AGENDA - Mole Valley · 2020. 4. 24. · If you require a copy of an agenda item, please contact Hannah Scott on 01306 879 201 or email: [email protected] NOTE: This

Mole Valley District Council Pippbrook Dorking Surrey RH4 1SJ

Telephone 01306 885 001 Facsimile 01306 876 821 Website www.molevalley.gov.uk

Document Exchange DX 57306 Dorking

Printed on recycled paper

To the Members of the Development Management Committee,

Your attendance is requested at a meeting of the Development Management Committee to be held in the Council Chamber, Pippbrook, Dorking on Wednesday 4 March 2020 at 7.00pm for the transaction of business set out in the following agenda.

Karen Brimacombe Chief Executive

21 February 2020

Members of the Committee: Councillors: David Preedy (Chairman), Simon Budd (Vice-Chairman), Roger Adams, Lesley Bushnell, Paul Elderton, Nancy Goodacre, Raj Haque, Tim Loretto, Wayne Monkman, Emma Norman, Keira Vyvyan-Robinson, Tracy Keeley, Helyn Clack, Richard Moyse, Mary Huggins, Chris Hunt, David Hawksworth, Patricia Wiltshire and Simon Edge.

Substitutes: Councillors: Margaret Cooksey, Stephen Cooksey, Mary Cooper, Bridget Kendrick, Paul Kennedy, Charles Yarwood, Rosemary Dickson, Metin Huseyin, Tim Ashton, Garry Stansfield, David Harper, Alan Reilly.

The Chairman would like to remind Members that they have the opportunity to ask Officers questions, in respect of issues concerning matters of detail

or for further clarification, prior to the meeting.

If a vote is tied the Chairman may exercise a casting vote, or if he/she has already voted, a second vote.

AGENDA

1. Minutes

To approve as a correct record the minutes from the meetings held on 5 February 2020.

2 Apologies

To receive apologies for absence.

3. Disclosure of Interests

To receive any disclosures of interests from Members (either disclosable pecuniaryinterests or non-pecuniary interests) in relation to any items included on the agenda forthis meeting in accordance with the Council’s Code of Conduct.

If you require a copy of an agenda item, please contact Hannah Scott on 01306 879 201 oremail: [email protected]

NOTE: This meeting will be webcast for live or subsequent broadcast via the Council’s internetsite (www.molevalley.gov.uk). The whole of the meeting will be filmed except where there areconfidential or exempt items. Generally the public seating areas are not filmed. However, byentering the meeting room and using the public seating area, you are consenting to being

filmed.

Members of the press/public may film or record proceedings, blog or tweet proceedings andtake photographs providing they do not disturb the conduct of the meeting. The Chairman of the

meeting has the discretion to terminate or suspend filming/recording if in his/her opinioncontinuing to do so would prejudice the proceedings of the meeting or, on advice, considers that

continued filming/recording might infringe the rights of any individual.

4. Development ManagementReports on Planning ApplicationsN.B:

1. Any relevant information received after the publication of the reportswill be circulated to Members of the Committee and tabled as part ofthe Addendum sheet prior to the commencement of the proceedings.

2. Financial implications are only highlighted where these are other thanmight arise in pursuance of statutory rights.

3. Environmental implications are indicated in each case as applicable.4. Background documents in each case comprise the application (where

this is applicable) and the representations and other correspondencerelevant within the meaning of the Local Government Act 1972, asamended by the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985.

Page1 - 90

5. Urgent ItemsTo consider any items of business, other than those shown on this agenda andwhich, by reason of special circumstances to be stated at the meeting,in the opinion of the Chairman, should be considered at the meeting as a matterof urgency.

mailto:[email protected]://www.molevalley.gov.uk/

DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE 4 MARCH 2020

INDEX OF PLANNING APPLICATIONS

PLEASE NOTE:

THE COMMITTEE MAY DECIDE AT THE MEETING TO CHANGE THE ORDER OF THE APPLICATIONS TO BE TAKEN.

ITEM NO. APPLICATION SITE ADDRESS WARD

PAGE NOS.

1 MO/2019/1889 6, The Quarry, Betchworth, Surrey, RH3 7BY

Brockham, Betchworth & Buckland

2 MO/2019/2204 64, Eastwick Drive, Bookham, Leatherhead, Surrey, KT23 3PS

Bookham North

3 MO/2019/2130 3, Hazel Way, Fetcham, Leatherhead, Surrey, KT22 9QF

Fetcham West

4 MO/2019/2009 Land South of Blanks Lane, Newdigate, Surrey, RH6 0ES

Capel, Leigh & Newdigate

5 MO/2019/1953 Downsvale Nursing Home, 6-8, Pixham Lane, Dorking, Surrey, RH4 1PT

Mickleham, Westhumble & Pixham

6 MO/2019/1641 Carpel House, Horsham Road, South Holmwood, Dorking, Surrey, RH5 4LT

Holmwoods

1-8

9-38

39-52

53-60

61-82

83-90

Application Number and Registration Date

MO/2019/1889 (Detailed) 25-Nov-2019

Applicant Miss E Gardner

Case Officer Helen Clarke

Amendments /amplifications

Committee Date 4 March 2020

Ward(s) Brockham, Betchworth & Buckland

Proposal Installation of an air conditioning unit in log cabin.

Site Description 6, The Quarry, Betchworth, Surrey, RH3 7BY

RECOMMENDATION: Approve subject to conditions

Summary

This application was presented to the February Committee and was deferred due to concerns with the noise level that needed further clarification from the Environmental Health Officer.

The application is for the installation of an air conditioning unit onto the side elevation of an existing log cabin building in the garden of 6 The Quarry, Betchworth. The building is used partly as a dog grooming business for which planning permission has been granted and partly for residential use. The main issues relate to the character of the Green Belt and the AONB and the issue of noise to nearby neighbouring properties. It is concluded that the small scale nature of the unit and its position would not impact the Green Belt or the AONB. The noise of the unit is low in comparison with normal volume conversations and therefore this would not significantly impact the amenities of the neighbours. Planning permission is recommended.

Application number 1

DM1

1. Development Plan

1.1. Metropolitan Green Belt, Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), Area of Great Landscape Value (AGLV), Site of Archaeological Potential, Within 800 m of a Special area of conservation.

2. Relevant Planning History

MO/2010/0308 Single storey side/rear extension Approved with conditions

30-Apr-2010

MO/2018/1691 Change of use from residential (C3) to mix C3 and dog grooming (Sui Generis). The dog grooming activities are restricted to a specific half of outbuilding

Approved with conditions

05- Apr-2018

MO/2018/1691/1

Non-material amendment to allow the installation of an air conditioning unit within log cabin.

Refused

30-May-2019

3. Description of Development

3.1. The application site is located on the northwest side of The Quarry, Betchworth. This is a small lane that leads off from Station Road. There are a number of small dwellings on this lane, constructed in the around the 1900s, grouped together at one end of the road. There are some office buildings at the eastern end of the road closer to the station. The site hosts a two storey semi-detached dwelling. There is a log cabin building at the end of the rear garden that is used for a dog grooming business.

3.2. The current application seeks planning permission for the installation of an air conditioning unit on the log cabin.

3.3. This would be positioned on the north eastern elevation. The maximum size of the unit would be 799mm by 542mm with depth of 290mm.

3.4. Figures 1-3 below show where the air conditioning units are proposed to be positioned on the building and where the dwelling is in relation to neighbouring properties.

DM2

3.5.

Figure 1 - Location of the units on the building

Figure 2 - Proposed location of units on the north eastern elevation

DM3

3.6.

Figure 3 - Site location plan 4. Consultations

Consultee Comment Condition SCC Highways As it is not considered that

the likely net additional traffic generation, access arrangements and parking would have a material impact on the safety and operation of the public highway, the Highway Authority was not consulted on this application.

None

Environmental Health Officer

Satisfied that the unit would not overhang into neighbour’s garden. The noise from the unit would be 51dbA. This would attenuate to below day time levels within 3 m of the unit and 10 metres to the nearest residential property. There should be no noticeable adverse effect.

Condition recommended No.3.

