Application No:
2015/3936
Case Officer:
Ward:
Tom Scriven
07/04/2016
4 Claremont Lane Esher Surrey KT10 9DW
Detached two storey building with rooms in the roof space with undercroft parking to
provide 8 flats following demolition of existing house
Mr Chris Green
Stonegate Homes
FAO Mr Donncha Murphy
17 High Street
Bookham
Surrey
KT23 4AA
Expiry Date:
Location:
Proposal:
Applicant:
Agent:
Decision Level:
Recommendation:
Application Type:
FULL
Esher
If Permit – Sub Committee
If Refuse – Sub Committee
Permit
Representations: Nine letters of objection were received in relation to this
application the contents of which can be summarised as follows:
• Adverse impact upon neighbouring amenity
• Loss of privacy
• Loss of views
• Does not enhance the local environment
• Out of character
• Fails to comply with sub area ESH03 of the Design and Character SPD
• Utilitarian design
• Lack of separation distance to side boundaries
• Long side walls impacting upon gardens of neighbours
• Area becoming characterised by flats, offices and hard standing
• Overdevelopment of area
• Setting further precedent for flats in the area
• Highway safety
• Impact of building works/excavation
• Description of proposal
• Lack of amenity space for occupiers
• Impact on trees
***The application has been promoted by Cllr Archer if the recommendation is
to permit.***
Report
Description
1. The application site comprises a detached two storey building located on the eastern
side of Claremont Lane. Located in the Settlement Area of Esher, the site slopes
steeply from the highway. The site is just outside both the Town Centre and
Conservation Area boundaries.
Constraints
2. The following planning constraint is relevant:
• Tree preservation order
• Classified ‘A’ Road
Policy
3. In addition to the National Planning Policy Framework and the National Planning
Practice Guidance, the following local policies and guidance are relevant to the
determination of this application:
Core Strategy 2011
CS2 – Housing provision, location and distribution
CS9 – Esher
CS17 – Local character, density and design
CS19 – Housing type and size
CS21 – Affordable Housing
Development Management Plan 2015
DM1 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development
DM2 – Design and Amenity
DM 8 – Refuse, recycling and external plant
DM10 – Housing
Design & Character SPD 2012
Esher Companion Guide
Developer Contributions SPD 2012
Community Infrastructure Levy
4. Relevant Planning History
Reference
2015/0249
Description
Three storey detached building
with rooms in the roof space
with under croft parking to
provide offices (251 sqm) at
ground floor and flats at first and
second floors following
demolition of existing house
Decision
Refused – Appeal
dismissed on lack
of UU for affordable
housing
contributions
Proposal
5. This is a planning application for a detached two storey building with rooms in the roof
space with undercroft parking to provide 8 flats following demolition of existing house.
6. This is an amended scheme following the refusal of planning application 2015/0249
which was subsequently dismissed on appeal. In relation to this previous application
the built form of the scheme is very similar with only a few relatively minor external
alterations including the addition of a terrace at ground floor level and the removal of
the steps to the rear which provided access from the first floor to the rear amenity
space.
7. Internally the proposal has been changed more significantly with the office space at
ground floor level now omitted entirely and the number of flats increased from 3 large
two bed units to 8 smaller two bed units. The undercroft parking area would remain
as proposed in the previous application.
8. Amended plans were accepted during the process in order to resolve some minor
discrepancies in the floor plans.
Consultations
9. Surrey County Council Highways – The highway authority have assessed the impact
of the proposal on highway safety, capacity and policy grounds and have raised no
objection subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions. The conditions relate to
the laying out and permanent retention of the parking and turning area and the
requirement for any entrance gates to open inwards. They note that Claremont Lane
is a busy A road in the centre of Esher and proposed entrance gates which open
outwards would not allow sufficient space for a car to wait clear of the highway whilst
the gates are opened.
10. Tree officer – The Council’s Tree Officer has raised no objection to the proposal
subject to conditions relating to additional tree information, tree protections and a precommencement inspection.
