maintain the intrinsic beauty of the
countryside.
9.78 The proposal
would affect the setting of Whitehouse Farm Cottage a Grade II
Listed Building. It was concluded that this would result in
‘less than substantial harm’ to the significance
of the Listed Building, from development within the setting. Within
the category of ‘less than substantial harm’, the harm
would be of a low order. However, and in accordance with Paragraph
193 of the NPPF, any harm must be afforded ‘great
weight’ to the heritage asset’s conservation in the
decision-making process. Paragraph 196 goes on to say that where a
development proposed would lead to less than substantial harm, as
in this case, the harm should be weighed against the public
benefits.
9.79 In this case the
benefits would be the additional dwelling and contribution to the
Council’s housing land supply, and associated social and
economic benefits that brings.
9.80 The proposal
would result in an additional dwelling which would contribute to
the Local Authority’s 5 year Housing Land Supply (HLS). It is
the government objective to significantly boost housing supply and
as such the contribution towards the HLS carries significant weight
in favour of the proposal. Additional housing also brings
associated social and economic benefits including creation of jobs
and input into the local economy, and together they are considered
to outweigh the less than substantial harm to the significance of
the designated heritage asset.
9.81 In light of this
assessment, the application is considered to be acceptable in terms
of highway safety, character and appearance of the area and
amenities of neighbouring properties. The low order of harm
identified to the setting of the listed building is considered to
be outweighed by the contribution to the housing land supply and
other associated public benefits. Subject to the completion of the
S106 agreement to secure SPA mitigation, and relevant conditions
the application is therefore recommended for approval.
11.
RECOMMENDATION
Following the completion of
planning obligation(s) under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990
relating to the following measure:
·
avoid and mitigate the impact of residential development upon the
Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (SPA);
that the Head of
Planning be authorised to APPROVE the application subject to the
following conditions, amended, added to or deleted as the Head of
Planning considers necessary:-
01. The development
hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three
years from the date of this permission.
REASON: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country
Planning Act 1990.
02. The
development shall be carried out in accordance with the following
plans and details received by the Local Planning
Authority:
Site location plan (018456-90 Rev. C) received 11.01.21
Proposed block plan (108456-135 Rev. B) Received
11.01.21
Proposed boundary and landscaping plan (108456-195 Rev. D) received
11.01.21
Proposed elevations (108456-253 Rev B) received 21.03.21
Proposed floor plans (108456-254 Rev C) received
21.03.21
Proposed site plan (108456-190 Rev. E) received 31.03.21
Car barn and cycle store (108456-1000) received
06.005.21
REASON: To ensure that the development is carried
out only as approved by the Local Planning Authority.
03. The
following, shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the
Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of
development:
a) Sample panel of all facing brickwork which demonstrates the
brick type, colour, texture, face bond, mortar mix and pointing, to
be erected on site and maintained there during the course of
construction;
b) Samples and/or manufacturer's details of the roof
materials;
c) Plan and elevation drawings, with materials annotated, of all
new windows and window openings (including surrounds) at a minimum
scale of 1:10;
d). Plan and section drawings, with materials annotated, of all new
doors at a minimum scale of 1:10;
The relevant part of the works shall not be carried out otherwise
than in accordance with the details thus approved.
REASON: In order to safeguard the special architectural and
historic interest of the neighbouring building.
[Relevant policy: CSDPD CS1, CS7, BFBLP, EN20]
04.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning
(General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (or any order
revoking and re-enacting that order with or without modification)
no enlargement, addition, improvement or other alteration permitted
by Classes A, B, C, D and E of Part 1 of the Second Schedule of the
2015 Order shall be carried out.
REASON: To safeguard the setting of the adjacent listed building
and the residential and visual amenities of the occupiers and
adjoining properties.
[Relevant Policies: CSDPD, CS1, CS7, BFBLP EN20]
05. The
development shall not be begun until an Energy Demand Assessment
has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. This shall demonstrate that a proportion of the
development's energy requirements will be provided from on-site
renewable energy production (which proportion shall be at least
10%). The buildings thereafter constructed by the carrying
out of the development shall be in accordance with the approved
assessment and retained in accordance therewith.
REASON: In the interests of the sustainability and the efficient
use of resources.