DM4

5. Representations

One letter has been received by the Parish Council and one from a neighbour. Comments are summarised below: Comment Officer Comment Condition Noise of unit would be noticeable especially in the summer.

Discussed in body of report

Condition put forward by Environmental Health

Concerned that Number 5 has been sold so might not have been notified.

This property has been notified. It is not within the control of the Council when the application is submitted

The Parish Council object to the application on the grounds that it enables a business in a quiet residential area.

Noise related issue which is discussed in the report

As above.

6. Main Planning Policies

6.1. Government Guidance National Planning Policy Framework 2019 (NPPF) Section 12 – Achieving well-designed places Section 13 – Protecting Green Belt land Section 15 – Conserving and enhancing the natural environment

6.2. Mole Valley Core Strategy CS13 – Landscape Character CS14 – Townscape, Urban Design and the Historic Environment

6.3. Mole Valley Local Plan ENV22 – General Development Control Criteria ENV23 – Respect for Setting

6.4. Other Documents Surrey Hills Management Plan – policies LU1 to LU5

7. Main Planning Issues

7.1. The main planning issues for consideration are:

- The impact on the Green Belt and the AONB - The impact on the character and appearance of the dwelling and surrounding area - The impact on the amenities of the neighbouring properties Impact on the Green Belt and AONB

7.2. The property is located in a rural area which is subject to stringent controls on new

development. This application is for the installation of a small domestic type of air conditioning unit to make the log cabin easier to work in in the summer months without having to have the windows and doors open.

DM5

7.3. Planning permission has already been granted for half of the log cabin to be used for dog grooming. This is under planning application MO/2018/1691.

7.4. The NPPF advises that inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.

7.5. The provision of an air conditioning unit would be considered as an alteration of a building and this would be acceptable within the Green Belt under paragraph 145 exception c). The alteration of a building is acceptable provided that it does not result in disproportionate additions over and above the size of the original building.

7.6. The size of the external unit would be 0.8 metre (799mm) wide and 0.5 (542mm) metre high. It is considered that this would be a small scale alteration that would not harm the openness of the Green Belt, which would comply with the requirements of the NPPF.

7.7. In relation to the character of the AONB, as the unit would be small and fixed onto the side of the existing building within the applicant’s garden area, it would not be visible within the wider AONB. Therefore the alteration would not harm the character of the AONB in accordance with policy CS13 of the Core Strategy. Impact on the character of the dwelling and the surrounding area

7.8. The external part of the unit would be located on the north eastern side of the building. This would not be readily visible from the dwelling as there is a low fence with a large bush behind it that obscures the view from the dwelling. It is considered that the addition of this air conditioning unit would not harm the overall character of the existing dwelling due to its position away from the main property.

7.9. It is considered that the general character of the area is residential and rural. The unit would not be readily visible from viewpoints outside of the site. Outbuildings are a common feature in residential areas and this small scale addition to the existing outbuilding would not have any harmful impact on the character of the surrounding area.

7.10. This would accord with the criteria of policies ENV22 and ENV23 of the Local Plan and CS14 of the Core Strategy. Impact on the amenities of neighbouring properties

7.11. The main issue associated with installing an air conditioning unit is the noise it would generate. The proposed unit would emit circa 51 dbA which is equivalent to the noise emitted from a refrigerator and less than a conversation.

7.12. The unit would be positioned away from No.7’s garden at a distance of approximately 15 metres. The unit would be approximately 13 metres from No.5. No. 9 sits to the southwest of the rear part of the site. Although the log cabin is close to the rear of this property, as the unit would be on the opposite side, it would be around 10 metres away from the property.

7.13. The original permission granted for use of part of the building for dog grooming has specific conditions relating to the use. One of these conditions is that when the dryers and blowers are being used to dry dogs, all windows and doors shall be kept closed.

7.14. The applicant advises that the unit is necessary for making the temperature inside the building cooler in the summer months. Other fans and blackout blinds have not worked to reduce the indoor temperature. The unit would not be switched on all day,

DM6

every day. Grooming is on average 2 dogs per day. This is also beneficial for the dogs as well as the applicant.

Figure 4 - Photo of the existing cabin 7.15. The Environmental Health Officer advises that the noise emitted would be a low level,

within a residential area, that it would not have any adverse impact on the living conditions of the neighbouring properties. Therefore the relevant criteria of policy ENV22 would be met.

Conclusion

7.16. The proposed air conditioning unit is considered not to be inappropriate development within the Green Belt and would not harm the openness of the Green Belt or the character of the AONB. The unit would not harm the character of the existing dwelling on the site or the surrounding area. The noise emitted by the unit would be low in a residential area and therefore the amenities of neighbouring properties would not be significantly affected.

8. Recommendation Permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years

from the date of this permission.

DM7

Reason: To comply with Section 91(1) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51(1) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out and completed in all respects strictly in accordance with the submitted documents and plans contained within the application and no variations shall take place. Reason: To accord with the terms of the submitted application and to ensure minimal impact on local amenity and the environment in accordance with Mole Valley Core Strategy policy CS14 and Mole Valley Local Plan policy ENV22.

3. The air conditioning unit shall be installed in accordance with the approved details and the unit shall be maintained in accordance with the manufacturers recommendations and any unit to be installed in the future shall not have a worse acoustic performance than that detailed in the specification sheet submitted to support the application. Reason: To protect the amenities of neighbouring properties in accordance with policy ENV22 of the Mole Valley Local Plan.

4. The use of the air conditioning unit shall be restricted to the business hours of 09:00 to 18:00 Mondays to Fridays, 09:00 to 14:00 on Saturdays and at no time on Sundays or Bank Holidays. Reason: To protect the amenities of the area, and in particular the amenities of neighbouring residential properties in accordance with Mole Valley Local Plan policy ENV22.

DM8


MO/2019/2204 (Outline) 17-Dec-2019

Applicant J Ware

Case Officer Donna Penson



Ward(s) Bookham North

Proposal Outline application for the consideration of access, appearance, layout and scale for the erection of 1 No. two storey dwelling, 1 No. single storey dwelling and a single detached garage following the demolition of existing dwelling.

Site Description 64, Eastwick Drive, Bookham, Leatherhead, Surrey, KT23 3PS


Summary

The proposal is an Outline planning application for the erection of 1 No. two storey dwelling at the front of the site following the demolition of existing dwelling and 1 No. single storey dwelling and a single detached garage at the rear of the site. Access, appearance, layout and scale are to be considered at this stage. Landscaping is the only reserved matter.

In November 2019, the same scheme was refused on ecology grounds, as insufficient information had been supplied to satisfactorily demonstrate that the proposal would not have an adverse impact on protected species that may be occupying the site.

The current application has been submitted with an ecology report. The report concluded that the existing property has no external or interior features suitable for roosting bats or nesting birds.


DM9

The proposal is considered acceptable in relation to local and national policies. Accordingly, approval is recommended. 1. Development Plan

1.1. Built up area

1.2. Bookham Neighbourhood Development Plan (BKNDP)


2.1 Relevant planning history for the site is set out below.

MO/2019/0192 Outline application for the consideration of access, appearance, layout and scale for the erection of 2 No. two storey dwellings and a single detached garage following the demolition of existing dwelling.

Figure 1 – Layout plan MO/2019/0192

Refused 15 April 2019

DM10

Figure 2 - Front elevation house

Figure 3 - Front Elevation (House at rear) The application was refused for the following reasons:-

1. The proposed development comprises an undesirable overdevelopment of the site, out of keeping with and detrimental to the character and appearance of the area. The proposal would therefore be in conflict with Mole Valley Core Strategy policy CS14, Mole Valley Local Plan Policies ENV22, ENV23 and ENV24, Bookham Neighbourhood Development Plan policies BKEN2 and BKH2 and government advice contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

2. The proposed layout, by reason of the form and siting of the Plot 2 House, is considered unsatisfactory and would be detrimental to the amenities of 66A Eastwick Drive by reason of

DM11

overlooking and loss of privacy. The proposal would therefore be in conflict with Mole Valley Core Strategy policy CS14, Mole Valley policy ENV22 and government advice contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

MO/2019/0924 Outline application for the consideration of access, appearance, layout and scale for the erection of 1 No. two storey dwelling, 1 No. single storey dwelling and a single detached garage following the demolition of existing dwelling.