11. Housing – Support the application subject to the applicant entering into a legal
agreement confirming the payment of an affordable housing contribution of
£29,710.35.
Positive and Proactive Engagement
12. In assessing this application, officers have worked with the applicant in a positive and
proactive manner consistent with the requirements of 186-187 of the NPPF by making
available pre-application advice to seek to resolve problems before the application
was submitted and to foster the delivery of sustainable development.
13. No formal pre-application advice was sought prior to the submission of this
application.
Planning Considerations
14. The main planning considerations in the determination of this application area:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Planning history
The principle of the development
The design of the proposal and its impact on the character of the area and the
street scene
Suitable living conditions for future occupants
The impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties
Trees and landscaping
Access and parking
Financial considerations
Planning history
15. The previous planning application 2015/0249 was refused and dismissed on appeal.
However the dismissal of the appeal only related to the lack of a Unilateral
Undertaking to secure the appropriate affordable housing contribution in relation to
the development. The inspector considered that the built form of development and
siting of the development was acceptable. The external changes to this previous
scheme are relatively minor in nature. The primary material change in the application
is the omission of the office floor space at ground floor level and the uplift in the
number of flats from 3 large two bed units to 8 smaller two bed units. There have
been no material changes in planning policy or on site which would alter the previous
assessment other than in terms of the affordable housing requirement. This is dealt
with in the financial considerations.
The principle of the development
16. The site is located within the Settlement Area of Esher and is not subject to any
planning constraints that would render the principle of the proposal unacceptable.
The principle of the development of the site has already been considered acceptable
by the inspector in their previous appeal decision. The proposal would now be
entirely residential with the commercial element of the scheme omitted. This
particular site is located on the edge of Esher Town where the character begins to
move towards primarily residential and as such a mixed use or entirely residential
scheme would be acceptable. Therefore it is considered that the principle of an
entirely residential scheme would be acceptable in this location.
The design of the proposal and its impact on the character of the area and the street
scene
17. A noted above the built form of the development was considered acceptable in the
appeal decision on application 2015/0249. There have been no material changes in
planning policy or on site which would alter this assessment. As such it is considered
that the form and style of the building would be compatible with the general
vernacular of this sub-area of Esher.
18. Due to the site topography, the building would have the appearance of being 3 storey,
with accommodation within the roof when viewed from the front and 2 storey with
accommodation within roof from the rear. The proposed dormers would not over
dominate the proposed roof form.
19. The building would not be unduly forward of No.2 and the proposed frontage of 16m
would be sufficient to prevent the building appearing overtly prominent or overbearing
within the street scape. Furthermore adequate separation distances to the flank
boundaries have been proposed to prevent the building appearing cramped.
Suitable living conditions for future occupants
20. The proposed units would comply with the space standards as set out in the
Technical housing standards – nationally described space standards and would
provide the occupants with a suitable living environment in terms of light, outlook and
privacy. There are no minimum recommended standards in terms of private amenity
space for flats however the majority of the flats benefit from small enclosed private
terraces. The only flats without these private terraces are units 1 and 2 located on
the ground floor. In addition to the private terraces there is a large communal garden
to the rear with a length of some 25.5m. Given the location of the flats close to the
town centre such a situation is not considered unusual and as such the proposed
amenity space is considered acceptable for these units.
21. There is sufficient refuse provision for these residential units. Furthermore, these are
sited for access for collection vehicles as well as the regular users.
22. It is noted that there is residential floor space would be immediately above the
undercroft parking area which could lead to some conflict between the use of the car
park and residential units above. In determining the previous appeal the inspector
concluded that adequate sound insulation could be installed to ensure the impact
would be acceptable within the building. In addition given the sites location close to a
busy road it is unlikely that the use of the car park would cause a significant level of
disturbance to the occupiers of the flats.
The impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties
23. In the consideration of the previous application there were no concerns raised with
regards to the impact upon neighbouring amenity which could not be addressed
through the imposition of conditions. As noted earlier in the report there have been
no material changes in policy or on site which would alter the previous assessment.
