Major Application Cttee: 6 April 2016 Item No. 1

Application no: 15/00975/FUL

For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address Leamington Court Andover Road Newfound Hampshire

Proposal Partial demolition of office building (B1a), and conversion of remainder to form 7 no. residential units (C3); and, the erection of 6 no. residential units (C3) - incl. internal and external alterations, associated parking, turning, landscaping, and private amenity space.

Registered: 30 March 2015 Expiry Date: 14 March 2016

Type of Application:

Full Planning Application

Case Officer: Katherine Fitzherbert-Green 01256 845716

Applicant: Leamington Court Holdings Ltd

Agent: Mr Mark Pettitt

Ward: Oakley And North Waltham

Ward Member(s): Cllr Diane Taylor Cllr Rob Golding Cllr Stuart Frost

Parish: OAKLEY CP OS Grid Reference: 457830 151296

Recommendation: the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report and the terms of a completed S106 agreement.

Reasons for Approval 1. The proposed development would deliver new housing in accordance with the

Borough's Land Supply requirements, where the Borough has a ‘serious and significant shortfall’ in provision. This is a significant material consideration in favour of the application. The proposal accords with the provisions of the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012).

2. The proposal would preserve the setting of the special architectural and historic

interest of the Listed Building and as such complies with adopted policies and guidance, in particular the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) and the associated English Heritage Historic Environment Practice Guide; and Saved Policy E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

3. The proposed development would bring a localised change to the landscape

character however it would reuse an existing developed site and therefore this change is not deemed so harmful as to significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the development. The proposal complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) and Saved Policy E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

4. The proposed development would provide safe access in accordance with highway requirements and as such would accord with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) and Saved Policies E1 and A2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

5. The proposal would conserve the biodiversity value and nature conservation

interests of the site and would deliver biodiversity enhancements. As such the proposal would comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) and Saved Policy E7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

6. The proposal would not result in significant harm to the amenities of residents in

the vicinity in excess of that which could reasonably be expected in association with a housing development in an edge of settlement location. The proposal accords with Saved Policies E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

7. Adequate drainage can be provided for the development which would also be

controlled through other legislation to ensure that there would be no adverse flood risk to property or the environment. The proposal accords with Saved Policy A7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 in this respect.

8. The development through completion of a Section 106 agreement would provide

for adequate infrastructure to mitigate the impact of the development in relation to community facilities, public recreational open space and equipped play provision. The development would comply with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012); Saved Policies C1 and C9 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996 - 2011; the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010; the Council's adopted Interim Planning Guidance on S106 Planning Obligations and Community Infrastructure (July 2005, updated April 2013) and the Council’s Adopted Green Space Standards (adopted July 2013).

General comments This application is brought to the Development Control Committee in conjunction with the application for Listed Building Consent (ref 15/00976/LBC) in accordance with the scheme of delegation given the Officer's recommendation for approval and the number of objections received. Planning Policy Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 requires that proposals be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. Therefore, alongside the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 (NPPF), this application must be assessed against the Development Plan which comprises the Saved Policies of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 (BDBLP). The application site is located within Newfound, a small hamlet located outside of, but sitting contiguous with the Settlement Policy Boundary for Oakley, with this boundary

extending along the B3400 to the south of the site. The site is therefore, for planning policy purposes, located within the countryside. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out the Government's planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. Paragraph 212 of the NPPF is clear that the policies within the NPPF are material considerations which Local Planning Authorities should take into account from the day of publication (27 March 2012). It is considered that the following sections of the NPPF contain policies material to the assessment of this application:

Core Principles - Achieving Sustainable Development

Section 1 (Building a strong, competitive economy)

Section 6 (Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes)

Section 7 (Requiring good design)

Section 10 (Meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change)

Section 11 (Conserving and enhancing the natural environment)

Section 12 (Conserving and enhancing the historic environment)

Annex A: Decision Taking

Adopted Local Plan 1996 - 2011 (saved policies) For the purposes of decision-taking, Paragraph 211 of the NPPF is clear that the policies within the Local Plan should not be considered out-of-date simply because they were adopted prior to the publication of the Framework. The Saved Policies of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 were not adopted in accordance with the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (but were adopted under the transitional arrangements). Regard is therefore given to Paragraph 215 of the NPPF which states that “due weight should be given to relevant policies in existing plans according to their degree of consistency with this framework (the closer the policies in the plan to the policies in the framework, the greater the weight may be given to them)”. This means that in determining applications, consideration needs to be given to the degree of consistency a Saved Policy has with regard to the NPPF.

The following Saved Policies of the Local Plan are relevant to the application and were found by the Council (June 2012) to have a limited degree of conflict with the NPPF:-

Policy D5 (Residential and other Development within Settlements)

Policy D6 (Residential Accommodation in the countryside)

Policy D9 (Rural Brownfield Sites)

Policy E1 (Development Control)

Policy E2 (Buildings of Historic or Architectural Interest)

Policy E6 (Landscape Character)

Policy E7 (Nature/Biodiversity Conservation)

Policy EC6 (The Re-use of Buildings in the Countryside)

Policy A1 (Car Parking)

Policy A2 (Encouraging Walking, Cycling and the Use of Public Transport)

Policy A7 (Water and Sewerage Infrastructure)

Policy C1 (Section 106 Agreements)

Policy C2 (Affordable Housing)

Policy C3 (Housing Mix)

Policy C9 (New Leisure Facilities or Open Spaces)

