Agenda item

Proposal:	Erection of 1 dwelling within the curtilage of public house
Location:	The Coach, Worlds End, Beedon
Applicant:	Newperties Ltd
Recommendation:	The Head of Development and Planning be authorised to GRANT planning permission

 

(Councillor Hilary Cole declared a personal interest in Agenda Item (4)3 by virtue of the fact that she lived in the area. As her interest was personal and not prejudicial or a disclosable pecuniary interest, she determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.)

(Councillor Clive Hooker declared a personal interest in Agenda Item (4)3 by virtue of the fact that he was Ward Member for Downlands. As his interest was personal and not prejudicial or a disclosable pecuniary interest, he determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.)

(Councillor Hooker opened the item by explaining that he was both the Ward Member for the application and Chairman of the Committee. He therefore decided that in the circumstances, he would stand down from the Chair for the hearing of this application and Councillor Tony Vickers, as Vice-Chair, would conduct the meeting for Agenda Item (4)3. This was agreed by the Members of the Committee.)

(Councillor Vickers in the Chair)

The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(3)) concerning Planning Application 19/01690/FULD in respect of the erection of one dwelling within the curtilage of a public house.

In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, Mr David Johnston, Beedon Parish Council representative, Mr Giles Rainy Brown, objector, and Ms Clara Millar (Turley) and Ms Sara Dutfield (Turley), agent, addressed the Committee on this application.

1.     Sian Cutts introduced the report to Members, which took account of all the relevant policy considerations and other material considerations. In conclusion the report detailed that the proposal was acceptable and a conditional approval was justifiable.

2.     The Chairman thanked the planning officer for their presentation and invited the Highways officer to comment. Paul Goddard drew the Committees attention to page 38 of the report. The site was an existing public house and the visibility for vehicles accessing the car park would be unchanged. The footway would be widened to 1.5m, but the access remained at 4.8m wide, allowing two cars to pass. The current number of 19 parking spaces would be reduce to 17. The development would be provided with three spaces and was therefore compliant. He had no objection to the scheme.

3.     Mr Johnston in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         There were concerns about the safety of the patrons entering and leaving the pub.

·         The access was too narrow for vehicles to pass each other and pedestrians safely.

·         A previous, rejected application for two, three-bedroomed houses had been refused, it was therefore difficult to understand how this proposal was recommended for approval as there was not much difference between the footprints of the plans.

·         The nearness of the boundary wall, would mean that the light levels of the adjoining property would be much reduced.

·         If the Committee were minded to approve the application, he asked that the area be ring-fenced during construction.

4.     Mr Rainy Brown in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·          The elevations in the plans were inaccurate.

·         The design had no regard for rural characteristics and the relationship with the Old Stores Cottage.

·         There was no need for a dwelling on this site. The requirement for 2,000 homes in the area had already been met and a town house would make no positive contribution to the housing stock.

·         Pedestrian safety was impacted and compounded by the existing wall.

·         The presence of commercial vehicles and the reduced access was unsafe.

·         The design would mean the loss of amenity of a large pub garden.

·         The pub was in the last throws of existence and this scheme would not ensure its continuance.

·         There was a history of flooding on the site.

·         The impact on the 300 year old, Old Stores Cottage would be detrimental. The design meant that the wall was even closer than the previously rejected proposal. The cottage would suffer from loss of light and an unacceptable level of overshadowing.

·         The privacy of the bathroom and landing areas in the cottage would be compromised.

·         This proposal should be rejected for the same grounds as the previous application, as it was of a similar size. It was ethically and morally indefensible to build a property of this scale in this site.

5.     Councillor Hilary Cole noted that there was a tree outside the bathroom and wondered if this affected the light levels in the property. Mr Rainy Brown explained that the tree had been cut back to allow light into the bathroom.

6.     Councillor Cole sought clarification as to over-looking, as there were no first floor windows in the proposed design. Mr Rainy Brown expounded that there were two dormer windows that had sight lines into the Old Stores Cottage that would overlook the bathroom landing and study. The bathroom window was left open for venting purposes to reduce mould. The proposed garage wall would be within 1.25m of his property wall.

7.     Councillor Adrian Abbs queried what was currently stopping people looking into the bathroom. Mr Rainy Brown explained that there was a six foot wall and oil storage tank. Councillor Abbs further clarified that there was therefore no direct line of sight.

8.     Ms Millar in addressing the Committee raised the following points:

·         The development complied with the Local Plan Policies. The previous application had been refused, and they had worked hard with planning officers to rectify the reasons for refusal on this plan. The key changes had been to reduce the development to a single dwelling and increase the width of the pavement.

