Development
Control Ref No
Fl201210212
Applicant
Location
Proposal
TY~e
PS Category
Officer
No weeks on
day of
committee
16113
Parish
Ward
Listed by:
Finchampstead
Wokingham
Without
Cllr HeliarSymons
Mr Freeman
Fairway, Devils Highway, Crowthorne
Postcode RG45 6BJ
Proposed erection of 12 no. apartments with associated parking,
amenity space and landscaping plus demolition of existing dwelling.
Major
7 (Major Residential development)
Ashley Smith
FOR CONSIDERATION BY
REPORT PREPARED BY
Planning Committee on 17110112
Head of Development Management
SUMMARY
The site is located on the Southern side of the Devil's Highway on the site of an existing
large detached dwelling in well landscaped grounds. The site area extends to 0.3
hectares and is generally level. The southern side of the Devil's Highway is made up of
predominantly large detached dwellings in substantial plots, the northern side of the
Road abuts a golf Course.
The applicant proposes to demolish the existing dwelling in order to allow the erection of
12 Flats and ancillary facilities.
The application is brought before the Committee as it has been listed by Cllr HeliarSymons and the reasons for refusal below differ from Cllr Heliar-Symons' reasons for
listing. Although the built form of the host building is considered by officers to be
acceptable it is considered that the intensified use type and associated development to
facilitate this will detract from the rural and low density feel of the locality and as such
the proposal is recommended for refusal. A holding reason with regards impact upon
bats has also been raised, however this may be overcome as further information has
been received from the applicant, the Borough ecologists consideration of this will be
reported in the member's update.
PLANNING STATUS
Modest Development Settlement
Adjacent site of archaeological interest
CAA
Adjacent to footpathlpublic right of way
5km and 7km SPA
Wind turbine safeguarding Zone
RECOMMENDATION
I That Planning Permission be REFUSED fqr&he following reasons:
f"
1. The proposed development would result in an uncharacteristic high density form
of development which fails to reflect local character. The layout and appearance
of the development would appear uncharacteristic when viewed in the context of
the surrounding development patterns due to features such as the substantial
hardstanding, vehicle parking, and bin & cycle stores required to deliver the
development would urbanise an area of semi urban character. As such the
proposal fails to respect the prevailing character of the surrounding
neighbourhood and streetscene. This is considered to be contrary to polices CP3
of the Wokingham Borough Core Strategy and the Borough Design Guide.
2. It has not been demonstrated that the proposed development would satisfy the
Local Planning Authority with respect to the impact upon the protected species of
bats. As such the proposal is contrary to the NPPF with regards its impact upon
biodiversity.
3. The proposal fails to make satisfactory provision of adequate s e ~ i c e s amenities
,
and infrastructure needs and consequently would have an unacceptable adverse
impact upon the amenities of the area. As such the proposal is contrary to policy
CP4 of the Wokingham Borough Core Strategy.
4. The proposal fails to make adequate provision for affordable housing either on
site or through an off site financial contribution. As such the development would
be contrary to CP4 of the Core Strategy.
PLANNING HISTORY
0/2005/6607 - Outline application for the erection of 4 dwellings with garages and
demolition of existing dwelling. (Means of access and siting to be considered).
(Withdrawn - 04/04/2006)
0/2005/4967 - Outline application for the proposed erection of 4 dwellings (Access and
siting of be considered). Demolition of existing dwelling. (Refused - 18/08/2005)
SUMMARY INFORMATION
For Residential
Site Area
Existing units
Proposed units
Number of bedrooms per unit
Proposed parking spaces
0.3 Hectares
One detached dwelling
12 residential flats
2 x I bedroom units, 10 x 2 bedroom
units
20 Spaces
CONSULTATION RESPONSES
Object- overdevelopment of site, out of character & keeping with
Parishrrown
area, concerns re traffic and safety with increased movements on
Council:
a very narrow and unlit access road with considerable pedestrian
activity. Is Devils Highway PROW? (Officer note: Yes,
Wokingham Without Foofpafh 13) Ravenswood Ave is
-ocal Members:
unadopted.