Emerging Local Plan The Council submitted the Emerging Local Plan (ELP) to the Planning Inspectorate for examination on the 9th October 2014 thus the Plan is currently ‘at examination’. An Exploratory Meeting was held in December 2014 to discuss the Inspector’s initial concerns to the ELP relating, in particular, to housing strategy issues. Following this meeting, Full Council agreed on the 27 March 2015 that the annual housing requirement for the ELP should be set at 850dpa and this figure should be used in determining the borough’s 5 year land supply position. This decision was followed by public consultation during May/June 2015 on the proposed main modifications to the ELP with Examination hearings held during October and November 2015. A response from the Planning Inspector is awaited with adoption of the Local Plan expected during late Spring 2016. Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance

Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document - Appendix 5 - Construction Statements - Appendix 6 - Storage and Collection of Waste and Recycling - Appendix 7 - Places to Live - Appendix 14 - Countryside Design Summary - Appendix 16 - Residential Amenity Design Guidance

Residential Parking Standards SPD;

Housing Mix and Lifetime Mobility Standards SPD

Landscape Character Assessment SPG

Landscape and Biodiversity SPD

S106 Planning Obligations and Community Infrastructure Interim Planning Guidance

Adopted Interim Green Space Standards Other Relevant Documents

Oakley and Deane Neighbourhood Plan

Basingstoke Environment Strategy for Transport (BEST);

National Planning Practice Guidance

The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990

Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended)

Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Species Regulations 2010 (as amended)

Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act (2006)

The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010 (Revised 2015)

Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990

Description of Site The application site comprises an irregularly shaped area of 0.48 hectares positioned to the northern side of Andover Road (B3400) and directly opposite the residential area of Oakley. The site is on rising ground, with the area subject of the development being at a higher ground level than the highway. Access is taken via a bell mouth junction flanked with landscaped banks with a route remaining through the site to the agricultural land beyond via a gate sitting within the northern boundary. This agricultural land was historically subject to the grant of planning permission (ref BDB/75427) to create allotments, albeit this permission has since lapsed. The site accommodates a large Grade II listed timber barn dating from the early 19th century, which was originally ‘L’ shaped comprising of two five bay threshing barns set at right angles. The barn originally formed part of the Dell Farmstead and is included on the Statutory List as ‘Barn E of Dell Farmhouse’. The structure itself sits upon a brick plinth, is externally clad in weatherboarding or facing brick and sits under a tiled pitched roof. The barn was later extended during the 20th century to its north elevation and most recently used as offices, with the immediate grounds to the property laid as car parking or sits within an enclosed garden. The site additionally extends east within a strip of land sitting parallel to the rear of Nos 2 and 2 New Cottages to adjoin a woodland shelter belt. The site is visible from the public realm and whilst high hedges visually impact on the spatial relationship between the barns and Dell Farmhouse, the barn still retains a substantial degree of surrounding open space which helps reinforce the rural character of the host building. Proposed development

The application seeks planning permission for the redevelopment of the site to provide a total of thirteen residential units formed from a conversion of the existing Grade II listed barn (four units) and the erection of nine properties within the curtilage. In total, the site is to provide 1 no four bedroom dwelling, 5 no three-bedroom dwellings and 7no two-bedroom dwellings in a mix of terraced, semi-detached and detached forms set within a landscaped courtyard setting that additionally contains private amenity space and parking for each unit. The layout of the site has been determined by the positioning of the building to be converted, the available space within the site and an extant planning permission for two units to the north east corner. The proposed dwellings are to provide accommodation over two floors either in properties of full two story height or by providing such accommodation within the roofspace and a mix of external finishes are to be applied, with a mix of brick work and timber cladding set under slate or tiled roofs. The development would be accessed from the B3400 Andover Road utilising the established bell mouth junction which previously served the office building and is currently used by neighbouring dwellings to the site. The site is to retain an open landscaped frontage to the highway together with the hedgerows which demarcate the remainder of the boundaries. This redevelopment and change of use of the listed building sits in conjunction with an application for listed building consent (ref 15/00976/LBC) to seek approval for works

both internally and externally to facilitate the conversion. This includes the demolition of a link between the original historic barn and its later 20th century extension. Amendments The application has been modified to address matters arising on conservation, arboricultural and highway grounds through the submission of amended plans as well as receiving additional supporting information to consider the heritage aspects of the development, the relationship of the site to existing trees and the presence of bats within the office building. Supporting information The application has been accompanied by the following documents:

Planning Statement

Design and Access Statement

Heritage Statement

Arboricultural Assessment

Bat Roost Survey

Bat Mitigation Method Statement

Tracking Diagrams. Consultations The application has been subject to extensive consultation with both statutory and non-statutory consultees. With the exception of comments received from the Parish Council, the responses have been provided in summary. Oakley and Deane Parish Council:- Initial comments “Understanding that the site currently has existing permission for the development of two dwellings and the conversion of the listed building into a further 9 dwellings, the committee nevertheless recognises that this application represents an entirely different scheme. It believes that this latest scheme is an over development of the site. The development, as drawn will unacceptably restrict access to the parking areas of the existing properties at numbers 1 and 2 New Cottages. Further the scheme appears to propose to block the double field gate giving access to the field to the north of the site. Part of this field has been offered, by the owners, to the Parish Council as a possible allotment site using the gateway as access. Accordingly the committee objects to the currently proposed scheme. The committee welcomes an attempt to turn this empty into useable accommodation and also that the new scheme has recognised that access on foot is difficult and proposes a new footway be developed to the south of the B3400”.