Figure 4 – Layout plan from MO/2019/0924

The application was refused for the following reason:

1. Insufficient information has been submitted to satisfactorily demonstrate that the proposal would not have an adverse impact on protected species that may be occupying the site. In the absence of such information, the Local Planning Authority is not satisfied that protected species would not be adversely affected by the proposed development and the current proposal is therefore contrary to policy CS15 of the Mole Valley Core Strategy, policy ENV15 of the Mole Valley Local Plan and the policy guidance contained within the National Planning Policy Framework.

Refused

08 Nov 2019

2.2 Planning history on the adjoining property, 66A Eastwick Drive is also relevant and is set out below:-

DM12

66A Eastwick Drive MO/2018/1092 Erection of detached two storey dwelling following demolition of existing bungalow. The bungalow which used to be on site is shown below on the left and the approved house (nearing completion) is shown below on the right.

Figure 5 - Front elevation (existing)

Figure 6 - Front elevation (proposed)

Figure 7 - Layout

2.3 Also relevant is planning history on a property further along the road, which has been referred to by an objector to the current proposal.

Land rear of 49, Eastwick Drive MO/2009/0088 Erection of detached bungalow with associated parking.

An appeal (APP/C3620/A/09/2106852) was dismissed on 23 November 2009. The site plan is shown below.

DM13

Figure 8 - Site Layout

The Inspector commented that there was a generally spacious feel in the street scene. He stated that the proposed bungalow would have a plot size smaller than all but one of those nearby on Eastwick Drive. He stated “I accept that it would be larger than many plots on other streets, but the building would be sited and seen in the context primarily of the larger frontage properties. In my view, the proposal would not respect the existing chracter of the area”.

The Inspector further stated that “The replacement dwelling is a large structure and is particularly tall. In my opinion, taking into account the proposed separation distance, it would visually overpower the bungalow. I consider that there would be a poor physical relationship between the two buildings, and the main dwelling would be left with a garden of limited depth. Furthermore, the siting of the bungalow to the rear of no. 49, with access along the side boundary, is not a characteristic form of development in the street”.

The Inspector concluded that “….in the context of the character of the surrounding area, the proposal would be relatively cramped and would constitute an overdevelopment of the site. Taking into account also the tandem nature of the development, I conclude that the bungalow would have a harmful effect of the character and appearance of the area”.

DM14


Figure 9 - Location of site

3.1. The application site lies on the eastern side of Eastwick Drive, within the Built up Area

and in the heart of a residential area. It accommodates a detached bungalow with detached garage which stands along the southern boundary. The site extends to some 0.48 acres. The road has a leafy and attractive ambience, typical of this part of Bookham and, in the main, the houses enjoy spacious and well landscaped settings. There is a wide variety in the type of buildings present.

3.2. The site is flanked by a bungalow (no. 62) and a substantially completed house (no. 66a). In 2018, permission was granted for the replacement of the bungalow to the north (66A) with a house (MO/2018/1092).

3.3. The current application seeks Outline planning application for the erection of 1 No. two storey dwelling at the front of the site following the demolition of existing dwelling and 1 No. single storey dwelling and a single detached garage at the rear of the site. Access, appearance, layout and scale are to be considered at this stage. Landscaping is the only reserved matter.

3.4. The frontage house (Plot 1) would be sited further forwards than the existing bungalow so that the front of the house would roughly fall in the line with the front of the bungalow at number 62 to the south. There is an existing hard surfaced driveway leading to the existing garage which runs back for a considerable distance. It is proposed to extend the driveway further to the east to serve the rear bungalow (Plot 2), which would be sited approximately 35 metres from the front house.

3.5. The house on Plot 1 is sited 2m from the boundary with no. 66A and 5.4m from the boundary with no. 62. The proposed house has an approximate garden depth of 17.1m (measured to the driveway leading to the proposed rear garage). There is a distance of

DM15

35m between the rear of the proposed house on Plot 1 and the front of the proposed bungalow on Plot 2.

3.6. The bungalow on Plot 2 is sited 1.9m from the boundaries with 2 Meadow Way and 12 Long Copse Close. The side elevations of the proposed bungalow is approximately 25 metres from the rear elevation of 2 Meadow Way and approximately 35 metres from the rear elevation of 12 Long Copse Close and over 25m from 10 Long Copse Close.

The proposed layout is shown below:-

Figure 10 - Proposed Site Layout Plot 1 at the front and Plot 2 at the rear

3.7 The proposed house at the front (Plot 1) would have the following layout and elevations:-

Figure 11 - Proposed Layout Plot 1

DM16

Figure 12 - Proposed Front and Side Elevation Plot 1

Figure 13 - Proposed Rear and Side Elevation Plot 1 3.8 The proposed bungalow at the rear (Plot 2) would have the following layout and

elevations:-

Figure 14 - Proposed Layout Plot 2

DM17

Figure 15 - Proposed Front and Side Elevations Plot 2

Figure 16 - Proposed Rear and Side Elevations Plot 2

The proposals incorporate a minimum of three dedicated parking spaces for each new dwelling in accordance with local policy. This consists of two parking spaces for each property, a detached garage for the house on Plot 1 and an integral garage in the bungalow on Plot 2.

The provision of cycle storage will be provided for four bikes, which will be located within the garage accommodation.

Refuse and recycling bins will be stored on a dedicated area of hard standing within the curtilage of each plot and on collection days brought to the dedicated refuse collection point located near the boundary on Eastwick Drive.

4. Consultations

4.1. SCC Highways No objections, recommends condition. (Conditions 9 and 10)

4.2. Environmental Services No queries or concerns. Bins would need to be presented on Eastwick Drive on collection days.

4.3 Sustainability Consultant

More information would need to be submitted were permission to be granted. This can be secured by way of condition (Condition 6)

4.4 Joint Waste Solutions No objections in relation to this proposed development however it should be made clear that the occupant of plot 2 would be required to present their waste bins at the designated refuse collection point near the entrance of the site for collection.

4.5 Surrey Wildlife Trust Agree with the recommendations within the ecology report (Condition 12)

DM18

4.6 SES Water

No comments received 4.7 Thames Water

No comments received 5. Representations

5.1. Bookham Residents Association object to the scheme for the following (summarised) reasons:

Concern Officer Comment Relevant Planning Condition

Over development of a back land garden space being demonstrated by the building footprint in relation to the plot sizes

This is not considered overdevelopment in this case due to the pattern of development in the immediately surrounding area; in fact no. 64 has the longest garden in the run of properties between 54-68 Eastwick Drive.

(The gardens between 54 - 62 appear to have been shortened by the development of Long Copse Close and 66a - 68 by the development of 2 Meadow Way)

No condition required

This application seems to contravene the policies EN22, 23 and 24 together with the local development plan.

It is not considered that the proposal contravenes local or national policies


Concern regarding the parking arrangements which could be inadequate Turning and manoeuvring of vehicles generating a possible difficulty particularly plot 2

Any visiting parking may well result in on street parking

Plot 1 has been provided with two parking spaces in the front garden and a garage at the rear of the site. It is considered sufficient space has been provided for turning and manoeuvring


DM19

Figure 16 – Layout of parking

Plot 2 has two parking spaces in front of the property and an integral garage. There is considered to be sufficient space for turning and manoeuvring.

Figure 17 – Layout of parking

The street scene which could be greatly affected if this application is allowed by creating a precedent for further developments thereby transforming the character appearance and impact upon this road and locality

Each planning application must be considered on its own merits. In this particular case, given development that has taken place on the immediately surrounding properties that the site has a longer garden than surrounding properties; that a bungalow rather than a house is now proposed and that the site is screened to a large extent by mature trees and planting it is not considered the proposal would set a precedent.


5.2. 11 letters of representations from nine neighbouring properties were received raising the following summarised concerns:

DM20

Concern Officer Comment Relevant Planning Condition

The proposed development comprises undesirable, piecemeal, overdevelopment of the site, out of keeping with and detrimental to the character of the area.