The only changes to the proposal which would need to be considered in terms of the
impact upon neighbouring amenity are the alteration in the number of residential units
on site and the associated changes to the rear terraces of the proposal.
24. The proposed building would not breach the appropriate 45 degree sightline taken
from the nearest rear and front facing windows of the apartments of No.2. As such,
there would be no adverse impact in the amount of light received by the same.
Furthermore, the building would not appear visually intrusive or overbearing.
25. The dwellinghouse to west, No.9 Broom Close is sited beyond the rear building line of
the existing and proposed building. The existing dwelling breaches the 45 degree
sightline at distance of approx.11m at single storey and approx.16m at two storey.
The proposed building would breach the sightline at 10m. Given the existing
relationship between the building of No.4 and No.9 Broom Close, the difference
would not resultant in an adverse impact on light and to the habitable areas of No.9 or
visual intrusion beyond that already experienced.
26. The first floor flank windows in the north western elevation would not provide a direct
view into any habitable rooms of the nearest apartments of No.2 Claremont Lane.
27. The first floor flank windows in the eastern elevation would serve a secondary
purpose to provide additional light. The principle outlook for these rooms would be
from the rear and front facing windows. These windows are considered acceptable
subject to the imposition of a condition requiring these windows to be obscure glazed
with the principle lights fixed shut.
28. The ground, first and second floor terraces would be inset within the rear building line
and would not provide a direct view into the neighbouring private amenity space.
Trees and landscaping
29. There are a number of trees protected by virtue of a Tree Preservation Orders on site.
The Council’s Tree Officer has advised that they raise no objection to the proposal on
tree grounds subject to the imposition of tree protection pre-commencement
conditions.
30. Given the proposal and the level of mature boundary screening which should be
sought to retain. It would be reasonable to require the details and implementation of a
landscape scheme. This could be done by way of a pre-commencement condition.
Access and parking
31. The Highway Authority have raised no objection to the proposed redevelopment.
However, Claremont Lane is a busy A Class road in the centre of Esher and, as such,
the proposed access gate should be conditioned to open inwards to ensure that
vehicles accessing the site can fully pull off the highway when entering the site. This
can be managed by way of a planning condition and would ensure that the
development would not prejudice highway safety nor cause inconvenience to other
highway users.
32. A total of 17 car parking spaces, 2 motor cycle spaces and 9 cycle spaces would be
provided. Notwithstanding the sustainable location of the site, this would provide
more than sufficient on-site parking for the proposed residential units.
Financial considerations
33. Section 70 subsection 2 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended)
states that any local financial considerations are a matter to which local planning
authorities must have regard to in determining planning applications; as far as they
are material for the application. The weight to be attached to these considerations is
a matter for the Council.
34. The New Homes Bonus Scheme Grant Determination is a grant paid by central
government to local councils for increasing the number of homes and their use. The
New Homes Bonus is paid each year for 6 years. It is based on the amount of extra
Council Tax revenue raised for new-build homes, conversions and long-term empty
homes brought back into use. There is also an extra payment for providing affordable
homes.
35. The Council’s New Homes Bonus Scheme Grant Determination for 2016-17 is
£2.97m.
36. Local financial considerations are defined as grants from Government or sums
payable to the authority under the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). This means
that the New Homes Bonus is capable of being a material consideration where
relevant. In the current case, the approval of the application would mean that the
New Homes Bonus would be payable for the net increase in dwellings from this
development.
37. Policy CS21: Affordable Housing of the Council’s Core Strategy (2011) requires that
where the development resulting in the net gain of 6-14 residential units 30% of the
gross number of dwellings on site should be affordable units.
38. Paragraphs 012 - 023 of the National Planning Policy Guidance on planning
obligations was removed following the quashing of Ministerial Statements dated 28
November and 10 February by the High Court (on the application of West Berkshire
District Council and Reading Borough Council vs. Secretary of State for Communities
and Local Government [2015]). This was overruled by the Court of Appeal and the
Government guidance has been changed again.