Final comments “The committee recognises that the developers have made changes designed to overcome objections to its proposals, notably with the inclusion of cycle storage, provision for large vehicle to turn within the site thus avoiding the need to reverse on to the B3400 and by clearing access to the field at the rear of the property. It does however continue to object to the scheme as currently proposed and supports the objections of the residents of Leamington Cottages as the access, particularly for caravans, which both property owners has been made impossible for one and very difficult for the other. The parish council believes it would not object to the scheme on this basis had the house marked as number 11 not been included within the scheme, as this then represents over development of the site and is cause of the access problems. The residents of Leamington Cottages claim that they have not been informed of changes to these proposals in the past. Please could you confirm that they have been made fully aware of the latest developments in order that they can reiterate their objections should they so with? Thank you. The committee also notes that no provision for pedestrian access along the B3400 has been indicated on the current site plan, this despite being told by the developer, at a previous meeting, that this would be included. In summary therefore Oakley and Deane Parish Council continues to object to this scheme as currently presented.” Conservation: - Original comments – Objection

The principal of conversion of the designated heritage asset from office to residential has previously been established;

Insufficient information to enable the assessment of the implications of the development

The principal of the demolition of the modern link is welcomed subject to sensitive demolition and remedial works to the listed barn;

Extension forward of the current site line will detract from the primary structure including the setting;

The proposed additional units are detrimental to the special interest including setting of the designated asset through significant spatial erosion and the introduction of a strongly cramped suburban character. The present historic relationship between Dell Farmhouse and the barn will be detrimentally affected.

Amended Plans/Additional information – no objection subject to conditions.

The proposed development does not re-introduce any formal historic hierarchy of a farmstead through the addition of minor ancillary residential units as the preferred approach for the future of the site;

Additional units to the site erode the spatial character of the site and introduces an urban character which would detract from the primary structure of the listed building;

These concerns have to be balanced against the planning history for the site, which has already compromised the setting of the listed building;

In balancing the concerns: - Removal of link between the listed building and its later extension is a positive

benefit enabling the listed building to sit as a standalone structure; - Units 9 – 10 have been separated from Units 6 – 8 adding a break in the built

form and are no greater in height or massing than units 6-8; - With the exception of Plots 12-13 (allowed appeal), the new units (Units 5, 9-

11) are single storey (with use made of the roof space) thus retaining the barn as the principle structure in terms of height;

- Views of the listed building will still be gained upon entering the site and will be the most prominent structure to passing views from the highway;

- The listed building would continue to retain a form of courtyard to the east (parking) as already present on site;

- Preference for Units 5 to be re-orientated however the scheme would not be refuse-able on this issue alone;

Need to ensure appropriate detailing to the new properties and landscaping to ensure that the development has regard to the appearance of the listed building;

Careful consideration required of the proposed materials - note the continuation of timber boarding within external elevations, however keen to ensure that not all properties are solely timber clad. Examination of drawings reveals that properties are to retain brick plinths and with new builds containing a mix of timber and brick elevations (units 5 – 11) or are solely brick (Units 12 – 13).

Require final details to be of an appropriate specification re colour and texture, which should extend to the fenestration (to be timber or aluminium).

Landscape:- Original Comments – no objection subject to conditions

No vegetation on site of significant amenity value. A shelter belt with mature trees and hedgerow runs to the east of the open fields to the north of the site and to Andover Road emphasising the importance of natural boundaries in forming clear and established limits to the village;

The increase in buildings will have some impact on the local landscape character and visual amenity, particularly to the north of the site which will form a boundary between the Oakley settlement and the open landscape;

The new development will be highly visible to the north. This can be mitigated with suitable landscape treatment including the reinforcing of field boundaries along the northern edge of the site.

As well as native hedgerow, additional native trees should be planted along this boundary to integrate the landscape proposals with the existing shelterbelt field boundary to the east to form a natural boundary to the village.

Amended Plans – no objection

Amended plans modify the proposed layout with an overall reduction in the proposed grass and tree planting in the centre of the site, replaced by an increased number of parking spaces;

There will be some detrimental impacts on the local landscape character and visual amenity but these can be mitigated to an acceptable degree with suitable landscape proposals;

There is need to protect the shelterbelt running north-south to the east of the site and to protect the hedgerow that runs along the northern and northwestern site boundaries during the construction phase and be included in the future landscape management plan;

Landscape proposals should include native tree planting to this

northern/northwestern boundary to soften the visual impact on this settlement edge. Incongruous perimeter fencing should be avoided;

Hard landscaping detailing should reflect the rural style of the buildings and be in sympathy with the surrounding landscape as much as possible and avoid the more obvious urban styles that would be detrimental to the local landscape character at this sensitive interface with the countryside.

Open Space:- No objection Trees: - Original comments - Objection

The proposed development appears to be acceptable in arboricultural terms.

Need to see and approve the arboricultural details concerning plots 12 and 13;

The eastern rear gardens of these semi-detached dwellings back onto the adjacent linear woodland, which is monitored for ecological purposes under the HBIC framework;

The existing trees will cast shade and drop debris etc, and these factors need to be thoroughly assessed in considering the long-term maintenance of the woodland with regard to introducing domestic living arrangements close to the trees.

Following additional information:- no objection subject to a condition.

The submitted arboricultural detailing is noted however a conflict remains between the canopies and root protection areas of trees located in the adjacent linear woodland to the east of plots 12 and 13 monitored under the HBIC framework;

The area of useable eastern rear garden is greatly reduced by encroachment by the trees which would be made more complicated when accounting for permitted development rights for householders;

Arboricultural details have not been used to fully inform the design and layout;

Trees will cast shade, drop debris being close to the proposed dwellings;

The trees stand-off site and are in poor overall condition. The applicant would be advised to approach the landowner to open up dialogue regarding the maintenance of the trees.

Biodiversity: - Original comments – objection.

Insufficient information submitted to be able to adequately assess the impact on biodiversity in accordance with Saved Policy E7.

Following additional information:- no objection subject to conditions

The submission of necessary ecological surveys has confirmed the presence of small numbers of bats using the main structures;

Bats are a European Protected Species. Local Planning Authorities have a duty to address the three tests containing the EU Habitats Directive and UK Habitat Regulations;

Advise that the bat mitigation plan and proposals appear as adequate to ensure the proposed work will maintain the favourable conservation status of the bat population;

An old birds nest was found during the preliminary ecological survey and therefore advise measures to avoid committing an offence through an informative.