The surrounding backland development in the vicinity is not similar. These developments were carried out a number of years ago in a considered and comprehensive way to allow for efficient use of the Land.

This is not considered overdevelopment in this case due to the pattern of development in the immediately surrounding area; in fact no. 64 has the longest garden in the run of properties between 54-68 Eastwick Drive.

(The gardens between 54 - 62 appear to have been shortened by the development of Long Copse Close and 66a - 68 by the development of 2 Meadow Way, albeit some time ago).

It is considered that this development is similar and makes effective use of the Land.

Figure 18 – Layout of immediate vicinity


Over-development of back land garden space demonstrated by the building footprint in relation to the plot size. One of the reasons for the refusal of the previous application for tandem-style development of this plot was over development and applying to build a single storey instead of a two-storey dwelling does not change this fact.

It is considered that the change from a two storey house to a single storey bungalow does make a significant difference, in terms of how visible it will be in relationship to surrounding properties.

It will appear similar to the outbuilding in the garden of 12 Long Copse Close, which is a large single storey outbuilding, (shown in the aerial photo below) and will not be overdominant or cause overlooking.


DM21

Figure 19 – Aerial photo showing large outbuilding in rear garden of No.12 Long Copse Close.

The proposed layout, by reason of the form and siting of both properties, is unsatisfactory and would be detrimental to the amenities of adjacent properties and cause harm to the open and spacious character of the area.

It should be noted that the garden of 64 Eastwick Drive is the longest in that stretch of the road. And there is a reason for that – the gardens of 54, 56, 58, 60 and 62 have been shortened in the past to allow for the development of Long Copse Close and 66 and 68 are shorter due to the provision of 2 Meadow Way. The back garden of 64 is the only one not developed.



If this application were to be permitted, it would set a precedent for further development of this kind to the detriment of the character, appearance and impact on this area.

It is not considered that this is the case; the particular circumstances here being that the application site is larger than the surrounding properties because backland and infill development has taken place to the rear of all the immediately surrounding properties.


DM22

There is insufficient information regarding the drainage management of surface and foul water which could lead to water logging in the vicinity of my property. There is also no mention of how the plots will be landscaped. Leaving such detail to Reserved Matters is not appropriate in this situation.

Condition can require details Condition 5

Loss of light to 62 Eastwick Drive as the only windows of the living room will be blocked by the overbearing side wall of Plot 1. Proposal will also be unduly prominent and cause loss of outlook.

The distance between the proposed new house and 62 Eastwick Drive is shown below. The distance is approximately 13m so the proposal is not considered to be unduly prominent or to cause loss of light.

Figure 21– Plan showing application property and neighbouring property to the south.


The removal of established trees to provide access to the single storey building would open up the view from our property to the proposed two-storey building which would overlook our property and compromise our privacy.

There are no significant trees on site – account has been taken of the trees off site in particular the TPO tree within the rear garden of 10 Long Copse Close.

The trees that are to be retained, both at and adjacent to the site, are to be protected in accordance with BS5837:2012 (Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction–Recommendations). Tree root protection areas have been identified and fencing will be provided during construction.

Condition 8 – Boundary Treatments

Condition 11 – Tree

Condition 12 - Ecology

DM23

Likely to cause damage to oak tree. Loss of mature tree will affect bat population.

A Bat survey has been provided, which concluded that the building is in good condition with no features for bats.

There are significant safety issues with increased traffic entering and exiting at this point on the bend of the road. A ‘condition’ requiring vehicles to enter and exit in forward gear will be impossible to enforce and there is not enough space within the grounds of each property for long/large vehicles to turn. This will encourage parking on the road at a point where visibility is already restricted and cause a dangerous hazard to all road and pavement users.

It is considered there is sufficient room to provide parking and turning space on site - 2 parking spaces for each house, a detached garage for Plot 1 and an integral garage for Plot 2

Condition required as per Surrey Highways requirement. Condition 9.

There is a shallow balcony detailed on the rear view elevation of the two-storey building that is not reflected in the side elevation.

The balcony at the rear is a Juliet balcony No condition required

Wildlife/Ecology Disturbance The report only looks at the requirements for birds and bats and nothing else.

A Bat survey has been provided with this application. Due to the nature of the proposal a wildlife assessment check advises that a desk study for bats and birds would need to be required for this type of application.

The survey concluded that that the building remains in good condition with no external or interior features suitable for roosting bats or nesting birds.

The recommendations of the report will be conditioned accordingly.

Condition 12 - Ecology

A further application at 49 Eastwick Drive

It is considered that the application site circumstances are not the same as no. 49. In that

No condition

DM24

for a second property in the rear garden was turned down and the appeal was also lost.

case the proposal would have introduced another dwelling beside dwellings with long gardens, whereas the current proposal fills in a gap between existing backland and infill development.

Proposal for no. 49 shown below

Figure 22 - Layout house at no. 49

required

Changing the position of Plot 1 to bring it significantly forward, just to facilitate space for another property in the back garden, is not a good enough reason to justify the impact it will have on the adjacent properties.

There is no set building line along the road so bringing the house forward is not considered unacceptable in the street scene or detrimental to the amenities of surrounding properties.

Garden sizes for the two plots are considered acceptable in this case taking into account plot sizes in the immediate area.


The proposed access road to Plot 2 runs the whole length of my immediate neighbour’s plot (62 Eastwick Drive). This will lead to additional noise, light nuisance/disturbance and vehicle fumes at close proximity to our property which will negatively affect the enjoyment of our rear garden.

Resurfacing will cause loss of trees.

Much of the driveway already exists as shown by the photo below.

Figure 23 – Photo of existing driveway The driveway will serve only one additional dwelling and no. 62 is sited a good distance from the side boundary.

Condition 4

DM25

Figure 24 – Layout of immediate vicinity The existing driveway is to be left in-situ during both demolition and construction and not removed until all major works have been completed at the site and it is planned to install the new / replacement permeable hard surface. The existing hard surfaced areas are to be removed and either retuned to soft landscaping or a permeable hard surface (gravel, small brick paviours, resin bound gravel or similar product situated on a suitable cellular confinement system) installed in compliance with Section 8.6 of BS5837:2012.

There is every possibility that Plot 1 and 2 could be extended in the future, by way of a loft conversion. This will lead to windows in the roof space which will cause overlooking issues and lead to a lack of privacy that will affect my property

A condition can remove permitted development rights. Any planning application would then need to assess impact on neighbours.

Condition 13 and 14

Plot 1 is for a 4 bed property which is contrary to Bookham Neighbourhood Plan BKH1

This will be addressed within the report in section 7.3.


Plot 1 – The height of the ridge is still higher than neighbouring property at 66a plus 64 is on higher ground. Also its overpowering to the

The recently consented dwelling at 66a Eastwick Drive has a proposed ridge height of approx. 8.7m. The proposed front dwelling has a ridge height of 8.65m.

The Design and Access statement states that the recent consent at 66a Eastwick Drive allowed the ridge height to be approx. 600mm higher than the


DM26

bungalow at 62 Eastwick Drive. A street scene would highlight this. Plot 1 – The light from the proposed house now being further forward than our property at 66a will be affected. Plot 1 – The garage in the rear is only 2 metres from the boundary and is 2.2 metres high, with a very imposing gable plus it is also on higher ground, than our land at 66a.

existing dwelling at 66 Eastwick Road and approx. 700mm higher than the existing dwelling at 64 Eastwick Drive.

Whilst the house would stand forwards of the new house permitted at 66A, it would not breach a 45 degree line taken from the centre of the nearest windows in the front elevation of 66A.

The new garage is a single width garage and is 4.2m high (shown below)


It is not immediately to the rear of 66A, but approximately 11m away as shown below


There are covenants within the Deeds regarding width and depth of properties in this road to preserve area

This is not a material planning consideration. No condition required


6.1. Government Guidance NPPF

Section 2: Achieving sustainable development. Section 5: Delivering a sufficient supply of homes Section 12: Achieving well-designed places.

DM27

6.2. Mole Valley Core Strategy CS1 – Where Development will be directed. CS2 – Housing Provision and Location. CS14 – Townscape, Urban Design and the Historic Environment

6.3. Mole Valley Local Plan

ENV22 – General Development Control Criteria ENV23 – Respect for setting ENV24 – Density of Development and Space about buildings.