All three ward members expressed their concerns in relation to
this scheme. Cllr Helliar-Symons offered the following comments
which were supported by Cllrs Ross and Sleight:
"I write as the local borough councillor for this area which, whilst
being in Finchampstead Parish, is in Wokingham Without ward.
I write to object on a number of accounts to this development. I
wish to 'List' the application if you are minded to approve it, or to
refuse it without Highways and Local Character reasons. It is the
effects of these two aspects on which I mainly put fonvard as
reasons for my Listing.
The Devil's Highway is a Private Street, narrow (3-3.5m) and
without easy ability to pass oncoming traffic. The proposal to put
in a passing place on the opposite side of the road can surely not
be agreed as:
a. It is a Private Street and agreement of all residents required.
b. The area proposed for this passing place is outside the 'red
line' for the development and therefore cannot be secured?
c. This will add safety considerations as the road is also a public
footpath.
Whilst the nearby houses are in the main substantial individual
dwellings, the proposed scale, massing and bulk of the proposed
building is totally out of character for the area, clearly in
contravention of current adopted policies and this concern
is strongly supported in the emerging Borough Design Guide
SPD which has completed its consultation. Whilst the parking
provision may technically meet the new proposed standards, it
does not take into account that no on-street parking is available
for other visitors.
Previous applications along this road, including one on this site,
were found to generate excessive traffic increases along Devil's
Highway. Any further development of this or the larger site next
door (Talavera) would seriously affect safety and reasonable
access along this street. The recent developments at Rookwood
and Lane End (both 4 for 1) has reached a point of saturation for
access along this private road and footpath.
To the local members a scheme for flats is totally unacceptable in
this location. The only other flatted development nearby (Ardwell
House) accesses onto public highways along a much wider street
and is built on a much larger plot, but this was only secured on
Appeal and was against the strong opposition of local residetns
and councillors.
For these reasons I submit that this application is seriously flawed
and should be refused. This is submitted in concert with my two
ward colleagues."
.. -
. -.
-.
-..-
I
1
Environmental
Health
"No objections 1 comments regarding this application"
Rights of Way
No objections
Affordable Housing
Gave advice on potential breakdown of affordable unit provision
at the site.
Natural England
No objection, subject to compliance with the Rooks Nest Sang
Mitigation scheme.
Landscapes officer
Has no objection to the above proposal as the development
would have little effect on the local and wider landscape and all
trees on site can be protected throughout the build.
Planning Policy
Offered general planning advice on the proposal
Archaeology
Highways
Ecology
No objection subject to conditions
No objection, Subject to conditions.
Raised an objection on bat protection grounds.
Thames water
No obiection with regards infrastructure
.
REPRESENTATIONS
Correspondence received from 76 residents to the initial consultation (and 27 providing
revised and additional comments on the revised proposals) the letters objected to the
application on the grounds of:
-o
The development is entirely out of character/unacceptable mass and scale
The character of the road is semi rural
Potential for significant highway problems and congestion.
Potential conflict at junctions and golf club
Potential for conflict between cars and pedestrians
Possibility of noiselwaste and environmental issues from intensified use
Parking provision is inadequate
Housing is not necessary or suitable
Owner may not be able to implement permission due to ownership issues of
highway (not a planning matter)
Potential damage caused by construction (not a planning matter)
Transport data and parking data unsatisfactory or misleading
Pressure on existing infrastructure
Could create an undesirable precedent
Potential for overlooking
Juiliet balconies are unsatisfactory
Overdevelopment of site
Development could conflict to use of the golf course (including golfers and HGVs)
Devils Highway has already been overdeveloped by developers
Associated paraphernalia such as car park, footpaths, bin stores will add to
urbanising impact.
