28 MARCH 2017 PLANNING COMMITTEE

5b / 16/0845 / Reg’d: / 10.08.16 / Expires: / 31.03.17 / Ward: HV
Nei. Con. Exp: / 11.01.17 / BVPI
Target / 13 (Dwellings) / Number of Weeks on Cttee’ Day: / 29/33 / On Target? Y / Yes
LOCATION: / The White Cottage, Kingfield Green, Woking, GU22 9BD
PROPOSAL: / Erection of 2No. detached two storey four-bed houses within the existing grounds of White Cottage with associated hard and soft landscaping, vehicular access and 2no. detached garages (amended description and plans and additional information submitted).
TYPE: / FullApplication
APPLICANT: / Mr Medani / OFFICER: / Joanne Hollingdale

______

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COMMITTEE

The application is for two new dwellings and is therefore outside the Scheme of Delegation.

SUMMARY OF PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

This is a full planning application for the erection of 2No. detached two storey four-bed houses within the existing grounds of White Cottage with associated hard and soft landscaping, vehicular access and 2no. detached garages.

PLANNING STATUS

  • Urban Area
  • Adjacent to Urban Open Space/Common Land
  • Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (TBH SPA) Zone B (400m-5km)
  • Kingfield Cottage (to the rear of the site) – Locally Listed Building
  • Fairview Cottage (at entrance to Kingfield Close) – Locally Listed Building

RECOMMENDATION

GRANT planning permission subject to the prior completion of a legal agreement to secure the SAMM (SPA) contribution and the recommended conditions.

SITE DESCRIPTION

The application site extends to approximately 0.22ha.The White Cottage comprises a chalet style dwelling with the first floor accommodation being contained in the roof and lit by dormer windows. The existing dwelling is faced with render under a tiled roof with the dormer windows being faced with tile hanging and render. The existing dwelling is located in the eastern part of the site with the garden currently being located to the eastern and western sides of the dwelling. The eastern boundary of the site is formed by a wall except for the gap for the vehicular access. The northern and western boundaries of the site are formed by vegetation and trees. The southern boundary of the site is mostly formed by a dwarf brick wall with fencing.

The dwelling currently has two vehicular accesses, one via an unmade road across Kingfield Green off Loop Road with a second access being off the mini roundabout within Kingfield Close.

To the southern boundary of the site is a dwelling known as Round Oak Cottage and to the rear of Round Oak Cottage a new two storey dwelling is under construction. To the eastern boundary of the site is a single storey dwelling fronting Kingfield Close. To the north the site is adjoins an area of open space and to the west is a lane with the dwellings immediately to the west of the site located on the opposite side of the lane.

RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY

Since the original dwelling was constructed the site has been subject to a number of applications for extensions. Since 1990 the planning applications relating to this site are as follows:

PLAN/2016/0670 - Erection of a two storey rear extension, increase in roof height to increase first floor area and alterations to fenestration of all elevations following demolition of an existing front porch, rear extension and dormers. Erection of a detached garage following demolition of an existing detached garage. Granted 15.08.16

PLAN/2005/1345 - Renewal of planning permission PLAN/2000/1031 for a single storey rear extension. Granted 13.01.06

PLAN/2000/1031 - Proposed single storey rear extension. Granted 30.11.00

PLAN/1998/1111 – Demolition of kitchen veranda and erection of a new conservatory to side (renewal of 92/0887). Granted 03.12.98

PLAN/1992/0887 – Demolition of kitchen veranda and erection of a new conservatory to the side of the property. Granted 12.11.92

PLAN/1992/0659 - Demolition of kitchen veranda and erection of a conservatory to the side and first floor extension to the side of the property over the existing billiard room. Refused 24.09.92

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

This is a full planning application for the erection of 2No. detached two storey four-bed houses within the existing grounds of White Cottage with associated hard and soft landscaping, vehicular access and 2no. detached garages.

The existing dwelling known as The White Cottage will be retained on the site and the garden area to the north-west of the existing dwelling is proposed to be split to create two plots, each for a detached four bed dwelling and detached garage.