Environmental Health: - No objection subject to conditions. Housing:- No requirement for an affordable housing contribution.

Waste:- No comments to make. Highways:- Original comments – objection.

The previous approved scheme demonstrated a residential use with less modification of the existing layout;

The proposed scheme would result in an impractical layout. Revisions are required to provide a technically acceptable layout with sufficient facilities for access, manoeuvring and turning, parking, storage of cycles, and for access and collection of waste.

The B3400 Andover Road is adjacent which has a 30mph speed limit. There are no footways or street lighting on the adjacent section of the road. A footway links to the wider Oakley network;

The permission for the offices (BDB/26419) conditioned the provision and maintenance of visibility splays. Maintenance has lapsed allowing vegetation to grow taller in the splay areas and impacting on visibility, especially eastward;

The shared access road was built in conjunction with the alteration of the former farm buildings to offices. The access road is used by the existing 1&2 New Cottages and the offices and to gain access to farmland adjacent to the north;

The principle of conversion to residential with less traffic generated could be accepted;

A revised design increasing from 11 to 13 dwellings would have a marginal increase but remain having a reduced effect;

Areas of the internal layout and access require addressing the size of parking spaces, and in respect of safety and two way movement with details of visibility splays and swept-path diagrams of manoeuvring vehicles and showing cycle storage;

The Highway Authority (HCC) as a local access scheme for the provision of a footway along B3400 Andover Road between Foxmoor Close and Dell Farm. The provision of the footway would significantly improve the development proposals and the development should contribute towards the provision of this footway as identified in the application’s list of design principles.

Amended plans:- no objection subject to conditions.

The layout and boundaries have been altered to revise the width of the roads and visibility splays, with revision also to the junction on the northern section of the access road;

Swept-path diagrams showing manoeuvring have been provided, and include showing vehicle use of the farm access at the northern end;

The gateway width is reduced from that presently installed but the swept-path shows sufficient width is retained for a large 3.7m wide agricultural vehicle;

Accesses and the verge to 1 New Cottages are shown accurately;

Sheds are indicated in the rear gardens of all plots and might be utilised for cycle storage. It is not explained how the sheds of the mid-terrace dwellings would be accessed;

The waste collection service has made no specific comment on the access road or collection. The access road and its side-turning-arm provides areas that can be used for the turning of a collection vehicle;

Reference is made to providing a footway to improve pedestrian access between the site and Oakley. A design for such a footway has been produced by HCC in its list of highway improvement schemes and can be realised through an off site highways agreement.

Sustainability:- No objection.

The site is ‘marginally sustainable’ when measured in terms of sustainable transport modes;

The site has limited accessibility by a choice of transport means;

Walking within the local area would be unlikely due to the site location on the B3400 which is narrow, unlit, with no pedestrian footways. The road is subject to 30mph;

Bus services offers opportunities for mode transfer to other destinations, with the nearest bus stops approximately 250m from the site. It is unconfirmed if these stops are in use.

There is a single service linking Andover, Whitchurch and Basingstoke every 30mins weekdays and on Saturdays and an hourly service on Sundays. School services operate in the area;

On road cycling would be feasible for the more competent cyclist with Basingstoke 6km distant.

HCC Archaeology: - No objection. Thames Water – No comments Scottish and Southern Energy –

The land concerned has 11,000 voltage overhead line and a pole mounted substation which must be retained;

No contractual arrangements have been agreed with the developer for modification of the circuit. Any conditions imposed must be on the developer;

Granting permission without further discussion and agreement as to how equipment can be accommodated within the proposal is unacceptable.

Environment Agency:- No comment. Lead Local Flood Authority:- No comments. Southern Gas: – No objection. Hampshire County Council: - Scheme to be considered by the Council’s own engineers. Public Observations Original Submission Two letters of objection were received to the application raising objections on the following grounds (in summary): Principle of Development

The development is being forced as being on a brownfield site, which it is not given that people already live at the site and are by definition, residents. Brownfield Site status cannot be used to further this application;

The Listed Building must be retained for future generations;

The development will not enhance and maintain the vitality of the local community;

Conversion of listed buildings is expensive and therefore the optimum number of cheaper new build units is of immense importance. The more requested, the greater of profit;

The proposed development is not contemplated by the Oakley plan;

Allowing the development to proceed would undermine the Oakley plan and adversely impact on the overall balance of developments in the area.

Impact upon the character of the area

Object to the high density of the development which is out of keeping with the rural location;

There is no contemporary/modern building in the original hamlet to Andover Road;

Any development, other than conversion of the barn, will not be keeping with the appearance or density of the rural area, nor recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside;

Overshadow a much loved, iconic, local historical building;

The proposed development is too big and out of proportion for its location;

Newfound is already under threat from other developments;

Loss of local distinctiveness, abandoning the simple farming heritage.

Highway safety and traffic generation

The proposed development will add significant traffic to Andover Road which is struggling to cope with existing traffic levels during peak times and is set to get worse as other planned developments in the area proceed;

Andover Road is very busy/dangerous and very few cars observe the 30m/h speed limit;

Increase in vehicle numbers accessing the site (inc. trade/delivery vehicles and visitors) above that of the former use of the offices and at all times of the day;

The access is dangerous as the development may not be seen until just before the turning, causing vehicles to break or turn suddenly;

The slip road is already used by young children for scooters and bikes, existing residents and dog walkers with more vehicles creating a serious safety risk;

The existing splayed junction does not provide clear sight along the B3400 in either direction with verges not cut giving rise to accidents at the bell mouth of the site;

No account made for the vehicles accessing allotments proposed to the north of the site with access blocked by a new hedgerow;

Difficult and dangerous access is provided to existing and proposed properties with the development providing a narrow blind bend to the rear of 1 New Cottages;

The development denies space for manoeuvring a caravan;

The application does not recognise private Rights Of Way over the development site;

No provision is made for visitor parking. Any visitor parking would block the access road;

Absence of on-site turning for delivery and refuse lorries;

Inadequate space provided for footpaths required by the residents;

Limited bus services in the area impacting upon travel from work or social activities and movements on a Sunday.

