PLANNING APPLICATION REPORT – Householder Developments
Case Officer: Liz Payne Parish: Thurlestone
|
Application No: 0793/23/HHO
|
Ward: Salcombe & Thurlestone |
|
Agent: John Salmon Po Box 807 Perranporth TR1 9NN
|
Applicant: Lee & Amanda Cash The Paddocks Cross Park Thurlestone TQ7 3LP
|
|
Site Address: The Paddocks, Cross Park, Thurlestone, TQ7 3LP
|
|
|
Development: Householder application for renovations and extension
Reason item is before Committee: Cllr Long has referred the application to committee: I would wish this application, which has the support of the Parish Council, to be reviewed by DM Committee to consider, do the proposals provide an uplift on the build and design quality on the original property, and any challenges this makes to other policy areas including some Neighbourhood Plan policies. |
|
|
|
|
Recommendation: Refusal
Reasons for refusal:
1. The proposed extension to the dwelling, by reason is its design, materials and siting would appear incongruous and would not represent an uplift in the quality of the built form contrary to adopted Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan policies TTV29 Residential extensions and replacement dwellings in the countryside (criterion 5) and DEV20 Place Shaping and the quality of the built environment (criteria 2, 3 and 4), the Supplementary Planning Document (2020) and policies TP1 General Development Principles (criterion 2) and TP7 – Replacement Dwellings And Extensions (criterion 2) of the made Thurlestone Neighbourhood Plan.
2. The quantity of glazing at first floor would result in an unacceptable level of additional light spill and fail to maintain and conserve the special qualities of the South Devon AONB and Undeveloped Coast contrary to adopted Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan policies DEV23 Landscape Character, Joint Local Plan Policies DEV24 Undeveloped Coast and Heritage Coast (criterion 3) and DEV25 Nationally protected landscapes (criterion 8) and policies TP1 and TP22 of the made Thurlestone Neighbourhood Plan.
3. Insufficient information has been submitted to show how surface water would be managed in accordance with the drainage hierarchies set out in the Plymouth and Devon Local Flood Risk Management Strategies contrary to policy DEV35 Managing flood risk and water quality impacts (criterion 4) of the adopted Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan and TP1 (criterion 3) of the made Thurlestone Neighbourhood Plan.
Key considerations: Design, scale and massing; impact on AONB, Undeveloped and Heritage Coast; Neighbour Amenity; Ecology; Drainage.
Site Description:
The application site is located approximately 1.3km northeast of Thurlestone within a small group of detached dwellings and comprises a detached single storey dwelling, driveway, front and rear gardens and several outbuildings. The dwelling faces southwest and overlooks the access road for the neighbouring properties and long views of the surrounding countryside. To the southeast a fence runs along the boundary with the neighbouring property, Whitley Lodge. To the northwest of the property a grazing field separates the site from another dwelling, Beechlawn.
The application site is within the South Devon AONB, Undeveloped Coast and Heritage Coast. A Public Right of Way passes 200m to the southwest.
Proposal:
The application seeks to raise the ridge height of both the original dwelling and the single storey extension to create additional living accommodation within the roof space. A flat roof front extension and partially enclosed veranda would replace the existing front extension and provide a balcony for a large dormer window above. A pergola would be attached to the rear of the property and the existing outbuildings replaced by a single garage building. The development would be finished in timber cladding, timber louvres, render and a mix of slate, sedum and zinc on the roofs.
Consultations:
· County Highways Authority: no highways implications
· Thurlestone Parish Council:
Thurlestone Parish Council supports this application. The proposed development would be unlikely to have an unacceptable impact on neighbouring residential amenity (NP Policy TP1.1) and although the ridge height of the existing dwelling would be slightly increased and extended to provide more accommodation in the first floor (contrary to NP Policy TP7.2i), Councillors considered the extension was proportionate and appropriate in the location and that the overall character and appearance of the existing property would be improved (NP Policy TP1.2). The building materials – including timber louvres, windows, sliding doors and cladding - were welcomed, as were the recessed windows on the first floor that had been designed to reduce light spill, since the property occupies a sensitive and elevated location in the open countryside within the AONB and Heritage Coast (NP Policies TP1.4 & TP1.5). There were, however, concerns about the number of proposed roof lights, particularly as they mainly served non-habitable spaces.
PUBLIC CONSULTATIONS
Representations:
None received.
Relevant Planning History
55/1031/98/3 - 17/08/1998 - Conditional Approval
Addition of bay window and two dormer windows,
55/0115/99/F - 04/03/1999 - Conditional Approval
Amendment to approved plans for alteration to sunroom
55/1399/01/F - 10/10/2001 - Conditional Approval
Extension to form new bedrooms and en-suite bathrooms
ANALYIS
1. Principle of Development/Sustainability
1.1.The site is located within the open countryside and hosts a residential dwelling. Policy
TTV29, Residential extensions and replacement dwellings in the countryside, of the Joint Local Plan (JLP) establishes the principle of extending dwellings within this context subject to consideration that the design and scale of the extension is appropriate for the setting.