·         She acknowledged concerns about drainage and access and there would be no increase in the volume of service water run-off.

·         There were concerns over the future of The Coach Pub, as it was not currently economically viable. The capital funds released by this scheme would be used to make the business thrive, as had happened with a previous project in Essex.

9.     Councillor Cole asked how the application was going to help the pub. Ms Millar explained that the outdoor space would be improved, the pub would be connected to mains drainage, the gas tank would be re-located, the interior of the pub would be refreshed, the lay-out of the parking spaces would be improved and the living conditions within the pub would be improved.

10.  Councillor Abbs queried how much of the footpath would be lost. Ms Millar confirmed that it would be 0.6m. Councillor Abbs further asked officers what the normal width of a footpath would be. Paul Goddard explained that it was 1.15m and that the footway to the car park at the rear was a designated strip. Councillor Abbs posited his concern about the safety of mixing pedestrians and vehicles. Paul Goddard observed that there was a 4.8m shared surface that was acceptable from the officer’s point of view.

11.  Councillor Cole noted that the objector had made reference to a loss of light. She enquired as to whether officers had carried out light angle projections and if there would be no loss of light. Sian Cutts confirmed that officers had made the calculations. The bathroom window was obscure glazed and a 45 degree sight line from the proposed property would cover a view of the garden, as the house would be set back.

12.  Councillor Claire Rowles asked for assurance that an emergency vehicle would be able to fit through the access and be able to turn. Paul Goddard confirmed that 4.8m gave enough room for a car and a larger vehicle to pass. He added that a larger vehicle would have to reverse into the space, but that this was the existing situation, and it was therefore difficult to raise and objection.

13.  Councillor Howard Woollaston asked officers to clarify the area of concern regarding the overlooking of the bathroom and study. Derek Carnegie answered that officers did not consider there was a scale of damage that would mean the application should be rejected. The scheme had been designed to minimise any impact.

14.  Councillor Tony Vickers queried whether the pub could be accessed safely from the car park. Derek Carnegie concurred that it would be sensible to have access to the garden from the car park, and that this could be clarified in later plans. The car park was already in place and serving the pub. This proposal did not decrease safety from the existing situation.

15.  Councillor Cole observed that she had lived in the area for a number of years and had used The Coach pub. There had been a lot of demise of pubs in the area and she was keen to support the local economy. If this was to be achieved by building a house in the garden, then this was pragmatically acceptable. Although there was no settlement boundary, this property was in the middle of the village and there were new modern houses around. Whilst she understood the impact on residents and car parking, the parking situation already existed and would not be negatively impacted.

16.  Councillor Cole proposed that the Committee accept officer’s recommendation and grant planning permission. The proposal was seconded by Councillor Woollaston.

17.  Councillor Abbs elucidated that he was left cold by the mixing of footpaths and cars. As the eaves overhang the wall, cars would not drive near the wall and therefore 4.8m was not in reality the space available. This was an existing problem. There was an historic cottage which would have a view of a blank wall. However, he could not find any planning grounds to oppose the application.

18.  The Chairman invited the Committee to vote on the proposal by Councillor Cole as seconded by Councillor Woollaston, which was carried at the vote with two abstentions.

RESOLVED that the Head of Development and Planning be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the following conditions:

Conditions

1.     Commencement of development

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 (as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004).

2.     Approved plans

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings and other documents listed below:

                      I.        Proposed Location Plan Drawing No PL01 received on  25^th June 2019;

                    II.        Proposed Site Plan Drawing no PL03 Rev E received on 5^th November 2019;

                   III.        Proposed Floor Plans Drawing No PL04 Rev C received on 5th November 2019;

                  IV.        Proposed Roof Plan Drawing No PL05 Rev B received on 5th November 2019;

                   V.        Proposed East & West Elevations Drawing No PL06 Rev C received on 5th November 2019;

                  VI.        Proposed North & South Elevations Drawing No PL07 Rev C received on 5th November 2019;

                 VII.        Swept Path Analysis Drawing No 1809064-TK05 Rev A received on 5th November 2019;

               VIII.        Planning Statement prepared by Turley received on 15^th July 2019;

                  IX.        Arboricultural Report prepared by Duckworths Arboriculture dated 14^th June 2019 reference SCD 05256/2019 received on 15^th July 2019;

                   X.        Extended Phase 1 Ecological Assessment prepared by Pro Vision dated March 2018 received on 18^th September 2019;

                  XI.        Drainage and Flood Risk Appraisal prepared by Motion dated 17^th September 2019 received on 18^th September 2019; and

                 XII.        Heritage Statement and Desk-based Archaeological Assessment of Development Proposals prepared by Keevil Heritage Ltd dated September 2019, received on 25^th September 2019.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interest of proper planning.