Amenity

Reduction in privacy due to noise, music, lights and traffic at all times from continued occupation of the site as opposed to Monday – Friday office hours;

Lack of respect for existing residents with an increase in noise and disturbance;

Light pollution with a loss of dark starlit skies;

Loss of space, loss of peace/an area of rural calm and compromised countryside views;

The proposed development will overlook the garden to Dell Farm causing a substantial loss of privacy due to the number of units proposed.

Natural Environment

Loss of wildlife – bats, nesting birds (inc. Woodpeckers, Song Thrushes, Willow Tits, Barn Owl), badgers and deer;

Retained large trees may be under attack by new residents if they overhang gardens;

Threat to tree roots with trees also to be deprived of light;

No sanction should be granted to the interference, lopping or destruction of trees;

Landscaping encumbers a right of access to 1 New Cottages;

No provision is made in the landscape plan for any footpaths. Other matters

Not enough Broadband capacity to enable occupiers to work from home;

The development will not create a comfortable mix of inhabitants;

No local facilities;

No proof in the application that the proposal would create a safe and accessible environment;

The new build will not dilute the agrarian feel of the site for Newfounders.

Comments on amended/additional information. One letter received maintaining objections submitted to the original plans. Relevant Planning History 15/00976/LBC Partial demolition of office building (B1a), and

conversion of remainder to form 7 no. residential units including internal and external alterations

Recommended for Approval

14/01157/FUL Change of use from commercial offices to 9 no.

residential units. Internal and external alterations to existing building, landscaping and associated parking

Granted 29.08.14

13/00308/FUL Erection of 2 no. two bedroom semi-detached

dwellings Allowed on appeal

17.10.13

BDB/76132 Display of 2 no. non illuminated post mounted

signs to replace existing Granted 01.06.12

BDB/73726 Erection of single storey extension Refused 17.03.11

BDB/67540 Change of use from commercial offices to 9 no. residential flats. Internal and external alterations to existing building, landscaping and associated parking

Withdrawn 28.01.08

BDB/66575 Change of use from commercial offices to 9 no.

residential flats. Internal and external alterations to existing building, landscaping and associated parking.

Withdrawn 29.08.07

Assessment The key issues for consideration comprise the principle of development having regard to the location outside of the settlement boundary, the impact upon the character and appearance of the area, the setting of the listed building, design, traffic generation and highway safety, the natural environment and residential amenity. The planning history for this site is particularly material to the consideration of this application in which planning permission has been granted for the creation of residential accommodation at this site. This comprises two separate developments, the first being the conversion of the existing office building to form nine flats under planning reference 14/01157/FUL and secondly the erection of a standalone pair of semi-detached properties allowed on appeal under reference 13/00308/FUL. Both these decisions remain extant and capable of implementation. Principle of development The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case the Development Plan comprises the Saved Policies of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 (BDBLP) whereby in accordance with Saved Policy D5, the site lies outside of any Settlement Policy Boundary and is therefore in the countryside for planning policy purposes. Notwithstanding this location, provision is made for development in the countryside, including residential development with support provided for the proposal under Saved Policies D6 and EC6 of the BDBLP with respect to the conversion of existing buildings. The remainder of the site is considered as brownfield land therefore consideration must also be given to the requirements of Saved Policy D9 of the BDBLP.

Residential conversion Saved Policy D6 (New Residential Accommodation in the Countryside) provides for residential development derived from the conversion of an existing building, whereby the building is located in a sustainable location and where alternative uses (e.g. employment, commercial or community uses) have first been considered. The requirements of this policy are also reflected within Saved Policy EC6 (Reuse of buildings in the Countryside) which accepts the reuse or sympathetic adaptation of a suitable building located in a sustainable location for residential accommodation where alternative uses are not possible.

The building which forms Leamington Court has previously been in employment use and, through the grant of planning permission in 2014 for its conversion to residential, has been determined to sit within a sustainable location. This position acknowledges the relationship of Newfound to the Settlement Policy Boundary of Oakley which is referred to within the Submission Local Plan as a “relatively large, compact village” which benefits from a range of local facilities including a primary school, local shops, a doctors surgery. Oakley is also served by regular buses providing connections to Basingstoke, Andover and Winchester and, given the level of facilities and accessibility, has been identified as having a high level of local housing need. The planning history has additionally accepted the loss of an existing employment site in the countryside, being mindful that the NPPF sets out a positive and enabling approach to development where it enables the reuse of brownfield land. More notably, the NPPF contains no specific requirement to first explore alternative uses for vacant offices in the countryside or to undertake any marketing exercise in light of an overall national demand for housing. Given the local housing requirements, it would therefore be unreasonable to refuse the application in the absence of any demonstration that the site could be put to an alternative use other than residential redevelopment. With no change to the NPPF or the development plan since the grant of permission in 2014, there is no planning reason which would otherwise prevent the principle of development from being accepted. The proposal is therefore considered to accord with the requirements of Saved Policies D6 and EC6 of the Local Plan.