Proposal will devalue properties (not a planning issue)
/
A number of letters noted that the redesigned proposal was significantly better that the
previous proposal however all still concluded that they found the scheme unsatisfactory
for other reasons.
PLANNING POLICY
Government Policy
National Planning Policy Framework
Adopted Core Strateqy
CP1 - Sustainable development
CP3 - General Principles for Development
CP4 - lnfrastructure Requirements
CP5 - Housing mix, density and affordability
CP6- Managing Travel Demand
CP7 - Biodiversity
CP9 - Scale and location of development proposals
CP17 - Housing Density
Wokingham Borouqh Local Plan
WBE3 -Accessibility
WBE4 - Landscape and Planting
WBE5 - Trees and New Development
WHlO -Variety of Housing
WR7 - Provision of Public Open Space in New Residential Development
WCC3 -The Central Berkshire Forest
South East Plan
CC1 - Sustainable Development
CC2 - Climate Change
CC4 - Sustainable Design and Construction
CC6 - Sustainable Communities and Character of the Environment
CC7 - lnfrastructure and Implementation
CC8 - Green lnfrastructure
NRM5- Conservation and Improvement of Biodiversity
NRM9 -Air Quality
NRMI 0 - Noise
NRMI 1- Development Design for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
H I - Regional Housing Provision 2006-2026
H2 -Managing the Delivery of Regional Housing Provision
H3 -Affordable Housing
H5 -Housing Design and Density
T2 - Mobility Management
T4 - Parking
T5 -Travel Plans and Advice
BE1 - Management for an Urban Renaissance
S1 -Supporting Healthy Communities
Supplementan/ Documents
The Wokingham Borough Council Design Guide
Planning Advice Note: lnfrastructure Impact Mitigation November 2010
Sustainable Design and Construction SPD
Companion Document to the Sustainable Design and Construction SPD
Wokingham Highway Design Guide November 2006
PLANNING ISSUES
Principle of Development:
1. The site is located within a settlement boundary and as such the development should
be acceptable providing that it complies with the principles stated in the Core Strategy.
Core Strategy policy CP3 provides general principles for all development, with the
primary remit that development should be appropriate to the surrounding street scene
and without detriment to the amenity of neighbouring residents. The Wokingham
Residential Design Guide (adopted July 2007) provides recommendations for residential
schemes.
I
2. The NPPF requires that proposed dwellings should be well integrated with, and
complement local buildings in relation to scale, density, layout and access. Policy CP3
of the Core Strategy outlines that development should be appropriate to the surrounding
streetscene, and without detriment to the amenity of neighbouring residents. The
current position with regards planning policy encourages character led development.
The Borough Design guide provides substantial advice on layout best practice.
Impact on the Character of the Area:
3. The proposal has been subject to revised plans during the planning process and
these have been put out to full public consultation. The initial design featured large
harsh gables which gave a very urban appearance to the front elevation of the proposed
block of flats, this has been redesigned to remove much of the gabling and front facing
brick work and the redesign has incorporated much of the accommodation into the roof
space to soften the appearance of the building and give it a semi rural appearance,
4. The building now appears semi rural in line with the semi rural character of the lane
(though this is a settlement location) and provides an interesting and varied frontage
which is reflective of the informal character of the lane, which is something that the
previous design lacked before. This is considered to give the block visual interest and
make the host building not stand out as an obvious addition to the streetscene and
make a more positive contribution.
5. The width of the building provides space to either side of the building and the main
block retains a sense of spaciousness that is relatively characteristic of the streetscene.
The building will be ?Om in height at its highest point however drops across the building.
The existing building is over 8m in height and due to its set back appearance and the
fact that it will be of a similar height to the higher points of the adjacent building
(according to the site survey) this is acceptable.
6. The physical design of the main building is therefore considered to strike a balance
between responding to the surrounding context, as well as providing a development
which has its own individuality, which is acceptable in design terms.