Plot 1(located in the southern position on site) - would measure around 29 metres in depth by 16.2 metres in width. The proposed dwelling would have a footprint measuring 10 metres in width by 9.5-11 metres in depth. The proposed dwelling would be two storey with an eaves height of 5.4 metres and a maximum ridge height of 8 metres. The roof would be fully hipped on all sides with a front projection having a lower ridge height of 7.2 metres. Plot 1 would have two parking spaced (including one in the garage).The rear garden depth for the dwelling would measure between 12.4-13.4 metres.

Plot 2(located in the northern position on site) - would measure 32 metres in depth by 15.5 metres in width. The proposed dwelling would have a footprint measuring 10 metres in width by between 9.5-11 metres in depth (same as dwelling on plot 1). This dwelling would also have a single storey rear extension with terrace above measuring 4.4 metres in width by 3.4 metres in depth. The proposed dwelling would be two storey with an eaves height of 5.4 metres and a maximum ridge height of 8 metres. The roof would be fully hipped on all sides with a front projection having a lower ridge height of 7.2 metres (same as dwelling on plot 1). Plot 3 would have 3 parking spaces (including one in the garage). The rear garden depth for the dwelling would measure between 12.2-14 metres (except for where the single storey extension is located).

Both of the dwellings are proposed to be faced with white render under a clay tile roof coloured, anthracite grey.

For both dwellings a single garage is proposed withineach plot measuring 3.6 metres in width by 5.5 metres in depth. The garages would have a shallow pitched roof with an eaves height of 2.4 metres and a ridge height of 3.1 metres.

The driveway into the site off Kingfield Close is proposed to be widened to 6 metres and the driveway would follow the southern boundary of the site to provide access to the two new dwellings. Three further parking spaces would be provided adjacent to the driveway within the site.

Existing dwelling – The application proposes to retain the existing dwelling on the site. It is noted from the planning history that planning permission was recently granted for extension and alteration to this property and replacement detached garage (PLAN/2016/0670) and that the applicant would have the option of retaining the existing dwelling as is or implementing the planning permission for extension/alteration.

Amended plans – were received during the assessment of the application which essentially made changes to the size and scale of the proposed dwellings. The main changes made were as follows:

  • Increase in the depth of plot 2 by 2 metres;
  • Re-positioning of dwelling on plot 1 to increase separation distance between dwelling and southern boundary from 1.4 metres to 5 metres;
  • Removal of single storey extension and terrace to plot 1;
  • Change integral garage of plot 1 to detached single garage;
  • Alter roof form of both dwellings from gable roofs to fully hipped roofs;
  • Reduction in eaves height of both dwellings from 6.3 metres to 5.4 metres; and
  • Reduction in ridge height of both dwellingsfrom 9.3 metres to 8 metres.

These changes were subject to further publicity on the application including consultation with neighbouring residents as detailed in the Representations section of this report.

In support of the application the following documents have been submitted: Letter and plan relating to access, parking, swept paths etc, CIL Additional Information form, CIL Assumption of Liability form, Planning Statement, Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey, Arboricultural Report, Geo-Environmental Site Assessment and Design and Access Statement.

CONSULTATIONS

County Highway Authority – Having assessed the application on safety, capacity and policy grounds, recommends a condition be imposed on any permission granted (condition4).

Surrey Wildlife Trust – As bats may be present adjacent to the site, external lighting should be kept to a minimum, vegetation and site clearance should be undertaken outside the bird breeding season and precautionary methods of working should be adopted in relation to reptiles as there is some suitable reptile habitat immediately adjacent to the site (conditions 20, 9 and 21). The biodiversity enhancements given in the Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey should be undertaken (condition 10).

WBC Drainage and Flood Risk Engineer – Following the submission of additional information to address previous comments the proposal is acceptable on flood risk and drainage grounds subject to condition (condition 19).

WBC Scientific Officer – A condition to deal with contamination will not be required

WBC Arboricultural Officer – The Arboricultural Information provided is acceptable and should be complied with in full including a pre-commencement meeting. Details of foundation design and construction within the root protection areas will be required (conditions 6, 7 and 8).