[Relevant Plans and Policies: CSDPD Policy CS12]
06. The
development shall not be begun until a Sustainability Statement
covering water efficiency aimed at achieving an average water use
in new dwellings of 110 litres/person/day, has been submitted to,
and agreed in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The
development shall be implemented in accordance with the
Sustainability Statement, as approved, and retained as such
thereafter.
REASON: In the interests of sustainability and the efficient use of
resources.
[Relevant Policy: Core Strategy DPD CS10]
07. The
development shall incorporate surface water drainage that is SuDS
compliant and in accordance with DEFRA "Sustainable Drainage
Systems - Non-statutory technical standards for sustainable
drainage systems" (March 2015). The surface water drainage
works shall be completed before occupation of the
dwellings/buildings hereby permitted and shall be operated and
maintained as such thereafter.
REASON: To prevent increased risk of flooding, to improve and
protect water quality and ensure future maintenance of the surface
water drainage scheme.
[Relevant Policies: CSDPD CS1, BFBLP EN25]
08. All
ecological measures and/or works shall be carried out in accordance
with the details contained in QUANTS Ecological Appraisal and Great
Crested Newt eDNA Survey May 2020 as already submitted with the
planning application
REASON: In the interest of bio-diversity.
[Relevant Policy: CSDPD CS1, CS7, BFBLP EN1, EN2, EN20]
09. No
development shall commence until a scheme for the provision of
biodiversity enhancements (not mitigation), including a plan or
drawing showing the location of these enhancements, has been
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority.
REASON: In the interest of bio-diversity.
[Relevant Policy: CSDPD CS1, CS7, BFBLP EN1, EN2, EN20]
10. An
ecological site inspection report shall be submitted prior to
occupation of any dwelling hereby approved to confirm that the
works required by conditions 8 and 9 above have been
undertaken.
REASON: In the interest of bio-diversity.
[Relevant Policy: CSDPD CS1, CS7, BFBLP EN1, EN2, EN20]
11.
Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning
(General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 (as amended)
or any Order revoking and re-enacting that order, no external
lighting shall be installed on the site or affixed to any buildings
on the site except in accordance with details set out in a lighting
design strategy for biodiversity that has first been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The
strategy shall:
a) identify those
area/features on site that are particularly sensitive for bats and
that are likely to cause disturbance in or around their breeding
sites and resting places or along important routes used to access
key areas of their territory, for example, for foraging;
and
b) show how and where
external lighting will be installed (through the provision of
appropriate lighting contour plans and technical specifications) so
that it can be clearly demonstrated that areas to be lit will not
disturb or prevent bats using their territory or having access to
their breeding sites and resting places.
All external lighting shall be installed in accordance with the
specifications and locations set out in the strategy prior to the
occupation of the dwelling, and these shall be maintained
thereafter in accordance with the strategy. Under no circumstances
should any other external lighting be installed.
REASON: In the interest of bio-diversity.
[Relevant Policy: CSDPD CS1, CS7, BFBLP EN1, EN2, EN20]
12.
Notwithstanding the submitted plans the dwelling hereby
permitted shall not be occupied until hard and soft landscaping,
including boundary treatments and other means of enclosure, has
been provided for that dwelling in accordance with a scheme
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning
Authority. The scheme shall include a 3 year post planting
maintenance schedule.
All planting comprised in the soft landscaping works shall be
carried out in accordance with British Standard 4428:1989 'Code Of
practice For General Landscape Operations' or any subsequent
revision and completed in full accordance with the approved
scheme.
All trees and other plants included within the approved details
shall be healthy, well- formed specimens of a minimum quality that
is compatible with British Standard 3936:1992 (Part 1)
'Specifications For Trees & Shrubs' and British Standard 4043
(where applicable) or any subsequent revision.
Any trees or other plants which within a period of 5 years from the
completion of the development, die, are removed, uprooted, are
significantly damaged, become diseased or deformed, shall be
replaced during the next planting season (1st October to 31st March
inclusive) with others of the same size, species and quality as
approved.
REASON: In the interest of bio-diversity.
[Relevant Policy: CSDPD CS1, CS7, BFBLP EN1, EN2, EN20]
13. No
development (other than the construction of the access) shall take
place until the access has been constructed in accordance with the
details to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local
Planning Authority.
REASON: In the interests of highway safety.