7. The provision of a block of flats in this locality will however impact negatively upon
character. Although the built form of the host building is considered to be attractive and
I
locality. The NPPF requires thai'proposed dwellings should be well integratid with, and
complement local buildings in relation to scale, density, layout and access.
8. The character of this part of the Devil's Highway is dominated by rural feeling semi
rural large dwellings in substantial plots. Although the host structure is acceptable the
provision of a substantial level of parking and features such as the large and prominent
bin store would identify the property as an uncharacteristic departure from the wider
established pattern of development. The public areas to the front of the dwelling would
appear primarily hard landscaped, with the access road and parking areas dominating
the site and this visual impact would be accentuated when the car park is full and this
would urbanise the semi rural locality and detract from local character.
9. Although some reasonable provision of soft landscaping has been provided into the
remaining undeveloped areas, features such as the bin store and car parking would
remain obvious and reflective of an intensified use. This is not characteristic to the area
and is not considered to not reflect the density and layout of surrounding schemes and
repetition of this form of development could lead to significant degradation of the
streetscene.
10. For these reasons, the overall character and layout represents a departure from the
semi rural appearance of the area. On this basis, the scheme is considered
unacceptable on character grounds.
11. In terms of the buildings design, the design of the proposed building is traditional in
its appearance and this element would be considered acceptable by officers as the
design is not a significant departure from what one might expect from a large hose in
such a location.
Impact on Neighbours:
Loss of Light & Overbearing.
12. The proposals are unlikely to result in any significant loss of light or overbearing.
The only nearby property in reasonable proximity to the affected elevation is Rushton
Lodge which has a side to side relationship with the applicant site. The neighbouring
property is currently located approximately 9m from the is side elevation of the existing
building and this will be reduced to 7m in the current proposal which is still considered
to be a significant separation distance in excess of the separation distances at many
sites. The proposal does not project forwards of Rushtons Lodge and only projects by
1.5m to the rear with a 7m separation distance this is considered acceptable and no
loss of light, overbearing or significant change in relationships with amenity spaces or
existing fenestration will arise.
13. Due to the suitable length of the proposal, the side to side relationships and the lack
of insignificant change in relationship with amenity areas and fenestration it is
considered unlikely that the proposals will lead to any significant loss of light or
overbearing to the detriment of Rushton's Lodge or Talavera. All other properties are.
located a significant distance away well in excess of minimum separation distance
guidance contained in the Borough Design Guide and as such the proposals are
considered to accord with CP3 of the Wokingham Borough Core Strategy with regards
loss of light and overbearing.
Overlooking:
14. The proposals are three storey in nature, however no clear windows are proposed in
the side elevations at first floor level or above facing Rushton's Lodge, the only window
in this side elevation is an en-suite bathroom window which would be conditioned to be
obscure glazed and as such is acceptable. All rear and front facing windows comply
with Borough Design Guide recommendations relating to separation distances and as
such are considered acceptable. 6 Windows in the eastern elevation facing 'Talavera'
are proposed, however the separation distance to this dwelling is approximately 50m
and benefits from a tall vegetative screen and as such would be considered acceptable.
The windows in this side elevation are secondary in nature and could be conditioned to
be obscure glazed if necessary to protect Talavera. As such, the proposals will only
offer views of the applicant's garden and oblique views of other properties that are
common place in residential areas. As such no conflict with CP3 of the Core Strategy
will arise with regards overlooking.
Intensification of use o f the site as flats:
15. Blocks of flats are fairly common features in residential settings and are not
considered to impact unduly upon residential amenity with regards noise or other
impacts. There are no policies against blocks of flats within residential areas and there
is nothing unusual about this block which would suggest that any out of the ordinary
impacts would arise; as such no conflict with regards policy CP3 of the Core Strategy
arises.
Highway Issues:
16. The Highway Authority has been consulted on this proposal and does not object to
the scheme with regards parking or highway safety matters.