6.4. Bookham Neighbourhood Development Plan BKEN1: Trees and hedgerows BKEN2: Design and local character BKH1: Smaller homes for downsizing and new families BKH2: Infill and garden development BKH3: Parking space standards BKIN1: Drainage


The main planning issues for consideration are:- Principle of Development Housing Land Supply Effect on the character and visual amenities of the area Impact on the amenities of adjoining properties Highways and parking Impact on Trees Ecology CIL

7.1 Principle of Development

Policies CS1 and CS2 advise that new development will be directed towards previously developed land within the built up areas of Leatherhead, Dorking, Bookham, Fetcham and Ashtead. The site lies within the built up area of Bookham and the principle of residential development is therefore acceptable.

7.2 Housing Land Supply

The Council can currently only demonstrate 2.63 years of Housing Land Supply and as such, the’ tilted balance’ in paragraph 11 is engaged. This means granting permission for residential development unless the adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of doing so, when assessed against the NPPF as a whole, or there is a clear reason for refusing development because of a conflict with policies in the NPPF that protects areas or assets of particular importance. In assessing the benefits, the proposals would contribute one residential unit to the housing market and the District’s wider housing supply. The site lies within reasonable distance of the shopping centre at Bookham. The development would also increase footfall in the local shops and other outlets. This element would be consistent with the social and economic role of sustainable development and attracts some weight.

DM28

7.3 Character and visual amenities of the area

Paragraph 127 of the NPPF states that planning policies and decisions should ensure the developments, inter alia: (a) will function well and add to the overall quality of an area, not just for the short term but over the lifetime of the development; (b) are visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping; (c) are sympathetic to local character and history, including the surrounding built environment and landscape setting, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation or change (such as increased densities); create places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users. At paragraph 130, it is stated that permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions.

Policy CS3 states that the Council will particularly seek the provision of two and three bedroom dwellings. The proposal would provide one two storey four bedroom dwelling and one 3-bed bungalow therefore does not entirely accord with this policy. Policy BKH1 of the Neighbourhood Plan states that outside the Central Area (the case in this instance) particular support will be given to proposals for homes for two or three bedrooms. Whilst the proposal partly departs from the requirements of these polices, given that the proposal is only for one net additional dwelling, and one of the dwellings would be a 3-bed dwelling it is considered that a reason for refusal on these grounds would on balance be harder to sustain.

Mole Valley Core Strategy policy CS14 advises that all new development must respect and enhance the character of the area in which it is proposed whilst making the best possible use of the land available. Mole Valley Local Plan policy ENV22, General Development Control Criteria sets out seven general criteria for sound development control practice. Criterion 1 requires that development should be appropriate to the site in terms of its scale, form and appearance. Criterion 2 requires that the proposal does not significantly harm the amenities of neighbouring occupiers by reason of overlooking or its overshadowing or overpowering effect. Criterion 3 requires that development should respect the character and appearance of the locality.

Mole Valley Local Plan policy ENV23, Respect for Setting requires that development should take account of the scale, character, bulk and proportions of the surrounding built environment, and that it should not comprise overdevelopment in relation to the size of the plot and/or surrounding developments. Criterion 3 requires that new development has regard to established townscape features, including the space around buildings. Mole Valley Local Plan policy ENV24 advises that development will not be permitted where it would result in a cramped appearance having regard to the general spacing around buildings in the locality.

Bookham NDP policies listed under Policy Section above, briefly summarised, seek to ensure that new development is compatible with its surroundings in terms of building relationships, pays regard to existing trees and other vegetation and makes provision for smaller dwellings and adequate off-street car parking and access arrangements. The site lies within the East Bookham/West Fetcham Built up Area Character Appraisal. The key characteristics of the area are set out in the Built up Area Character

DM29

Appraisal as follows:-

• Houses often set back behind well maintained front gardens. Wide streets, grass verges and lateral separation between buildings combine to create a strong sense of spaciousness.

• Generous tree cover, including many mature trees within private gardens. • Interesting variety in house design, including some good examples of well built,

late 20th century housing. • Contrasting styles of development generally co-exist in a harmonious manner. • House plots mostly of regular size/spacing, creating a sense of coherence

despite variety of house design. • Little local distinctiveness in housing design, although level of tree cover and

spaciousness is very typical of “leafy” Surrey. • Few distinctive landmarks and some rather tortuous road layouts, which makes

area difficult to navigate, off the main through routes. Eastwick Drive is representative of the character described above. It has a pleasant ambience derived from the spacious settings of the properties which are of individual design. The road has a leafy appearance deriving from trees, hedging and verges which contributes towards the character. The mature landscaping provides a good level of screening to the buildings. Concerning the replacement of the bungalow with a house, this is considered to be acceptable. Indeed, permission has been granted for the replacement of the bungalow at 66A, to the north, with a house. Whilst the Plot 1 house would stand forwards of 66A, it is considered that this would not have a harmful impact in a road where there are staggers in the building line. There is a bungalow to the south at 62. However, there are other instances of bungalow/chalet houses adjoining houses and, due to the level of boundary landscaping in place, the transition between building heights is masked to some extent.

Turning to the dwelling proposed at the rear (Plot 2), there have been other forms of backland development in this area, notably to the north and south (Highcroft Court, Hambledon Place and Long Copse Close), which are designed on a comprehensive basis and make efficient use of land whilst respecting the character of the area.

The previous proposal, (for a two storey house on Plot 2) was considered a piecemeal form of development in backland form. The current proposal is for a bungalow not a two storey house, so would appear subservient to the frontage house and similar to an ancillary building which might be expected to be seen in a back garden. It would also be a 3-bed bungalow and so is more in accordance with the Neighbourhood Plan. The current proposal is therefore not considered to be detrimental to the character and visual amenities of the area.

7.4 Impact on the amenities of adjoining properties

Regarding the Plot 1 replacement dwelling at the frontage, it is considered that this would not have a detrimental impact. Whilst the house would stand slightly forward of new house permitted at 66A Eastwick Drive, it would not breach a 45 degree line taken from the centre of the nearest windows in the front elevation of 66A. The northern elevation of the Plot 1 house would only contain one first floor window serving a bathroom. It is considered that the amenities of 66A would not be significantly affected by the new dwelling or the first floor window.

DM30

Regarding 62 Eastwick Drive, the Plot 1 house would stand some 13 metres away. Once again, the facing side elevation would only contain one first floor bathroom window. Given the relationship and distances between the new house and the two adjoining properties, it is not considered that the house on Plot 1 would be detrimental to the amenities of the adjoining properties. Turning to the proposed Plot 2 bungalow at the rear of the site, due to the level of spacing that would exist between it and the neighbouring houses in each direction (some 30 metres plus), it is considered that the outlook of these adjoining properties would not be significantly affected. The presence of intervening screening in the form of trees and hedging would also assist. The separation between 66A and the proposed bungalow would be in the order of at least 27 metres. It is considered that this would be sufficient to maintain adequate levels of privacy to the house and garden of 66A particularly now only a single storey dwelling is proposed. The bungalow at 62 is sited further forward than 66A, so the distance between no. 62 and the new bungalow is in excess of 27m. Since there is already an access drive running along the southern boundary for a considerable distance, and the access would serve only a single dwelling, it is considered that a refusal based on noise from manoeuvring vehicles could not be justified. 12 Long Copse Close is over 35m from the site boundary and has a detached outbuilding between no. 12 and the application site boundary. The bungalow is sited sideways on to the site boundary and has no windows in the side elevation facing no. 12. 10 Long Copse Close is closer than no. 12 to the boundary, but is still over 20m from the site boundary. 2 Meadow Way is over 25 metres from the site boundary. The proposed bungalow is sited sideways on to the site boundary and has two windows facing the existing boundary screening and ground level. Given that a single storey bungalow is proposed and the separation distances from surrounding properties, it is not considered that the proposed bungalow on Plot 2 would be detrimental to the amenities of surrounding residential properties.