WBC Waste Services – Requested additional information regarding collection points and carry distances. Information provided

REPRESENTATIONS

13letters of objection have been receivedin respect of the application as initially submitted. A summary of the main comments made is given below:

  • The area is Arcadian in nature and 6 new dwellings have been built in recent years all with access from Kingfield Close but none have been planned in a bizarre way;
  • Road is already congested and the refuse vehicle has to reverse down Kingfield Close;
  • Why is plot 1 so close to the southern boundary? [Officer note: this has been changed on the amended plans]
  • The new dwelling being built at the rear of Round Oak Cottage was orientated to result in minimal overlooking –the new dwelling will look at the dwelling on plot 1 which will be rendered;
  • Insufficient turning space provided [Officer note: there is a turning area at the top of the driveway];
  • The access road varies in width;
  • Insufficient distance exists between The White Cottage and the new dwellings resulting in a loss of privacy and cramped development;
  • Would the foundations of plot 2 need to be hand dug given the close proximity to the trees;
  • Has a bat survey been undertaken;
  • Has an ecology survey been undertaken [Officer note: An extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey has been submitted];
  • The materials are out of character with the surrounding area;
  • Materials should be conditioned to have something more appropriate;
  • Given the site levels a foul drainage pump will be required which will be noisy;
  • Dwellings will be too high and bulky [Officer note: the height of the dwellings has been reduced];
  • Although not a planning matter local/owners residents have the benefit of restrictive covenants which preclude any development of more than 1 dwelling on The White Cottage property [Officer note: As noted this is not a planning matter];
  • Overlooking would result to the new dwelling to the rear of Round Oak Cottage, to The Cedars, Kingfield Green and other neighbouring dwellings;
  • Plot 1 would be overbearing to the new dwelling to the rear of Round Oak Cottage;
  • Development would appear cramped on the site and result in overdevelopment;
  • Does the density of development reflect the Core Strategy requirement? Does not appear to be an over-intensification but would the development be acceptable in views from Loop Road?
  • Loss of garden to The White Cottage;
  • Building on greenfield;
  • Inadequate amenity space;
  • There is no landscaping plan;
  • Removal of trees could result in more surface water;
  • Overall scheme not sympathetic to the locality;
  • The house to the rear of Round Oak Cottage is already imposing and construction had an impact on the area;
  • Previous developments have been sympathetic to the area this would out of character;
  • Know that other developers want to put more houses at Penlan Cottage;
  • Traffic on Loop Road already stretched and more development will add to this;
  • Kingfield Close cannot handle current traffic. More traffic will be dangerous. Unacceptbale parking when football/sports matches are on in the local area;
  • All plots on Kingfield Green are similar size and smaller plots are not in keeping;
  • Kingfield Pond is an area for wildlife;
  • Works will be required to the existing trees resulting in the dwellings being more visible. Do any trees need to be removed and are they subject to a TPO? [Officer Note: Only one holly tree and a group of 3 Cypress trees within the site are to be removed and no trees are covered by a TPO]
  • The adjoining property at White Rose Cottage [Officer note: possibly meaning Round Oak Cottage] is not drawn in the correct position as there is less space between this dwelling and The White Cottage [Officer note: Round Oak Cottage has been extended and no agent/applicanthas access to a neighbouring site to survey it accurately and this is not a requirement of any planning submission];
  • Construction work will cause disruption;
  • Utilities in the area are not suitable for additional dwellings;
  • The elevations are labelled incorrectly [Officer note: this has been corrected on the amended plans];
  • Application should be refused.