39. However in the absence of clarification on the matter as it currently stands, the
Council's approach to the provision of Affordable Housing is set out in Policy CS21 of
the Core Strategy (July 2011) and the Developer Contributions Supplementary
Planning Document (SPD) (April 2012). All planning applications for new residential
development within the Borough determined from 31 July 2015 are required to
comply with this policy. The proposed development is therefore required to provide
on-site affordable housing provision.
40. The proposal would result in a total of 8 residential units on the site. This would
generate an affordable housing requirement of 2 affordable units on site with a further
financial contribution of £82,712.78 to contribute towards affordable housing off-site.
The applicant has submitted a viability appraisal with the scheme which concludes
that the proposal is unable to support any affordable housing on-site or make a
contribution towards affordable housing off site. They consider that such a provision
would make the site unviable. This has been assessed by an independent viability
assessor who has concluded that the development can support a contribution of
£29710.35 The Council’s Housing and Enabling Manager has agreed that such a
contribution would be acceptable.
41. The applicant has advised that they will submit a Unilateral Undertaking prior to the
determination of the application. On this basis the application would be acceptable in
terms of the contribution towards affordable housing. An update on the Unilateral
Undertaking will be provided at the sub committee meeting.
42. The development falls under development which is liable for CIL. It is estimated that
1,047 sqm of new residential floor space will require a contribution of £120,621.65.
Matters raised in Representations
43. The material planning issues have been fully assessed in the planning considerations
above.
44. Some concern was raised regarding the description of the proposal as two storey with
rooms in the roof and undercroft parking as neighbours consider the proposal to be
four storey. Such a description is not unusual, particularly in terms of buildings with
rooms in the roof where the roofspace is not considered to be a storey in its own right.
In terms of the undercroft parking this is partially subterranean and as such is not
considered as a complete floor for the purposed of the description. However the
appearance of the building is clearly shown on the elevational drawings and the use
of this description is considered to accurately reflect the development and does not
prejudice any party or the consideration of the application.
45. There was some concern regarding the potential impact of the building work and in
particular the excavation upon adjacent properties. This is not a material planning
consideration and would be controlled by separate legislation. The works would need
to be carried out in such a way as to ensure no damage was caused to adjacent
dwellings. If the works were not carried out in the correct manner this would be a
Civil matter between the parties concerned.
46. Residents considered that the proposal would set a further precedent for flats in the
area. The proposal is not considered to set a precedent as each site is considered
on its own merits in relation to its particular constraints, relevant planning policy and
other material considerations. In this instance flats are considered acceptable.
Conclusion
47. On the basis of the above, and in light of any other material considerations, the
proposal is considered to be in accordance with the development plan. Accordingly,
the recommendation is to grant permission.
Case Officer Checklist
Neighbour Notifications
Consultations
Drawings
Site Visit Notes
15/06/16 TS
15/06/16 TS
15/06/16 TS
15/06/16 TS
Recommendation: Permit subject to the receipt of a Unilateral Agreement under
Section 106 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990 to secure the required
affordable housing contribution
Conditions/Reasons
1
TIME LIMIT (FULL APPLICATION)
The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years
from the date of this permission.
Reason: To comply with Section 51 of Part 4 of the Planning and Compulsory
Purchase Act 2004.
2
LIST OF APPROVED PLANS
The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in strict accordance with the
following list of approved plans: 233-A10P01 Rev F, 223-A20P03 Rev E, A20E00 Rev
G, 223-A20E03 Rev C, 223-A20E02 Rev C and 223-A20E01 Rev B received on 28
October 2015 and A20P00 Rev E, 223-A20P02 Rev F and 223-A20P01 received on
17 June 2016.
Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in a satisfactory manner.
3
MATERIALS SAMPLES
NO DEVELOPMENT SHALL TAKE PLACE UNTIL SAMPLES OF THE MATERIALS
TO BE USED ON THE EXTERNAL FACES AND ROOF OF THE BUILDING HAVE
BEEN SUBMITTED TO AND APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE BOROUGH
COUNCIL. DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE CARRIED OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH
THE APPROVED DETAILS.