Rural Brownfield Sites Saved Policy D9 (Rural Brownfield Sites) provides an exception to the normal planning policies whereby brownfield sites in sustainable countryside locations can be considered for residential redevelopment. The sustainability of the site has been established under Saved Policy D6, albeit for the purposes of a conversion but the position was also endorsed by the Planning Inspector when approving the scheme for a pair of semi-detached units to the north east corner (now plots 12 – 13). With the site remaining as brownfield land, there is again no planning reason to deviate from the conclusion that the site is acceptable for redevelopment (in principle), albeit sitting outside of any Settlement Policy boundary. The acceptability of the proposal therefore relies on a consideration against other relevant policies of the development plan. Housing Delivery In addition to the principle of development sitting in accordance with Saved Policies D6, EC6 and D9, the NPPF requires Local Planning Authorities (LPA’s) to actively manage their housing land supply for growth for 10 years and, where possible for 15 years. This includes a requirement to demonstrate a five year supply of specific deliverable sites together with appropriate buffers to ensure choice and completion in the market for land. At present, it is not possible for the Council to demonstrate a five year housing supply figure against the agreed housing requirement of 850 dwellings per hectare for the borough (March 2015), with this presently sitting at 3.5 years of supply (February 2016) using the nationally recognised Sedgefield Method. The NPPF (paragraph 49) states that relevant policies for the supply of housing should not be considered up-to-date if the Local Planning Authority (LPA) cannot demonstrate a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites. The shortfall in the five year housing

supply for the borough has also been described by an Inspector as ‘serious’ and ‘significant’ and is therefore a material consideration in the determination of this application. In terms of decision-taking, paragraph 14 of the NPPF determines that permission should be granted unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole, or where specific policies in the Framework indicate that development should be restricted. On these grounds a reason for refusal on the grounds of the council having an adequate housing supply cannot be substantiated. Neighbourhood Planning The Council actively supports the principle of Neighbourhood Planning as a central strand of the borough’s approach to future development in villages, with the emerging Local Plan setting the strategic framework for neighbourhood planning. Although the application site is located in Newfound, it does however sit within the Neighbourhood Plan area designation for Oakley and Deane. The Oakley and Deane Neighbourhood Plan was recently subject to a referendum held on the 17th March 2016 which resulted in 94% of voters saying “yes” to the Neighbourhood Plan being used when deciding planning applications in the neighbourhood area. The Neighbourhood Plan provides for approximately 150 dwellings within its area and whilst Leamington Court does not form an allocated site, it is acknowledged within the Plan as “providing a contingency against any increase in the 150 allocation”. The current proposal for an additional four dwellings above those already granted at Leamington Court in 2013 and 2014 would not be so notable either singly or cumulatively within the overall provision of housing to be brought forward through the Neighbourhood Plan. As such, the intentions or direction of the Neighbourhood Plan would not be compromised. Sustainability The NPPF establishes a presumption in favour of sustainable development which sits at the heart of the framework, with this principle stated to have three dimensions: economic, social and environmental. In response to housing development, the Core Planning Principles of the NPPF state that “planning should proactively drive and support sustainable economic development” in order to deliver the homes and “thriving local places that the country needs”. Every effort should be made to objectively identify and then meet the housing and development needs of an area and respond positively to the wider opportunities for growth. In addressing the proposed development itself under the three dimensions of sustainability, it is acknowledged that the scheme would not provide any direct form of economic development and in fact would result in the loss of an employment site. However the provision of housing would bring ‘spin off’ economic benefits through construction contracts, supplier sourcing, spend by new occupiers to make a dwelling ‘feel like home’ and, together with residents becoming consumers in the local economy, bring additional Council Tax receipts and the receipt of a New Homes Bonus. As such, economic benefits would arise and be long lasting.

The social aspect of sustainable development would be met through the contribution made to the housing stock, given the lack of a 5 year housing land supply whilst work continues on the emerging Local Plan. Finally, the development site currently comprises brownfield land which would be brought into active use in conjunction with measures to ensure against adverse harm to biodiversity through a comprehensive landscape management plan and provision of biodiversity enhancements. Housing Mix Saved Policy C3 of the BDBLP requires that a mix of dwellings should be provided within new residential developments, with 30-50% of market dwellings to be 1 or 2 bedrooms. The proposed development provides a mix of dwellings ranging from two to four bedrooms, with 54% of the total number being two-bedroom units ensuring that the policy requirement is met. Saved Policy C3 also encourages 15% of all new homes in the borough to be built to Lifetime Mobility Standards, and whilst it is not clear from the submission whether this element is to be provided, the provision can be secured via planning condition. Affordable housing Saved Policy C2 of the Local Plan sets out thresholds whereby contributions towards affordable housing would be sought having regard to the size of the settlement or the size of the site. The site is located outside of a settlement policy boundary and within a hamlet that has been considered for the purposes of calculating affordable housing to be associated with Oakley given the position contiguous with its settlement policy boundary. The proposed development provides thirteen dwellings which, in this location, sits below the policy threshold (15 dwellings) that would otherwise trigger an affordable housing contribution and at 0.48 hectares would fall under the trigger of site size (0.5 hectares). As such, no affordable housing contribution has been sought in accordance with Saved Policy C2. Impact on the character of the area and landscape setting The NPPF requires that new development gives regard to its setting and responds positively to the character of the area. This requirement is embedded within Saved Policy E1 ensuring that proposals are informed by the local context in terms of design and siting and reinforce attractive qualities of local distinctiveness. Saved Policy E6 of the BDBLP also requires proposals to be sympathetic to the landscape character and scenic quality of an area and are consistent with objectives of the NPPF to protect environmental value from significant or demonstrable harm. The site is not located in any nationally or locally designated area recognised as such for its outstanding landscape character, quality or tranquillity, nor is the site designated as sitting within any strategic gap. The site is set within the countryside and falls within the Hannington Down Character Area as defined by the BDBC Landscape Character Assessment which recognises that this is a landscape defined by large open arable fields bound by low hedgerows and infrequent woodland blocks. The setting of the application site is typical of this character with open fields to the north and natural vegetation defining the site boundaries that extends into a shelter belt to the east.