6 letters of objection have been received in respect of the amended plans and the second consultation undertaken. A summary of the main comments made is given below:

  • One letter submitted in response to the first consultation has been re-submitted;
  • Very little changes to the plans;
  • Site is only sufficient to support 1 additional house;
  • New houses are larger than that being constructed at the rear of Round Oak Cottage which is unacceptable;
  • Re-iterate comments summarised above;
  • Only change is to plot 1;
  • Kingfield Green area is being overdeveloped;
  • Should demolish existing house and build two new dwellings;
  • Hope trees to northern boundary will be retained;
  • No significant reduction in footprint of dwellings;
  • Dwellings would be higher than neighbouring properties;
  • Conflicts with the 45degree line of site from new dwelling;
  • Rear building line of plot 1 overlaps the rear of the new dwelling under construction by 4 metres and the proposal will have an impact due to close proximity;
  • Siting of the garage is less than 1 metre to the boundary and rear of garage cuts the building line of the new dwelling under construction; and
  • Design of the dwellings has no sympathetic shape or appearance to be in keeping with adjacent properties.

RELEVANT PLANNING POLICIES

National Planning Policy Framework 2012 (NPPF)

South East Plan 2009

Saved Policy NRM6 –Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area

Woking Core Strategy 2012

CS1 - A spatial strategy for Woking Borough

CS7 – Biodiversity and nature conservation

CS8 - Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Areas

CS9 – Flooding and water management

CS10 - Housing provision and distribution

CS11 - Housing mix

CS12 - Affordable housing

CS18 - Transport and accessibility

CS20 – Heritage and conservation

CS21 - Design

CS22 - Sustainable construction

CS24 - Woking’s landscape and townscape

CS25 - Presumption in favour of sustainable development

Development Management Policies DPD 2016

DM2 - Trees and Landscaping

DM5 – Environmental Pollution

DM8 – Land contamination and hazards

DM10 - Development on Garden Land

DM20 –Heritage Assets and their settings

Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD)

Heritage of Woking 2000

Parking Standards July 2006

Outlook, Amenity, Privacy and Daylight 2008

Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area Avoidance Strategy 2010-2015

Climate Change December 2013

Affordable Housing Delivery 2014

Design February 2015

Waste and recycling provisions for new residential developments

Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG)

Plot subdivision: Infilling and backland development (2000)

Other Material Considerations

National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG)

PLANNING ISSUES

1.The main planning issues to consider in the determination of this application are, the principle of development, visual impact of the proposed development on the locality including trees and the setting of the nearby locally listed buildings, impact on neighbouring amenity, highways and parking, ecology, surface water drainage and flood risk, sustainable construction, Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area (TBHSPA), affordable housing and local finance considerations.

Principle of development

2.Policy CS1 and Policy CS10 of the Woking Core Strategy 2012 identify that the Council will make provision for 4,964 net additional dwellings in the Borough between 2010 and 2027. The reasoned justification for Policy CS10 states that new residential development within the Urban Area will be provided through redevelopment, change of use, conversion and refurbishment of existing properties or through infilling. The application site is situated within the urban area of Kingfield where the principle of providing additional residential development is thus acceptable subject to detailed considerations.

3.Policy CS10 also provides an indicative density range for ‘infill development in the rest of the urban area’, within which this site lies, of between 30-40dph. The proposed development would result in 3 dwellings on the site which equates to around 13 dph which is well below the indicative range but the policy also notes that densities less than 30dph will not be justified unless there are significant constraints or a higher density cannot be integrated into the existing urban form. Taking all of the areas within Kingfield Close which can be split into areas of 2-3 dwellings the density of these areas varies between 13dph to 27dph. Therefore in density terms alone the proposed development would reflect the density of the local area and justify a density below the indicative policy level. The proposal is therefore considered to comply with Policy CS10 of the Core Strategy.

4.Policy CS11 seeks to secure a mix of dwelling types and sizes across the Borough and identifies a mix of dwelling types. The reasoned justification for the policy also identifies that lower proportions of smaller units will be acceptable in areas of low residential density where the character of the area will not be compromised. It is also acknowledged that not every development site will deliver the complete mix. In this case only two dwellings are proposed and therefore it is not possible to meet the mix sought by the policy. Nonetheless the policy operates Borough wide (and is monitored Borough wide) and will also include all of the smaller units being delivered in and around the town centre. This area is characterised by family dwellings and in this regard the proposed provision of 2no. 4 bed dwellings would not be out of character with the surrounding area and is considered to comply with Policy CS11 of the Core Strategy.