1.2.The Supplementary Planning Document (2020) (SPD) advises that an extension may be considered appropriate in scale if the extension does not increase the internal floor space of the original house (as it was first built or as it stood on 1 July 1948) by more than 50 per cent. Paragraph 11.86 continues,
“Permission may be granted for extensions that seek to increase the size of the internal floorspace by more than 50% if there is a demonstrable uplift in the quality of the built form, that the primacy of the host dwelling is not unduly diminished and that the proposal does not have a negative impact on the external amenity space within the proposal site”.
1.3.The original bungalow has already been extended by more than 50% internal floorspace and the proposal would provide a substantial increase further. Officers acknowledge that large extensions can sometimes be acceptable. As the submitted proposal would result in an increase of the original property by more than 50%, consideration of the design of the extension, in particular, whether it provides an uplift in the quality of the built form, the impact on the primacy of the host dwelling and external amenity space is required to determine whether the extension accords with JLP policy TTV29.
2. Design, Massing and Scale
2.1.Policy DEV20 of the JLP requires development to meet good standards of design. Proposals must have proper regard to the pattern of local development and wider surroundings in terms of (amongst other things), style, local distinctiveness, scale, materials, historic value, and character. Joint local policy DEV23 seeks to conserve and enhance the landscape and scenic quality by (amongst other criteria) requiring design which maintains and reinforces local distinctiveness, conserves characteristics of the area and is of high quality design appropriate to its landscape. Policy TP1 of the Thurlestone Neighbourhood Plan requires (amongst other criteria) locally distinctive design and TP7 requires extensions to be subordinate in scale and form to the existing dwelling.
2.2.The original dwelling is a modest bungalow and has been subject to a number of ad hoc extensions over previous years including front and rear extensions and dormer windows. A substantial single storey side extension has significantly increased the footprint of the property. Despite the additions, the character of the property has been retained to some extent through the retention and repetition of the pitched roof over the bay windows and consistent use of render and slate.
2.3.The proposed scheme seeks to raise the original roof and extend the roof to provide living accommodation over the existing single storey extension. The proposed first floor extension would not be set down or set back from the existing roof and given its scale would not be ‘subordinate’ to the existing property, contrary to paragraphs 13.37 – 13.39 of the SPD and policy TP7 of the made Thurlestone Neighbourhood Plan.
2.4.The existing property has an existing front dormer and the neighbour to the east has three dormer windows providing a significant feature to the front elevation. The principle of a front dormer window is therefore acceptable. However, the proposed dormer window would cover the majority of the existing and proposed roof plane. It would project forward of the eaves of the roof and connect directly to the flat roof of the front extension appearing as a full second storey rather than roof space accommodation. The property is within a short row of single storey dwellings and this addition, particularly with the balcony at first floor would be incongruous to the character of the host dwelling and immediate neighbouring properties and contrary to paragraph 13.49 of the SPD.
2.5.The proposal includes a replacement front extension and partially enclosed veranda which covers all the frontage of the host dwelling. The flat roof design does not respond to the pitched roof features of the host dwelling and the use of timber cladding and timber louvres would conceal all of the rendered wall. The scale and materials of the front extension would dominate the host dwelling.
2.6.As a whole the proposed alterations would engulf the original dwelling and not respond to the architectural features of the host property. The result would be an assortment of differing forms and materials that would lack coherence and would appear discordant. By virtue of the scale, design and materials, the proposal would not have proper regard to the character of the host dwelling and surroundings and would not represent an uplift in the quality of the built form contrary to policies TTV29 and DEV20 of the Joint Local Plan, the Supplementary Planning Document and policies TP1 and TP7 of the Thurlestone Neighbourhood Plan.
3. Undeveloped and Heritage Coast and South Devon AONB (DEV 25)
3.1.Policy DEV24 requires proposals to maintain and enhance the unique landscape of the Undeveloped and Heritage Coast. Policy DEV25 requires that proposals conserve and enhance the natural beauty of the AONB with particular reference to their special qualities and distinctive characteristics or valued attributes. Neighbourhood Plan Policy TP1 requires developments to be appropriate to the rural location within the South Devon AONB and to limit the impact of light pollution on intrinsically dark landscapes.
3.2.The site is located within a rural location, 1km east of East Buckland, 1.3km north east of Thurlestone and 1.3km north of South Milton. Despite being close to neighbouring settlements the topography of the area provides a remote setting with long distance views of the wider countryside. The group of dwellings within which the site is located are mostly single storey with accommodation in the roof space and are partially obscured by trees. The proposal incorporates wide, full height glazed openings with sliding doors at first floor level which lead out onto wide balconies. The design of the dormer window would provide cover overhead and to the side of the balcony and reduce light spill from internal lighting. However, the overall impact of the large windows and balconies at this height would disrupt the tranquil nature of the immediate area and would fail to conserve or maintain the special quality of the Undeveloped Coast and AONB. For this reason the development is contrary to Local Plan Policies DEV24 and DEV25 and Neighbourhood Plan Policy TP1.