Reason: To ensure that a satisfactory external appearance is achieved of the
development in accordance with Policy DM2 of the Elmbridge Development
Management Plan 2015.
It is considered necessary for this to be a precommencement condition because the use of satisfactory external materials goes to
the heart of the planning permission.
4
OBSCURE GLAZING
The first floor flank windows on the south eastern side elevation of the development
hereby permitted shall be glazed with obscure glass and non-opening to a height of
1.7m above finished floor level and subsequently maintained in this form. Such glass
shall be sufficiently obscure to prevent loss of privacy. The affixing of an obscure film
will not be sufficient.
Reason: To preserve the reasonable privacy of neighbouring residents in accordance
with Policy DM2 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.
5
LANDSCAPING - SCHEME
NO DEVELOPMENT SHALL TAKE PLACE UNTIL FULL DETAILS OF BOTH HARD
AND SOFT LANDSCAPING WORKS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO AND
APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE BOROUGH COUNCIL AND THESE WORKS
SHALL BE CARRIED OUT AS APPROVED. THIS SCHEME SHALL INCLUDE
INDICATIONS OF ALL HARD SURFACES, WALLS, FENCES, ACCESS
FEATURES, THE EXISTING TREES AND HEDGES TO BE RETAINED, TOGETHER
WITH THE NEW PLANTING TO BE CARRIED OUT, AND DETAILS OF THE
MEASURES TO BE TAKEN TO PROTECT EXISTING FEATURES DURING THE
CONSTRUCTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT.
Reason: To preserve and enhance the visual amenities of the locality in accordance
with Policy DM6 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.
6
LANDSCAPING - IMPLEMENTATION
ALL HARD AND SOFT LANDSCAPING WORKS SHALL BE CARRIED OUT IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPROVED DETAILS. ARBORICULTURAL WORK TO
EXISTING TREES SHALL BE CARRIED OUT PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT
OF ANY OTHER DEVELOPMENT, OTHERWISE ALL REMAINING LANDSCAPING
WORK AND NEW PLANTING SHALL BE CARRIED OUT PRIOR TO THE
OCCUPATION OF ANY PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT OR IN ACCORDANCE TO
THE TIMETABLE AGREED WITH THE BOROUGH COUNCIL. ANY TREES OR
PLANTS, WHICH WITHIN A PERIOD OF FIVE YEARS OF THE COMMENCEMENT
OF ANY WORKS IN PURSUANCE OF THE DEVELOPMENT DIE, ARE REMOVED,
OR BECOME SERIOUSLY DAMAGED OR DISEASED, SHALL BE REPLACED AS
SOON AS PRACTICABLE WITH OTHERS OF SIMILAR SIZE AND SPECIES,
FOLLOWING CONSULTATION WITH THE BOROUGH COUNCIL, UNLESS THE
BOROUGH COUNCIL GIVES WRITTEN CONSENT TO ANY VARIATION.
Reason: To preserve and enhance the visual amenities of the locality in accordance
with Policy DM6 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.
7
ADDITIONAL TREE INFORMATION AND PRE-COMMENCEMENT INSPECTION
BEFORE DEVELOPMENT TAKES PLACE FURTHER ARBORICULTURAL DETAILS
SHALL SUBMITTED TO AND APPROVED IN WRITING BY THE BOROUGH
COUNCIL AND THESE WORKS SHALL BE CARRIED OUT AS APPROVED.
a)
b)
c)
THIS SCHEME SHALL INCLUDE DETAILS OF:
THE EXISTING TREES AND HEDGES TO BE RETAINED IN THE FORM OF A
TREE SURVEY AND ARBORICULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT, IN LINE WITH
BS5837:2012, AND SHALL INCLUDE DETAILS OF ALL CURRENT AND
PROPOSED HARD SURFACES, WALLS, FENCES, ACCESS FEATURES, AND
GROUND LEVELS.