The proposed development would generate a localised impact upon the landscape character and visual amenity which would be most notable from the properties abutting the site and from the main public vantage point of Andover Road. This impact has been the subject of concern raised within the public observations. From the public domain, the changes to the site would be apparent but not unduly prominent as to have an unacceptable impact due to the set back from the highway of the new buildings and changes in ground level. In longer views across the landscape, the development would additionally be seen in the context of the built environment set against the retention of the natural boundaries. As such careful material selection and appropriate landscaping is to be secured through planning conditions to ensure that the development would assimilate into its surroundings. This approach acknowledges that landscape character is highly valued but balances the localised harm against the location of the development site within an area that has notable built influences (e.g. properties, road network). Furthermore the development would only affect a minimal area with longer views of a predominately agricultural landscape to be retained beyond the site and to be publicly enjoyed. Notwithstanding the local objection to the development, the proposal not been met by any objection from the Landscape Officer. It is also notable that the Planning Inspector for the previous appeal at this site concluded there was ‘merit’ in providing a ‘logical rounding off of this part of the partially developed enclave to the north of Andover Road whilst additionally having a degree of visual containment’. On the grounds that the development would not be visually and physically separated from its surroundings, it is considered that the impact would not have such an overriding harmful impact as to be significantly or demonstrably harmful to the character and appearance of the area as to outweigh the benefits and therefore justify a reason for refusal against Saved Policies E1 and E6 of the Local Plan. Design Principles Consistent with the NPPF, Saved Policy E1 of the BDBLP requires proposals to apply a high standard of design, to make efficient use of land and have regard to the local context in terms of design, siting and spacing.

Layout The development adopts a site layout informed by the reuse of the existing building and the extant permission for two dwellings to the north east corner. The site provides for an additional pair of semi-detached dwellings and two detached dwellings to ensure that there is an efficient use of the land as advocated by the NPPF. The layout has been subject to amendment during the course of the application to accommodate highway requirements and access through to the land to the north as well as providing amendments to plots 5, 6-8 and 12-13 in order to create a satisfactory built form. This provides a legible pattern of development with a hierarchy of buildings with the original barn retained at the entrance to the site, as well as good levels of natural surveillance and clearly defined public and private spaces. This layout also enables the retention of the hedgerow/trees which demarcate the boundaries of the site and the provision of additional hard and soft landscaping.

Scale and Appearance The development would intensify the built form, however the properties would be arranged to give separation in the massing and, with the exception of Plots 12 and 13, are of a chalet style providing first floor accommodation within the roofspace. Plots 12 and 13 are designed to sit consistent with the design previously approved in 2013 and, whilst being two storeys in height, would not appear out of keeping given the siting to the north east corner. By minimising the scale of the properties and seeking to adopt a simple form and external appearance, the development would have regard to the origins of the site as an agricultural holding which is considered necessary to preserve the setting of the listed building. Furthermore, the external appearance and mix of materials would create sufficient visual interest within this self-contained site as not appear demonstrably harmful to the character of the area. The consideration to detail is to be secured through planning conditions which additionally extends to the boundary treatments to ensure that the overall site respects its edge of countryside location. Given the origin of the site, the modest size of the properties and their plots and the relationship to the listed building, it is additionally considered reasonable to withdraw permitted development rights addressing householder development across the development. This will ensure that the Local Planning Authority can assist with directing the evolution of the site for the resultant occupiers and in doing so have regard to the setting of the listed building in perpetuity and also residential amenity. Residential Amenity Saved Policy E1 considers the effect of development upon neighbouring residential amenities, addressing aspects such as privacy and private open space, light, noise and disturbance. A notable number of concerns have been raised regarding the impact of the development upon residential amenity, and particularly upon those properties which have a relationship to the site boundary. The proposed development provides a number of residential units that have been accepted in terms of the relationship to existing properties adjacent to the site, with the new units not considered to generate any additional unacceptable impacts. This is achieved by providing development that is mainly single storey in height with use of rooflights to angle new views upwards and to reduce the prominence of the properties to avoid undue levels of overbearing and overlooking. Even within the converted barn, the development seeks to mainly reuse existing first floor windows where views have previously been established to not generate adverse harm to privacy (e.g. towards Dell Farmhouse) and where appropriate provide obscure glazing. The height and orientation of the properties additionally ensures that no adverse levels of shade are created across the existing curtilages of the neighbouring dwellings. There would be a loss of views from 1 and 2 New Cottages northwards which has been the subject of objection; however this is not a material planning consideration that can be afforded weight in the decision-taking process. Equally permission has been granted on appeal for these two units and the Inspector would have considered the proposals in this regard.

Noise and disturbance Objections have additionally been received to the impacts derived from having an increased level of activity on the site, above that generated by the former office uses with particular reference to noise and disturbance. In this regard, the NPPF seeks to ensure that the planning system should avoid the generation of “unacceptable levels” of noise pollution where this would give rise to “significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life” or harm to areas that are relatively undisturbed by noise. Locally, Saved Policy E1 gives consideration to avoiding noise impacts which would harm living and working conditions or the enjoyment of the built and natural environment. The location of the site on the edge to the edge of Oakley does not divorce the area from a level of background noise which is particularly influenced by road traffic using Andover Road. It is accepted that noise would be generated as an inevitable consequence of developing an edge of settlement site and the nearest residents would therefore be impacted upon to a degree. However, it is not considered that the development would generate any significantly harmful or unusual noise impacts above that expected from residential development. In the absence of evidenced significant demonstrable harm on noise grounds and with no objection from Environmental Health, a refusal on noise grounds cannot be substantiated. Whilst no demonstrable harm is evidenced from the occupation of the development, it is accepted that the construction phase of any development can also provide a notable level of disturbance. In order to minimise this impact, conditions are to be imposed in respect of hours of construction and hours of deliveries which are considered to be reasonable and necessary. If any undue disturbance were to be created either during or following construction that were of such significance to cause a nuisance, this can be addressed through the provisions of Environment and Health Legislation.

