This report needs to be read in conjunction with the
Decision Notice.
Ribble Valley Borough Council
DELEGATED ITEM FILE REPORT - APPROVAL
Ref: CS/CMS
Application No:
3/2014/1074/P
Development Proposed:
Non-material amendment to development approved on
appeal (APP/T/2350/A/12/2186164) to amend the position of
the dwelling and garage, the shape of the garage and the
location of internal stairs at Kemple Barn, Whalley Road,
Pendleton
CONSULTATIONS: Parish/Town Council
Parish Council – N/A.
CONSULTATIONS: Highway/Water Authority/Other Bodies
Environment Directorate (County Surveyor) - N/A.
Environment Agency - N/A.
CONSULTATIONS: Additional Representations.
N/A.
RELEVANT POLICIES:
N/A.
COMMENTS/ENVIRONMENTAL/AONB/HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUES/RECOMMENDATION:
Under reference 3/2012/0096/P the Council refused planning permission for a dwelling with
garages, garden and landscaping within the curtilage of Kemple Barn, at Whalley Road,
Clitheroe.
In a letter dated 13 March 2013 (reference APP/T/2350/A/12/2186164)
permission was granted on appeal for the proposed development.
Under reference 3/2014/0483/P condition no 3 of the permission (details of external
materials) was discharged; condition no 4 (landscaping details) was partially discharged; and
condition no 5 (details of protective fencing) was also partially discharged.
The
discharge/partial discharge of those conditions meant that construction works on the
approved development could be commenced lawfully.
Under reference 3/2014/0460/P, permission was granted for a number of non-material
amendments to the approved development. One of the approved amendments authorised
the building to be sited 1.8m to the northeast of its originally approved position.
Ground investigation works have been carried out on site in preparation for the
commencement of construction works. The results of the ground investigation works have
indicated that, due to ground conditions, it would be beneficial to construct the dwelling in a
slightly amended location and also to change the shape of the garage. This current
application therefore seeks permission, as non-material amendments, for the alterations to
the position of the building and the shape of the garage and also for the relocation of an
internal staircase.
On 14 January 2010, the Planning and Development Committee approved a Procedure Note
that had been prepared in order to define those alterations that could be regarded as nonmaterial amendments in order to ensure a consistency of approach. In that Procedure Note
it was stated that all of the following criteria needed to be met for amendments to be
considered non-material:
1.
There would be no alteration to the application site boundary (red edge).
2.
The amendment would not conflict with any Development Plan Policies.
3.
There would be no conflict with any conditions on the planning permission.
4.
The proposal would not exacerbate concerns which were raised by any third parties
at the original planning application stage.
5.
The approved footprint/siting of the building would not be moved in any direction by
more than 1m.
6.
The proposal would not result in an extension to development already approved.
7.
The height of the building or extension would not be increased.
8.
The amendment would not result in any potential overlooking of any neighbouring
property.
9.
The amendment must not result in a fundamental change in the design of the
building.
10.
The amendment does not amount to new works or elements not considered by an
Environmental Statement submitted with the application.
In a note at the end of those 10 numbered points, it was stated that the significance referred
to in 5, 6 and 7 would be determined on a case by case basis having regard to the context of
the site and development.
I will now consider the proposed non-material amendments in this application within the
context of the 10 points of the Procedure Note (PN) as stated above.
As the proposed relocation of a staircase relates entirely to an internal alteration, it can be
classed as “non-material”.
The proposed alterations to the shape of the garage and the precise position of the building
on its plot mean that, as now proposed, the building would be in a position that is generally
between the originally approved position and the position approved as a non-material
amendment by 3/2014/0460/P; although, its extreme western elevation would be
approximately 2.5m to the west of its originally approved position (and outside the approved
footprint) with the extreme eastern elevation being a similar distance to the west of the
approved position (but, of course, inside the originally approved footprint).
Overall, the proposed re-siting of the building would be in excess of the 1m maximum stated
at point no 5 of the Procedure Note. However, as stated in the note at the end of the
numbered points in the PN, the significance referred to in points 5, 6 and 7, can be
determined on a case by case basis having regard to the context of the site and
development. In this case, the site is in an isolated and well screened location such that the
proposed amendment to the siting of the footprint of the building can, in my opinion, be
regarded as “non-material”. It would not have any material effects on visual amenity, and no
effects whatsoever on the amenities of any nearby residents. I would also comment that the
proposed amended siting generally gives an improved clearance to the trees on the site that
are to be retained. This is therefore a beneficial effect of the proposed amended siting.
Overall, I consider that the internal relocation of the staircase, the amendment to the shape
of the garage and the amended positon of the building can individually and cumulatively be
regarded as “non-material”. I therefore consider accordingly that the application can be
approved.
RECOMMENDATION: That conditional planning permission be granted.