Highway Safety & Road Design
17. The Highway Authority considers that the capacity of the single track access road is
acceptable for the existing and proposed vehicle movements. This section of road is
straight and with the proposed width increase (proposed as per the revised drawing
number AP.0200 Rev J) across the site frontage would have adequate and inter-visible
passing places.
18. The sight lines on The Devils Highway turning south into Ravenswood Avenue have
been assessed using Manual for Streets principles and are acceptable taking the speed
survey details and the layout of the junction into consideration. A condition would be
required for the access to be constructed in accordance with specification details to be
submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details
would need to show the Devils Highway widening works across the site frontage,
turning head and footway all as depicted on the revised site layout plan.
19. During the application process the application was subject to a revised red line plan
which was subject to full public consultation. All works which need to be carried out by
the applicant that would be subject to condition would be incorporated within this red
line and as the private road is in existing use and is operational, the red line is suitable
for planning purposes. In the revised plans the proposed passing place has
on the side of the road closest to the dwelling
- and is considered acceptable as a
highway solution.
20. The level of parking provision (20 spaces) to be made is consistent with the
emerging Borough Car Parking standards (17 spaces) and makes provision for
additional visitors parking (3 spaces). Accordingly, this element is considered complianl
with CP6 of the Core Strategy.
Traffic Impact & Sustainability
21. The proposal is likely to generate 72 daily vehicle movements with 12 of these being
(AM) peak hour movements. A traffic survey undertaken on 13 October 201 1 shows thal
the Devils Highway carried 131 vehicles daily between 0700-1900 hours with 12 01
these movements being within the AM peak period (0800-0900 hours). The site itself is
located in an established residential area with the primary means of access to facilities,
shops and public transport being via Ravenswood Avenue. Crowthorne Railway Station,
situated off Dukes Ride is located some 600 metres from the site. A contribution is
sought to further enhance transportation infrastructure improvements in the area and
the applicant has indicated willingness to provide the necessary contributions should the
scheme be approved. There is no objection to the development on transport or
sustainability grounds.
Archaeoloqy:
22. The Borough Archaeologist forwarded recommendations for the outline permission
sought in 2005 as this site lies in an area of archaeoloqical potential. The site is located
adjicent
to and may incorporate part of the Roman ~ i a d'Investigations
.
near by have
returned varying results, with some investigations recording the presence of
archaeology and some not.
23. Medieval features were recorded during an archaeological evaluation at Lane End
on the Devils Highway that are likely to relate to different activities and timescales within
a 12-14th century timeline. While the Archaeologist has an understanding of the
significance of the Roman Road and potential associated activity, the Medieval activity
requires further understanding. Further information would assist in future decision
making and would benefit the local residents in understanding more about the heritage
of their area.
24. Given the potential to impact on archaeology of Roman and Medieval date, the
archaeologist recommends archaeological investigation conditions for the site.
Ecology
25. The submitted bat survey found evidence of roosting bats in this property and was
undertaken at a time when bats are not active. Consequently the applicant will need to
submit a full survey (including emergence and dawn re-entry surveys) of the building in
the bat breeding season (May- August inclusive) and an outline bat mitigation strategy
(including drawings to show any specific modification to the replacement dwelling to
accommodate bats). In line with the recommendations of the NPPF and established
ecological principles this information should be made available prior to the granting of
planning consent and not simply attached as a condition. Additional information has
been submitted and a holding reason for refusal on this basis is recommended which
may be withdrawn at the members update should the ecologist find the mitigation
measures satisfactory.
26. The application site appears to support suitable reptile habitat and the area around
the site is known to support populations of native reptiles which are protected species.
However the scale of the development proposed is unlikely to have a significant
adverse impact on the local reptile population and consequently a reptile protection
condition would be required at this site.