4. Neighbour Amenity
4.1.The existing property is on a generous sized plot and does not encroach close to the boundary with the neighbour to the east. The existing garage is sited close to the neighbour’s outbuildings. Due to the siting of the development it will not give rise to any detrimental impact on neighbour amenity through overlooking, overbearing, loss of light or increased noise and disturbance. In this context, the proposal is considered acceptable with regards to the provisions of DEV1 Protecting health and amenity.
5. Ecology
5.1.The Ecological Appraisal by Ecologic Consultant Ecologists LLP dated 16
December 2022 found no evidence or significant potential for bats to roost, however the report sets out precautionary measures to avoid any harm during building works. If the proposal was otherwise acceptable a condition would be imposed to ensure that the recommendations of the ecological appraisal were adhered to and as such, the proposal accords with JLP policy DEV26 Protecting and enhancing biodiversity and geological conservation.
6. Drainage
6.1.The applicant has not provided information on how the surface water from the proposed additional area will be discharged. Policy DEV35 requires surface water to be discharged in a separate surface water drainage system that has been devised following the drainage hierarchies set out in the Plymouth and Devon Local Flood Risk Management Strategies. As no evidence or justification of how surface water will be managed the proposal is contrary to DEV35 Managing flood risk and water quality impacts.
7. Climate Emergency
7.1.The Climate Emergency Planning Statement responds directly to the Climate Emergency declarations issued by South Hams and West Devon Councils and identifies measures for new development to meet the challenge of climate change. It builds on existing planning policies set out within the Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan and its supplementary planning document, embraces new standards and proposes new requirements. Officers have assessed the submitted Climate Emergency Compliance Form and note that the existing property already incorporates solar panels and would retain these. Whilst there is little scope for achieving net gain on a development of this scale in this location, the plans do demonstrate the use of natural materials such as sedum and timber. By virtue of the scale of the works and site specific circumstances the details as submitted are acceptable in this instance.
8. Conclusion
8.1.The proposed extension to the dwelling, by reason is its design, materials and siting would appear incongruous and would not represent an uplift in the quality of the built form contrary to policies TTV29 (criterion 5) and DEV20 (criteria 2, 3 and 4), the Supplementary Planning Document (2020) and policies TP1 (criterion 2) and TP7 (criterion 2) of the Thurlestone Neighbourhood Plan. The quantity of glazing at first floor would result in an unacceptable level of additional light spill and fail to maintain and conserve the special qualities of the South Devon AONB and Undeveloped Coast contrary to DEV24 (criterion 3) and DEV25 (criterion 8). In addition, a lack of evidence has been submitted to show how surface water would be managed in accordance with the drainage hierarchies set out in the Plymouth and Devon Local Flood Risk Management Strategies contrary to DEV35 (criterion 4).
This application has been considered in accordance with Section 38 of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004
Planning Policy
Relevant policy framework
Section 70 of the 1990 Town and Country Planning Act requires that regard be had to the development plan, any local finance and any other material considerations. Section 38(6) of the 2004 Planning and Compensation Act requires that applications are to be determined in accordance with the development plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. For the purposes of decision making, as of March 26th 2019, the Plymouth & South West Devon Joint Local Plan 2014 - 2034 is now part of the development plan for Plymouth City Council, South Hams District Council and West Devon Borough Council (other than parts of South Hams and West Devon within Dartmoor National Park).
The relevant development plan policies are set out below:
The Plymouth & South West Devon Joint Local Plan was adopted by South Hams District Council on March 21st 2019 and West Devon Borough Council on March 26th 2019.
SPT1 Delivering sustainable development
SPT2 Sustainable linked neighbourhoods and sustainable rural communities
TTV1 Prioritising growth through a hierarchy of sustainable settlements
TTV29 Residential extensions and replacement dwellings in the countryside
DEV1 Protecting health and amenity
DEV2 Air, water, soil, noise, land and light
DEV20 Place shaping and the quality of the built environment
DEV23 Landscape character
DEV24 Undeveloped coast and Heritage Coast
DEV25 Nationally protected landscapes
DEV26 Protecting and enhancing biodiversity and geological conservation
DEV32 Delivering low carbon development
DEV35 Managing flood risk and Water Quality Impacts
Thurlestone Neighbourhood Plan
Following a successful referendum, the Thurlestone Neighbourhood Plan was adopted at Executive Committee on 19 July 2018. It now forms part of the Development Plan for South Hams District and should be used in deciding planning applications within the Thurlestone Neighbourhood Area.
The following policies are relevant:
TP1 General Development Principles; and
TP7 – Replacement Dwellings And Extensions
TP22 – The Natural Environment
Other material considerations include the policies of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) including but not limited to paragraphs 130 and 176 and guidance in Planning Practice Guidance (PPG). Additionally, the following planning documents are also material considerations in the determination of the application:
South Devon AONB Management Plan (2019-2024),
Plymouth and South West Devon Joint Local Plan Supplementary Planning Document 2020; Plymouth and South West Devon Climate Emergency Planning Statement (2022);
Considerations under Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010
The provisions of the Human Rights Act 1998 and Equalities Act 2010 have been taken into account in reaching the recommendation contained in this report.