[Relevant Policies: Core Strategy DPD CS23]
14. Before any
other part of the development hereby permitted is commenced, the
proposed vehicular access shall be formed and provided with
visibility splays, in accordance with details as shown on the
approved plans. The land within the visibility splays shall
be cleared of any obstruction exceeding 0.6 metres in height
measured from the surface of the adjacent carriageway and
maintained clear if any obstruction exceeding 0.6 metres in height
at all times.
REASON: In the interests of highway safety.
[Relevant Policies: Core Strategy DPD CS23]
15. The
dwelling shall not be occupied until the associated vehicle parking
and turning space has been surfaced and provided in
accordance with the approved drawing. The spaces shall thereafter
be kept available for parking at all times.
REASON: To ensure that the development is provided with adequate
car parking to prevent the likelihood of on-street car parking
which would be a danger to other road users.
[Relevant Policies: BFBLP M9, Core Strategy DPD CS23]
16.
Notwithstanding the approved plans, any gates provided shall open
away from the highway and be set back a distance of at least 10
metres from the edge of the carriageway of the adjoining
highway.
REASON: In the interests of highway safety.
[Relevant Policies: Core Strategy DPD CS23]
17. No
development shall take place until a scheme has been submitted to
and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, to
accommodate:
(a) Parking of vehicles
of site personnel, operatives and visitors
(b) Loading and unloading
of plant and vehicles
(c) Storage of plant and
materials used in constructing the development
(d) Wheel cleaning
facilities
(e) Temporary portacabins
and welfare for site operatives
and each facility shall be retained throughout the course of
construction of the development, free from any impediment to its
designated use. No other areas on the site, other than those
in the approved scheme shall be used for the purposes listed (a) to
(e) above.
REASON: In the interests of amenity and road safety.
In the event of the S106 planning obligations not being completed
by 22 July 2021 , the Head of Planning be authorised to extend this
period or REFUSE the application on the grounds of:-
1. The occupants of
the development would put extra pressure on the Thames Basin Heaths
Special Protection Area and the proposal would not satisfactorily
mitigate its impacts in this respect. In the absence of a
planning obligation to secure suitable avoidance and mitigation
measures and access management monitoring arrangements, in terms
that are satisfactory to the Local Planning Authority, the proposal
would be contrary to Policy NRM6 of the South East Plan, Policy EN3
of the Bracknell Forest Borough Local Plan, Policy CS14 of the Core
Strategy Development Plan Document and the Thames Basin Heaths
Special Protection Area Avoidance and Mitigation Supplementary
Planning Document (2018).
Informative(s)
01. The Local Planning
Authority has acted positively and proactively in determining this
application by identifying matters of concern within the
application (as originally submitted) and negotiating, with the
Applicant, acceptable amendments to the proposal to address those
concerns. As a result, the Local Planning Authority has been
able to grant planning permission for an acceptable proposal, in
accordance with the presumption in favour of sustainable
development, as set out within the National Planning Policy
Framework.
02. The applicant is
advised that the following conditions require discharging prior to
commencement of development:
03. Materials
05. Energy Demand
06. Sustainability Statement.
09. Ecology Enhancements
13. Access
14. Visibility Splays
17. Site organization
The following conditions require discharge prior to the occupation
of the dwellings hereby approved:
10. Ecology Site Inspection Report
12. Landscaping
15. Surfacing
No details are required to be submitted in relation to the
following conditions; however they are required to be complied
with:
01. Time limit
02. Approved plans
04. Removal of Permitted Development Rights
07. SuD’s
08. Ecology
11. No lighting
16. Gates set back.
03. The Highways and
Transport Section should be contacted at Time Square, Market
Street, Bracknell, RG12 1JD, telephone 01344 352000 or via email at
Highways.Transport@bracknell-forest.gov.uk , to agree the access
construction details and to grant a licence before any work is
carried out within the highway. A formal application should be made
allowing at least 12 weeks prior to when works are required
to
allow for processing of the application, agreement of the details
and securing the appropriate agreements (S278) and licences to
undertake the work. Any work carried out on the public highway
without proper consent from the Highway Authority could be subject
to prosecution and fines related to the extent of work carried
out.
04. Please note the
clay soil may result in surface water infiltration rates being low.
Site specific drainage solutions may be required.