Services, Amenities and Infrastructure requirements:
27. The applicant has suggested in their planning statement that they would be willing to
provide contributions to mitigate against the impacts caused by the development. In
accordance with Core Strategy Policy CP4 new development is expected to make
arrangements for the improvement or provision of infrastructure, services, community
and other facilities. Under policy CP5 the development must include a range of housing
including .affordable housing. The Borough has adopted a Planning Advice Note on
Infrastructure Impact Mitigation - Contributions for New Development (PAN).
28. The catchment Oaklands Infant & Junior I St Sebastian's schools are currently oversubscribed and the development needs to contribute towards additional mainstream
primary education in the area. The catchment secondary school is currently oversubscribed however the proposal is only for 1 & 2 bed units so secondary contributions
are not attracted. The highway authority has identified the need for local highway and
public transport improvements to accommodate increased traffic in the area. In
accordance with the PAN the development would necessitate contributions as follows:
Education
Leisure, recreational and sports
facilities
Country parks, access and
biodiversity
Libraries
Highways
Air quality monitoring and
assessment
Thames Basin Heathlands SPA
Monitoring fee
Legal costs (minimum)
£37,278.00
£28,037.14
£6,358.00
£2,521.97
£26,000.00
£0.00
£24,387.24
£750.00
£ 1,000.00
TOTAL: £126,332.35 & affordable housing
As the application is recommended for refusal, there will be no S106 agreement to
secure infrastructure mitigation and this therefore constitutes a reasons for refusal.
1
Affordable Housing:
29. The threshold for affordable housing for this type of development is 5 dwellings or
more on residential sites of 0.16 hectares or larger. The site exceeds these thresholds
and therefore there is a requirement for provision of affordable housing.
-
30. To meet the requirements of Policy CP5 of the Core Strategy, a minimum of 20% of
the total number of units should be provided on-site as affordable housing. The
applicant is proposing 3 units for affordable housing, which is acceptable. All of the
affordable housing units should be built to Homes and Communities Agency Design and
Quality Standards and be transferred to one of the Council's preferred Registered
Provider (RP) partners for a price that will enable the RP to deliver the affordable
housing without the need for public subsidy. The Council is also willing to consider a
commuted sum in-lieu of some on site provision, should the applicant wish to put
forward such a proposal for negotiation. As the application is recommended for refusal,
there will be no S106 agreement to secure affordable housing and this therefore
constitutes a reasons for refusal.
CONCLUSION
The proposal is considered not to comply with development plan policies by reason of
the development being out of character with the locality and is therefore recommended
for refusal by the committee.
CONTACTDETAILS
Service
Development
I Management
1
Email
Telephone
01 18 974 6428 / 6429 development.control@wokingham.gov.uk
1
Page 1 o f 1
Ashley Smith
From:
Liz Penn [lizpenn.wwpc@btconnect.com]
Sent:
02 October 2012 14:OO
To:
Ashley Smith
Subject: F/2012/0212
HI Ashley
As per earlier telecom
Object- overdevelopment of site, out of character & keeping with area, concerns re traffic and safety
with increased movements on a very narrow and unlit access road with considerable pedestrian activity
Is Devils Highway PROW? Ravenswood Ave is unadopted.
Regards
Liz Penn
Assistant Clerk (Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, 9am - 2pm)
Wokingham Without Parish Council
01344 771425
www.wokinghamwithoutparishcouncil.~ov.uk
DISCLAIMER
You should be aware that all e-mails received and sent by this Council are subject t o the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 and therefore may be disclosed t o a third party. (The information contained in this
message or any of its attachments may be privileged and confidential and intended for the exclusive use
of the addressee). The views expressed may not be official policy but the personal views of the
originator.
If you are not the addressees any disclosure, reproduction, distribution, other dissemination or use of
this communication is strictly prohibited.
If you received this message in error please return it to the originator and confirm that you have deleted
all copies of it.
All messages sent by this organisation are checked for viruses using the latest antivirus products. This
does not guarantee a virus has not been transmitted. Please therefore ensure that you take your own
precautions for the detection and eradication o f viruses.
Click
to report this email as sparn.