7.5 Highways

The proposal would provide two parking spaces within the curtilage for each dwelling, and also a detached garage for Plot 1 and an integral garage for Plot 2, which would be sufficient to meet the Council’s standards. Sufficient room is provided to allow vehicles to turn on the site.

The Highways Authority has raised no objections to the proposal and is recommending a condition to address their requirements.

7.6 Impact on Trees There are no protected trees on site and no trees considered of significance such that they warrant consideration for a Tree Preservation Order.

DM31

A Tree Preservation Order (TPO/107/1/O) was confirmed on 31-Aug-1973 – this was presumably at the same time that houses were proposed on land within the curtilage of Nos. 54-62 Eastwick Drive (houses within Long Copse Close).

Figure 27 - TPO An Arboricultural Report has been submitted and an off-site tree detailed as Oak T13 within this report is subject to a Tree Preservation Order (TPO/107/1/O-1972). The position of the tree is shown below.

Figure 28 – Plan of trees The Arboricultural Report details the root protection areas, protective fencing measures and method of resurfacing of the access road. All trees shown as retained within the tree tables and/or drawing that accompanies this report, will be protected in accordance with British Standard BS 5837:2012 prior to the commencement of any development activity at the site. The type and proposed location of the tree protective measures are shown on Drawing Number DPA-7076-01 (for site preparation, demolition & construction). Access to the site for site preparation, demolition and construction is to be routed via the existing site entrance. The existing driveway is to be left in-situ during both demolition and construction and not removed until all major works have been

DM32

completed at the site and it is planned to install the new / replacement permeable hard surface and soft landscaping. The proposed new and replacement hard surfaces at the site have been reviewed by a qualified and experienced Arboriculturalist and amended to limit the potential for any damage to the trees which are to be retained both at and adjacent to the site. The existing hard surfaced areas are to be removed and either retuned to soft landscaping or a permeable hard surface (gravel, small brick paviours, resin bound gravel or similar product situated on a suitable cellular confinement system). The retained trees will not dominate the proposed private amenity spaces and should not significantly obstruct sunlight to any of the proposed habitable rooms within the proposed dwellings. The applicant has confirmed that in order to ensure continued tree cover and enhancement of the landscape, new trees, shrubs and/or hedges are to be planted. Landscaping is a reserved matter and so further details will need to be provided, but it is considered there is space to provide new planting. The report states that the placement and implementation of services has been considered to ensure that none of the trees identified for retention and protection will be detrimentally affected by the construction of service trenches.

7.7 Ecology This application is accompanied with an ecology survey. The objectives of the survey were to;

• Make an assessment of the likely presence or absence of bats • Identify any legislative or planning policy constraints relevant to the site • Determine the need for further surveys, compensation or mitigation.

The building was methodically inspected internally and externally for any evidence of roosting bats, including actual bats, droppings and evidence of feeding activity. The building was also assessed for it’s suitably to support roosting bats. The building was also inspected for the presence of birds including sparrow. The building was checked for field signs including nesting material. Findings The bungalow is constructed from modern building materials, which include tight fitting concrete interlocking roof tiles and well-sealed soffits, fascia’s and verges, leading to the well-sealed roof structure with no obvious access points present. The bungalow remains in good condition with no external or interior features suitable for roosting bats or nesting birds. Subsequently, during the survey no bats, droppings or any other bat related evidence was found to be present. The bungalow has negligible suitably for roosting bats which means insignificant roosting opportunities. In addition to this, no birds were noted in association with any aspect of the bungalow or the detached garage. Due to the lack of evidence of roosting bats within any aspect, it is not considered necessary or beneficial to undertake any further survey work. Due to the transitory

DM33

nature of bats, there always remains a very small possibility that bats could be encountered during demolition, therefore all works will proceed under a precautionary approach. Thus by, removing tiles and roof panels in a vertical angle rather than horizontal sliding motion and other measures. It is recommended that a precautionary approach to development with regards to bats and ecological enhancements are carried out by installing two sparrow nest boxes to the exterior of the new building. Surrey Wildlife Trust have been consulted on the application and agree with the observations and recommendations within the report.

7.8 Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Policy CS17 of the Core Strategy states that development should make provision for new infrastructure where necessary. However the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) has now been introduced, which places a mandatory charge on new residential and retail developments. The Council will publish an annual infrastructure list detailing the infrastructure projects or types of infrastructure which the Council intends will be or may be, wholly or partly funded by CIL.

This development is CIL liable and a CIL contribution of £79,704.55 would be collected from the development. However, this figure may be subject to an application for exemption. Conclusion The proposed development is not considered to be detrimental to the character and visual amenities of the area or to the amenities of surrounding residential properties. There is sufficient room to provide parking and turning space within the site. The proposal will not result in the loss of important trees or in future pressure to lop, top or fell trees. As the Council can currently only demonstrate 2.63 years of Housing Land Supply, the’ tilted balance’ in paragraph 11 is engaged. This means granting permission for residential development unless the adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of doing so. In this case no adverse impacts are considered to significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of permitting residential development. The proposal is therefore recommended for approval.

8. Recommendation

Permission be GRANTED subject to the following conditions:

1. Approval of details of the landscaping of the site (hereinafter called the 'reserved

matters') shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before any development is commenced and carried out as approved. Plans and particulars of the reserved matters referred to above, shall be submitted in writing to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of two years from the date of approval of the last of the reserved matters to be approved.

DM34

Reason: To comply with Section 92(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51(2) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out and completed in all respects strictly in accordance with the submitted documents and plan numbers Design and Access Statement Arboricultural Report by DPA arboricultual consultants dated August 2019 Location Plan Drawing Numbers 02 Rev C, 03 Rev A, 04 Rev B and 05 Rev A Ecology Report dated 11th December 2019 contained within the application and no variations shall take place. Reason: To accord with the terms of the submitted application and to ensure minimal impact on local amenity and the environment in accordance with Mole Valley Core Strategy policy CS14, Mole Valley Local Plan policy ENV22 and Bookham Neighbourhood Plan Policy BKEN2.

3. No development shall take place until details and samples of the materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the development hereby permitted have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter retained as such. Reason: To ensure the development harmonises with its surroundings in accordance with the NPPF, Mole Valley Local Plan policy ENV22, policy CS14 of the Mole Valley Core Strategy and Bookham Neighbourhood Plan Policy BKEN2.

4. Before any above ground works commence, details of the hard surfacing to be used within the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The details shall indicate either porous materials or the provision of a direct run-off from the hard surface to a permeable or porous area. All hard surfacing shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details, completed prior to the first occupation of the development hereby permitted and thereafter, permanently retained as such. Reason: To preserve the visual amenity of the area and prevent the increased risk of flooding, in accordance with Mole Valley Local Plan policy ENV25 and policies CS14 and CS20 of the Mole Valley Core Strategy.

5. Prior to the commencement of the development hereby permitted, surface water drainage details shall be submitted for the approval in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such details shall include an assessment of the potential for the disposal of surface water by means of a sustainable drainage system in accordance with the principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework. The assessment shall provide information of the design storm period and intensity (typically a 1 in 100 year storm of 30 minutes duration with an allowance for climate change), the method employed to delay and control the surface water discharged from the site and the means to prevent pollution of the receiving groundwater and/or surface water. Where applicable, the details shall include infiltration tests, calculations and

DM35

controlled discharge rates. If the development is to discharge water into the ground in any form, then a full BRE Digest 365 infiltration test (or falling head test for deep bore soakaways) will have to be submitted to the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of any works on site. The suitability of infiltration methods should be verified (i.e. possible contaminated ground). The approved drainage scheme shall be implemented prior to the first occupation of the development and maintained/retained permanently thereafter. Reason: The Local Planning Authority is satisfied that it is fundamental to the development permitted to address this issue before development commences and that without this safeguard planning permission should not be granted and, in the interests of sustainable development, in accordance with the advice contained in the National Planning Policy Framework, policy CS20 of the Mole Valley Core Strategy and and Bookham Neighbourhood Plan Policy BKIN1.