THE MEASURES TAKEN TO PROTECT EXISTING TREES AND HEDGES DURING
CONSTRUCTION, DEMOLITION, AND DELIVERY OF MATERIALS / MACHINERY,
INCLUDING A TREE PROTECTION PLAN AND AN ARBORICULTURAL METHOD
STATEMENT IN LINE WITH BS5837:2012 (SEE ARBORICULTURAL METHOD
STATEMENT INFORMATIVE.)
PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF WORKS ON SITE AND AFTER THE
INSTALLATION OF THE TREE PROTECTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH (B) ABOVE
THE APPLICANT SHALL ARRANGE A PRE-COMMENCEMENT MEETING
BETWEEN THE BOROUGH COUNCIL AND THE APPLICANT'S PROJECT
ARBORICULTURIST TO ALLOW INSPECTION AND VERIFICATION OF THE
PROTECTION MEASURES.
Reason: This permission is only granted on the basis that the trees would remain on
site to mitigate the impact of the development and to preserve and enhance the visual
amenities of the locality in accordance with Policy DM6 of the Elmbridge Development
Management
8
a)
b)
c)
d)
TREE PROTECTION
In this condition 'retained tree' means an existing tree, which is to be retained in
accordance with the approved plans and particulars; and paragraphs (a) and (b)
below shall have effect until the expiration of 5 years from the first occupation of the
development.
no retained tree shall be cut down, uprooted or destroyed, nor shall any retained tree
be pruned other than in accordance with the approved plans and particulars, without
the written approval of the Borough Council. Any pruning shall be carried out in
accordance with British Standard 3998 (tree work) and in accordance with any
supplied arboricultural method statement.
if any retained tree is removed, uprooted or destroyed or dies, another tree shall be
planted at the same place and that tree shall be of such size and species, and shall
be planted at such time, as may be specified in writing by the Borough Council.
tree protection shall be maintained in-situ and not moved or removed until all
construction has finished and equipment, materials, or machinery are removed from
site.
any arboricultural protection information and plans submitted as part of the
application, and listed in the approved plans condition, or submitted to meet a
condition of consent shall be implemented and adhered to at all times during the
construction process unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Borough Council.
This shall include any requirement for arboricultural supervision and site monitoring.
This condition may only fully be discharged on completion of the development subject
to satisfactory written evidence of contemporaneous supervision and monitoring of
tree protection throughout construction by the appointed arboriculturist.
Reason: This permission is only granted on the basis that the trees would remain on
site to mitigate the impact of the development and to preserve and enhance the visual
amenities of the locality in accordance with Policy DM6 of the Elmbridge Development
Management
9
ENTRANCE GATES
Notwithstanding the details of Drawing No.233-410P01, the entrance gates must open
inwards away from the highway.
Reason: To ensure that the development would not prejudice highway safety nor
cause inconvenience to other highway users in accordance with policy DM7 of the
Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015 and policy CS25 of the Elmbridge
Core Strategy 2011.
10
PARKING AND TURNING
The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until space
has been laid ot within the site in accordance with the approved plans 233-A10P01
Rev F and A20P00 Rev D for vehicles to be parked and for vehicles to turn so that
they may enter and leave the site in forward gear. Thereafter the parking and turning
areas shall be retained and maintained for their designated purposes unless
otherwise agreed in writing by the Borough Council.
Reason: To ensure that the development would not prejudice highway safety nor
cause inconvenience to other highway users in accordance with policy DM7 of the
Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015 and policy CS25 of the Elmbridge
Core Strategy 2011.
11
CYCLE STORAGE
Prior to first occupation of the development hereby approved the cycle storage area
shall be installed and permanently maintained in accordance with approved plan
A20P00 Rev D unless otherwise agreed in writing by the borough council.
Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in a satisfactory manner.
12
REFUSE STORAGE
Prior to first occupation of the development hereby approved the refuse storage areas
shall be installed and permanently maintained in accordance with approved plan 233A10P01 Rev F unless otherwise agreed in writing by the borough council.
Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in a satisfactory manner.
Informatives
1. COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE LEVY
The development permitted is subject to a Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)
liability for which a Liability Notice will be issued as soon as practical after the day on
which planning permission first permits development.