3.     Materials

No development shall take place above foundation slab level, until a schedule of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the dwelling and hard surfaced areas hereby permitted has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  This condition shall apply irrespective of any indications as to these matters which have been detailed in the current application.  Samples of the materials shall be made available for inspection on request. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved materials.

Reason: To ensure that the external materials are visually attractive and respond to local character.  This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2019), Policies CS14 and CS19 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), and Policy C3 of the Housing Site Allocations DPD (2006-2026) and Supplementary Planning Document Quality Design (June 2006).

4.     Electric vehicle charging point

No development shall take place above foundation slab level, until details an electric vehicle charging point has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The dwelling shall not be occupied until an electric vehicle charging point has been provided in accordance with the approved drawings. The charging point shall thereafter be retained and kept available for the potential use of an electric car.

Reason: To promote the use of electric vehicle.  This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (February 2019), Policies CS13 and CS14 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), Policy P1 of the Housing Site Allocation DPD and Policy TRANS1 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007).

5.     Construction Method Statement

No development shall take place until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.  The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.  The statement shall provide for:

a)    The parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors

b)    Loading and unloading of plant and materials

c)    Storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development

d)    The erection and maintenance of security hoarding including decorative displays and facilities for public viewing

e)    Wheel washing facilities

f)     Measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction

g)    A scheme for recycling/disposing of waste resulting from demolition and construction works

Reason: To safeguard the amenity of adjoining land uses and occupiers and in the interests of highway safety.  This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2019) Policies CS5 and CS13 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), Policy TRANS 1 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007).

A pre-commencement condition is required as the details refer to the construction phase of the development and insufficient information was submitted with the application.

6.     Provision of footway

No dwelling shall be occupied until the 1.5 metre wide footway is provided in accordance with the approved drawing (Drawing No PL03 Rev E and No 1809064-TK05 Rev A received on 5th November 2019)  and any statutory undertaker's equipment or street furniture located in the position of this footway has been re-sited to provide an unobstructed footway.

Reason: In the interest of road safety and to ensure adequate and unobstructed provision for pedestrians. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2019) and Policy CS13 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026).

7.     Surfacing arrangements

No development shall take place above foundation slab level until details of the surfacing arrangements for the vehicular accesses to the highway have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall ensure that bonded material is used across the entire width of the accesses for a distance of 3 metres measured back from the carriageway edge. Thereafter the surfacing arrangements shall be constructed in accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To avoid migration of loose material onto the highway in the interest of road safety. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2019) and Policy CS13 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026).

8.     Vehicle parking and turning

No dwelling shall be occupied until the vehicle parking and turning space have been surfaced, marked out and provided in accordance with the approved plans.  The parking and turning spaces shall thereafter be kept available for parking (of private motor cars and/or light goods vehicles) at all times.

Reason: To ensure the development is provided with adequate parking facilities, in order to reduce the likelihood of roadside parking that would adversely affect road safety and the flow of traffic.  This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2019), Policy CS13 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), Policy TRANS1 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007) and Policy P1 of the Housing Site Allocations DPD (2006-2026).

9.     Cycle storage

No dwelling shall be occupied until the cycle parking has been provided in accordance with the approved drawings and this area shall thereafter be kept available for the parking of cycles at all times.

Reason: To ensure the development reduces reliance on private motor vehicles and assists with the parking, storage and security of cycles.  This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2019), Policy CS13 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), Policy TRANS1 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007) and Policy P1 of the Housing Site Allocations DPD (2006-2026).

10.  Protective fencing

Protective fencing shall be implemented and retained intact for the duration of the development in accordance with the tree and landscape protection scheme identified on approved drawing Tree Protection Plan. Within the fenced areas, there shall be no excavations, storage of materials or machinery, parking of vehicles or fires.

Reason: To ensure the enhancement of the development by the retention of existing trees and natural features during the construction phase in accordance with the objectives of  the National Planning Policy Framework (2019) and Policies CS14, CS18 and CS19 of West Berkshire Core Strategy 2006-2026.

11.  Arboricultural watching brief

No development shall take place (including site clearance and any other preparatory works) until the applicant has secured the implementation of an arboricultural watching brief in accordance with a written scheme of site monitoring, which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the enhancement of the development by the retention of existing trees and natural features during the construction phase in accordance with the objectives of the NPPF and Policies CS14, CS18 and CS19 of West Berkshire Core Strategy 2006-2026.