6. Prior to any above ground works commencing, details to reduce the carbon emissions of the predicted energy use of the development hereby permitted by at least 10% through the on-site installation and implementation of decentralised and renewable or low-carbon energy sources shall be submitted and approved by the Local Planning Authority and be implemented prior to the first occupation of the development. Reason: To optimise renewable energy and its conservation, in accordance with policy CS19 of the Mole Valley Core Strategy.

7. No development shall take place until details of the existing ground levels of the site, the proposed finished levels of the ground, the ground floor slab level of each building, and the finished levels of any access road and driveway showing their relationship with the existing levels of the immediately adjoining land and buildings, have been submitted to and approved, in writing, by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved levels. Reason: To protect the amenities and privacy of adjoining properties in accordance with the NPPF and Mole Valley Local Plan policy ENV22.

8. No occupation of the development hereby permitted shall take place until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority a plan indicating the positions, design, materials and type of boundary treatment to be erected/retained. The boundary treatment shall be completed prior to the first occupation of the development, shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details and thereafter permanently retained as such. Reason To preserve the visual amenity of the area and protect neighbouring residential amenities in accordance with Mole Valley Local Plan policy ENV22, policy CS14 of the Mole Valley Core Strategy and Bookham Neighbourhood Plan Policy BKEN1

9. The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until space has been laid out within the site in accordance with the approved plans 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.

DM36

Reason: The above condition is required in order that the development should not prejudice highway safety nor cause inconvenience to other highway users, and in recognition of Section 9 “Promoting Sustainable Transport “ in the National Planning Policy Framework. The above condition is required in order to meet the objectives of the NPPF, and to satisfy policies MOV2, MOV5 and MOV15 of the Mole Valley Local Plan and and Bookham Neighbourhood Plan Policy BKH3.

10. The development hereby approved shall not be occupied unless and until each of the proposed dwellings are provided with a fast charge socket (current minimum requirements - 7 kw Mode 3 with Type 2 connector - 230v AC 32 Amp single phase dedicated supply) in accordance with a scheme to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and thereafter retained and maintained to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority. The charging provision shall thereafter be permanently retained as such. Reason: To accord with the sustainability objectives of the NPPF

11. The Arboricultural Report submitted in support of the application shall be adhered to in full, following effective supervision by a suitably qualified pre-appointed tree specialist to be retained during the development process. This condition may only be cleared on completion of the development subject to satisfactory written evidence of contemporaneous compliance, monitoring and supervision by the appointed tree specialist during the construction. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and to ensure the retention of trees which enhance the existing character of the locality in accordance with Mole Valley Local Plan policies ENV25 and ENV53, Mole Valley Core Strategy policies CS14 and CS15, Bookham Neighbourhood Plan Policy BKEN1 and and the current British Standard 5837 (Trees in relation to design, demolition and construction).

12. The recommendations set out within the applicant's ecological survey dated December 2019 and submitted in support of the application shall be carried out in full before the development is occupied. Reason: To safeguard the ecological interest of the site in accordance with Mole Valley Local Plan policy ENV15 in accordance with policy CS15 of the Mole Valley Core Strategy and the National Planning Policy Framework.

13. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no extensions within Schedule 2, Part 1, Classes A, B, C or E to any dwelling hereby permitted shall be erected. Reason To control any subsequent enlargements in the interests of the visual and residential amenities of the locality, in accordance with Mole Valley Local Plan policy ENV22 and policy CS14 of the Mole Valley Core Strategy

14. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification), no windows, dormer windows, glazed openings, or roof lights other than those expressly authorised by this permission shall be constructed.

DM37

Reason: To control any subsequent enlargements in the interests of the visual and residential amenities of the locality in accordance with Mole Valley Local Plan policy ENV22 and policy CS14 of the Mole Valley Core Strategy

DM38


MO/2019/2130 (Detailed) 06-Dec-2019

Applicant Mr D Absalom, Biles & Co Estates Ltd.

Case Officer Donna Penson



Ward(s) Fetcham West

Proposal Erection of a new 4 bedroom detached house on land adjacent to 3 Hazel Way following demolition of existing garage. New vehicle crossover for the existing dwelling.

Site Description 3, Hazel Way, Fetcham, Leatherhead, Surrey, KT22 9QF


Summary

The proposal is for the erection of one, four bedroomed dwelling on land adjacent to 3 Hazel Way, following the demolition of existing garage and the creation of a new vehicle crossover to the existing dwelling.

The proposal is considered acceptable in relation to local and national policies. Accordingly approval is recommended.

1. Development Plan

1.1. Built up area


DM39


No history


Figure 1 - Plan of street and immediate area 3.1. The application site lies on the western side of Hazel Way, within the Built Up Area

and in the heart of the residential area. The site currently accommodates a semi-detached bungalow on the bend of Hazel Way, the existing property benefits from a single garage on the north boundary that is to be removed.

3.2. The site is bordered by the donor property (No.3 Hazel Way) which is a bungalow to the south and a two storey dwelling to the north (No.5 Hazel Way).

3.3. The current application seeks full planning permission for the erection of one, four bedroomed property on the land adjacent to 3 Hazel Way following removal of the detached garage and a new crossover for the existing dwelling.

3.4. The proposed dwelling follows the building line of the road.

3.5. The dwelling is sited approximately 3m from the flank elevation with 3 Hazel Way and 1.3m from the boundary with No.5 Hazel Way. It must be noted that No.5 Hazel Way has been heavily extended up to the boundary. The proposed dwelling has a maximum height of approximately 7.4m, width of 10m and length of 11m. It has an approximate garden depth of 16.2 metres (when measured from the rear elevation to the rear boundary).

DM40

3.6. The proposed layout is shown below:

Figure 2 - Proposed Block Plan, in relation to buildings and boundaries

Figure 3 - Proposed ground and first floor plan

DM41

Figure 4 - Proposed elevations of new dwelling

Figure 5 - Streetscene showing proposed dwelling 3.7. The proposal incorporates a minimum of three dedicated parking spaces for the new

dwelling and two parking spaces for the donor property in accordance with local policy. The parking for the new dwelling consists of two parking spaces within the curtilage and an integral garage for the new dwelling.

3.8. Refuse and recycling bins will be stored within the curtilage of the dwellinghouse and placed out on the collection day

4. Consultations

4.1. SCC Highways – Raises no objection to the scheme, but recommends conditions.

5. Representations

5.1. 7 letters of representations were received raising the following summarised concerns:

DM42

Concern Officer Comment Condition

Proximity of both new crossovers to the bend of the road would be hazardous safety risk for crossing the road and users to the recreation ground and school.

Poor visibility for road users.

The development will only add to the parking issues of the road as it reduces on street parking

There is only one new crossover to the donor property (3 Hazel Way). The existing crossover will be used for the new dwelling.

Parking and Highway Concerns will be addressed in section 7.5 of the report.

Conditions 8 and 9

Only provision for one car space for each dwelling, which is insufficient and put pressures on the area.

The proposal would provide two spaces within the curtilage of each dwelling and an integral garage for the new dwelling.

Conditions 8 and 9

No provision for replacement trees.

There is mature hedging to the front of the site which would be removed but no trees are to be removed.

Not applicable

Cramped form of development on this plot which would be out of character of the townscape of Fetcham

Dwelling too dominant, high density detracting from the open spacious character of the road.

This will be addressed within the report in section 7.3

Not applicable

Loss of this open space and trees would be harmful to the character of the area and biodiversity.

The space is garden land for 3 Hazel Way. Impact on the character of the area will be addressed within the report in section 7.3

Not applicable

Unacceptable loss of light to first floor bedroom side window which has not been taken into consideration.

Loss of privacy due to new dwelling

Impact on amenity will be addressed in the report, in section 7.4

Not applicable

DM43

Rear windows will look directly into living accommodation of properties causing loss of privacy

Insufficient space between properties, that the proposed dwelling is almost touching 5 Hazel Way

5 Hazel Way has been heavily extended, right up to the boundary with the application site.

Impact on amenity will be addressed in the report, in section 7.4

Not applicable

If minded to approve, could the Council impose a condition regarding construction hours

This is covered by other legislation.

Not applicable

A bungalow with a lower pitch would reduce its impact.

A two storey house is considered acceptable in this location.