A pre-commencement condition is required as the details refer to the construction phase of the development and insufficient information was submitted with the application.

12.  Tree Protection Plan

No trees, shrubs or hedges shown as being retained on tree protection plan shall be pruned, cut back, felled, wilfully damaged or destroyed in any way without the prior consent of the local planning authority.  Any trees, shrubs or hedges felled, removed or destroyed, or any that dies, become seriously damaged or diseased within five years from completion of the approved development, shall be replaced with the same species in the next planting season unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent for any subsequent variation.

Reason: To ensure the enhancement of the development by the retention of existing trees and natural features during the construction phase in accordance with the objectives of the National Planning Policy Framework (2019) and Policies CS14, CS18 and CS19 of West Berkshire Core Strategy 2006-2026.

13.  Noise mitigation scheme

No development shall take place above foundation slab level, until a scheme for protecting the proposed dwelling from noise from traffic on the adjacent roads has been submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority.  Any works which form part of the scheme approved by the authority shall be completed before any permitted dwelling is occupied unless an alternative period is agreed in writing by the authority. 

Reason: as occupiers of the development, without such a scheme, are likely to suffer from noise caused by the traffic to an unacceptable degree.          This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2019), Policy CS14 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), and Policy OVS6 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007)

14.  Unforeseen contamination

Should any unforeseen contamination be encountered during the development, the developer shall inform the LPA immediately. Any subsequent investigation/remedial/protective works deemed necessary by the LPA shall be carried out to agreed timescales and approved by the LPA in writing. If no contamination is encountered during the development, a letter confirming this fact shall be submitted to the LPA upon completion of the development and before the dwelling is first occupied.

Reason: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised.  This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2019), Policy CS14 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), and Policy OVS5 of the West Berkshire District Local Plan 1991-2006 (Saved Policies 2007).

15.  Archaeological Brief

No development or site works shall take place within the application area until the applicant has secured the implementation of a programme of archaeological work in accordance with a written scheme of investigation which has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the development shall incorporate and be undertaken in accordance with the approved statement.

Reason: To ensure that any significant archaeological remains that are found are adequately recorded.  This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2019), Policy CS19 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026).

A pre-commencement condition is required as the details refer to the construction phase of the development and insufficient information was submitted with the application.

16.  Boundary Treatment

No development shall take place above foundation slab level until details, to include a plan, indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The boundary treatment shall be completed in accordance with the approved scheme before the dwelling hereby permitted is occupied.  The approved boundary treatments shall thereafter be retained.

Reason: The boundary treatment is an essential element in the detailed design of this development and ensuring adequate levels of privacy are secure for adjacent occupiers and future occupiers of the dwelling. This condition is imposed in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (2019), Policies CS14 and CS19 of the West Berkshire Core Strategy (2006-2026), Supplementary Planning Document Quality Design (June 2006).

Informatives:

1.         This decision has been made in a positive way to foster the delivery of sustainable development having regard to Development Plan policies and available guidance to secure high quality appropriate development.  In this application whilst there has been a need to balance conflicting considerations, the local planning authority has worked proactively with the applicant to secure and accept what is considered to be a development which improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area.

2.         CIL

The development hereby approved results in a requirement to make payments to the Council as part of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) procedure.  A Liability Notice setting out further details, and including the amount of CIL payable will be sent out separately from this Decision Notice.  You are advised to read the Liability Notice and ensure that a Commencement Notice is submitted to the authority prior to the commencement of the development.  Failure to submit the Commencement Notice will result in the loss of any exemptions claimed, and the loss of any right to pay by instalments, and additional costs to you in the form of surcharges.  For further details see the website at www.westberks.gov.uk/cil

3.         Damage to footways, cycleways and verges

The attention of the applicant is drawn to the Berkshire Act, 1986, Part II, Clause 9, which enables the Highway Authority to recover the costs of repairing damage to the footway, cycleway or grass verge, arising during building operations.

4.         Damage to the carriageway

The attention of the applicant is drawn to the Highways Act, 1980, which enables the Highway Authority to recover expenses due to extraordinary traffic.

5.         Excavation in close proximity to the highway

In order to protect the stability of the highway it is advised that no excavation be carried out within 15 metres of a public highway without the written approval of the Highway Authority.

6.         Incidental works affecting the highway

Any incidental works affecting the adjoining highway shall be approved by, and a licence obtained from, the Principal Engineer (Streetworks), West Berkshire District Council, Transport & Countryside, Council Offices, Market Street, Newbury, RG14 5LD, telephone number 01635 – 519169, before any development is commenced.