Not applicable

That extensions could be carried out on dwelling

Permitted Development Rights for further roof extensions would be removed.

Condition 11

Design of roof appears out of character

This will be discussed within section 7.3 of the report

Not applicable

Will exacerbate the current parking issues on street as road user’s currently park on the road creating a single track road.

The current parking issues cannot be dealt with through this application.

Not applicable


6.1. Government Guidance NPPF Section 2 – Achieving sustainable development Section 5 – Delivering a sufficient supply of homes Section 12 – Achieving well-designed places

6.2. Mole Valley Core Strategy CS1 – Where Development will be directed CS2 – Housing Provision and Location CS14 – Townscape, Urban Design and the Historic Environment

DM44

6.3. Mole Valley Local Plan ENV22 – General Development Control Criteria ENV23 – Respect for Setting ENV24 – Density of Development and space about buildings

6.4. Other Documents Built Up Areas Character Appraisal Bookham and Fetcham


The main planning issues for consideration are: Principle of Development Housing Land Supply Effect on the character and visual amenities of the area Impact on the amenities of adjoining properties Highways and parking CIL Sustainable Construction Sustainable Drainage

7.1. Principle of Development

Policies CS1 and CS2 advise that new development will be directed towards previously developed land within the built up areas of Leatherhead, Dorking, Bookham, Fetcham and Ashtead. The site lies within the built up area of Fetcham and the principle of residential development is therefore acceptable.

7.2. Housing Land Supply

The Council can currently only demonstrate 2.63 years of Housing Land Supply and as such, the ‘tilted balance’ in paragraph 11 is engaged. This means granting permission for residential development unless the adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits of doing so, when assessed against the NPPF as a whole, or there is a clear reason for refusing development because of a conflict with policies in the NPPF that protects areas or assets of particular importance. In assessing the benefits, the proposals would contribute one residential unit to the housing market and the District’s wider housing supply. The site lies within reasonable distance of the shopping area at Fetcham. The development would also increase footfall in the local shops and other outlets. This element would be consistent with the social and economic role of sustainable development and attracts some weight.

7.3. Effect on the Character and Visual Amenities of the Area

Paragraph 127 of the NPPF states that planning policies and decisions should ensure the developments, inter alia: (a) will function well and add to the overall quality of an area, not just for the short term but over the lifetime of the development; (b) are visually attractive as a result of good architecture, layout and appropriate and effective landscaping; (c) are sympathetic to local character and history, including the surrounding built environment and landscape setting, while not preventing or discouraging appropriate innovation or change (such as increased densities); create places that are safe, inclusive and accessible and which promote health and well-being, with a high standard of amenity for existing and future users.

DM45

At paragraph 130, it is stated that permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions.

Policy CS3 states that the Council will particularly seek the provision of two and three bedroom dwellings. The proposal would provide one two storey four bedroom dwelling and therefore does not entirely accord with this policy. Whilst the proposal partly departs from the requirements of this policy, given that the proposal is only for one net additional dwelling, it is considered that a reason for refusal on these grounds would on balance be harder to sustain.

Mole Valley Core Strategy policy CS14 advises that all new development must respect and enhance the character of the area in which it is proposed whilst making the best possible use of the land available. Mole Valley Local Plan policy ENV22, General Development Control Criteria sets out seven general criteria for sound development control practice. Criterion 1 requires that development should be appropriate to the site in terms of its scale, form and appearance. Criterion 2 requires that the proposal does not significantly harm the amenities of neighbouring occupiers by reason of overlooking or its overshadowing or overpowering effect. Criterion 3 requires that development should respect the character and appearance of the locality.

Mole Valley Local Plan policy ENV23, Respect for Setting requires that development should take account of the scale, character, bulk and proportions of the surrounding built environment, and that it should not comprise overdevelopment in relation to the size of the plot and/or surrounding developments. Criterion 3 requires that new development has regard to established townscape features, including the space around buildings. Mole Valley Local Plan policy ENV24 advises that development will not be permitted where it would result in a cramped appearance having regard to the general spacing around buildings in the locality.

The site lies within the North Fetcham and Shopping Centre Built up Area Character Appraisal. The key characteristics of the area are set out in the Built up Area Character Appraisal as follows:-

• More efficient use of land than in much of the rest of Bookham/Fetcham. Good supply of straightforward family housing, in convenient location for local services.

• Some good examples of 1930s and 1950s housing design, with many original features retained.

• Long back gardens discernible between buildings, contributing to a sense of spaciousness in an otherwise built-up street scene – particularly within Cannon Grove area.

• Good network of small green spaces –wide grass verge and informal greens incorporated into housing layout.

• Landscaping generally low key, but a good scatter of medium to large specimen trees on streets and or in front gardens.

DM46

• Good number and variety of well-supported local shops

• Some pockets of rather mediocre housing design.

• Lacks a strong sense of place – little local distinctiveness in housing design and detached from historic Centre of the village.

• Some less than sympathetic domestic extensions, interrupting rhythm of otherwise consistent stretches of similar designs.

Hazel Way is representative of the character described above. It has a pleasant feel derived from the spacious settings of the properties which are of different design. The road has a green appearance deriving from hedging and verges along with open frontages which contributes towards the character.

The proposed dwelling is not considered to have a harmful impact on the character of the road, as the properties are mainly two storey detached dwellings with open frontages and modest back gardens. The dwelling follows the building line for Hazel Way. The dwelling would be finished constructed in render with a brick plinth course, along with a small section of tile hanging, plain clay roof tiles and upvc windows, which is considered an acceptable use of materials for the area.

The design of a catslide roof on the western elevation captures the transition from a single storey bungalow to the west to a two storey dwelling to the east, lessening the impact to the donor property (No.3). The flank elevation of the dwelling also reads as a front elevation when viewed from the bend of the road to the south, the creation of two side dormers on this elevation provides a feature on this otherwise blank roof.

Concerns have been raised over the close proximity of the dwelling to the neighbouring property No.5, it must be noted that this neighbouring property has been heavily extended right up to the boundary. Although, the gap is just over a metre from No.5, due to the plot being on a corner it is not considered to appear cramped within the streetscene as you can see from Figure 4. Furthermore, the removal of the chimney stack on the eastern elevation provides more space, in particular at first floor, maintaining sufficient open space between the two buildings.

The proposal is therefore not considered to be detrimental to the character and visual amenities of the area.

7.4. Impact on the amenities of adjoining properties

Donor Property

It is considered that the new dwelling would not have a detrimental impact on 3 Hazel Way in terms of loss of light, overbearing impact or privacy because the new dwelling does not encroach further past the rear elevation and that there is a distance in excess of 3 metres between properties. Furthermore, the dwelling has been designed with a catslide roof to minimise any potential impact. Although, the dwelling has two side dormers with the furthest dormer serving a bathroom, this would be obscurely glazed. The other dormer serves a bedroom but is not considered to cause overlooking issues due to the distances and position being towards the road

5 Hazel Way

Concerns have been raised that the property would cause loss of light to a first floor side window. It is considered that the window which is affected is a secondary window to this room. The new dwelling follows the pattern of development and is not

DM47

considered to cause a significant detrimental impact on this adjoining property in terms of loss of light, overlooking or privacy.

Properties in Kennel Lane and the surrounding area

The rear elevation of the proposed dwelling consists of two bedroom windows, the distance between adjoining properties is considered acceptable to not cause overlooking concerns.

Given that the new dwelling is within the building pattern of development and the distance to properties to the north are in excess of over 40 metres, it is not considered that the dwelling would be detrimental to the amenities of the properties.

7.5. Highways and Parking

The new dwelling would provide two off-street parking spaces within the curtilage for each dwelling along with an integral garage which would be sufficient to meet the Councils Standards.

The creation of a new crossover to the donor property is also considered acceptable in this residential area. This property would have two off-street parking spaces which is considered sufficient to meet the Councils Standards.

The Highways Authority have assessed the scheme on safety, capacity and policy grounds and have raised no objections to the proposed new dwelling or new crossover to the donor property and is recommending conditions to address their requirements in terms of highway safety.

7.6. Trees

There are no protected trees on the site and no trees considered of significance such that they wa