Amenity to proposed properties The application site is of a size that can provide for the amenity requirements generated by the proposal in terms of private garden space, bin and cycle storage and parking. The layout provides each property with a private garden positioned either to the side or rear of the properties and whilst these vary in size, most achieve private spaces in terms of the overall area (i.e. sqm) to accord with the Design and Sustainability SPD (Appendix 16 - Residential Amenity Design Guidance). Notwithstanding this, some gardens do fall below the guided 10m length, particularly where the properties are derived from the conversion of the existing building. This is most notable at Plot 1 which has a garden area of approximately 33m2 and maximum length of 5.8m, and also Plots 6 – 8 with gardens extending to 8.5m although would benefit from a sense of ‘borrowed’ space from having an open outlook across the adjacent agricultural land. The gardens to Plots 6 - 8 would also experience higher levels of overshadowing due to the northern orientation. The nature of the amenity space afforded to the properties would be a ‘buyer beware’ decision given that it would be unreasonable to refuse the application on the level and nature of the amenity space provided when balanced against the other benefits of the development, in particular the delivery of new housing and reuse of a listed building. As such, the removal of permitted development rights will assist to ensure that the

properties retain a level of useable private space and also to minimise impacts between properties from otherwise uncontrolled householder development. Highway and Transport The NPPF advises that “development should only be refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe”. Locally, Saved Policy E1(iii) requires that any highway movements generated by new development are not of an inappropriate type or level, with safe and convenient access also provided for users of a site. This is considered in conjunction with Saved Policy A1 (Parking) and the relevant SPD on parking provision. The highway matters associated with this development, to include the generation of additional traffic, the access to the B3400, internal manoeuvrability and parking provision have generated a number of public concerns.

Traffic generation and access The planning application has been subject to consideration by the Highways Officer giving regard to the likely significant effects in terms of access and transport movements generated from the quantum of development. This assessment has been mindful of the established use of the site for offices and the planning history which has accepted movements from a total of eleven dwellings. It is acknowledged that by increasing the level of development by a further two units would in turn also increase the overall number of vehicular movements on the site, however this would not generate any magnitudes of traffic as to materially impact upon the highway or generate adverse harm to the free flow of traffic. The access to the site is via an existing bell mouth junction which has served the established development and deemed acceptable within the extant planning permissions as providing appropriate visibility onto the highway. This access is to be retained with appropriate visibility secured through a planning condition to maintain visibility in perpetuity. The continued use of this access has therefore not been met with objection from the Highways Officer. Within the site layout, public concern has been expressed as to the impact upon the vehicular accesses serving Nos 1 and 2 New Cottages which extend onto the existing internal road and hardstanding to the rear of the site respectively. These accesses are not to be obstructed by the development with parking to be retained in the rear gardens as currently provided. In the absence of no overriding evidence to demonstrate that the development would give rise to significant or demonstrable harm to the safety and free-flow of traffic, the proposal is considered to accord with Saved Policy E1(iii) of the Local Plan.

Parking The development site, despite being located close to Oakley, is expected to generate reliance upon a private vehicle to meet day-to-day needs. The development therefore provides a total of thirty-one parking spaces within or adjacent to the curtilages of the properties which is sufficient to meet the parking requirements as determined by the sizes of the dwellings as well as providing five visitor parking spaces. The site also contains on site turning to enable all vehicles servicing the development to enter and exit the site in a forward gear which has been supported through tracking diagrams to the satisfaction of the Highways Officer. The development is additionally required to

provide minimum levels of short and long term cycle parking which are also to be secured via planning condition. Therefore although having regard to the local representations, it is considered that a reason for refusal on inadequate parking provision could not be substantiated. The proposal therefore accords with Saved Policy A2 of the Local Plan.

Footway The applicant’s Design and Access Statement has included reference to the principles of contributing towards the construction of an off-site footway to improve pedestrian access between the site and Oakley to be positioned to the south side of the B3400. Whilst this sits outside of the application site, the Highways Officer has advised that a design for such a footway has been produced by Hampshire County Council as the highway authority within its list of highway improvement schemes. This footway scheme is to be progressed through a S278 highways agreement and a condition is recommended to bring this scheme forward. Storage and Collection of Waste and Recycling

The development would be expected to provide adequate provision for the storage of two wheeled containers and a glass collection box together with adequate space for containers to be presented for emptying by the collection operatives. The detail of such provision can be secured via planning condition and therefore no objection has been raised by BDBC Waste or Highways Officers in this regard. Natural Environment

Landscaping The development will bring about a localised change to the landscape character and also to the appearance of the site from the introduction of new built form and changes to the existing layout. In having regard to the character of the site, it has been considered necessary by the Landscape Officer and Conservation Officer to seek an appropriate landscaping scheme that safeguards the natural site boundaries and also provides new landscaping across the site. The landscaping scheme should assimilate the development into its own setting having regard to the historic connections of the site, be commensurate with the edge of settlement location and also benefit biodiversity. The detail of all hard and soft landscaping is to be secured via planning condition for later approval with the development therefore according with Saved Policy E1.

Trees The development site contains tree cover limited to the site periphery, particularly the north east corner in proximity to Plots 12 and 13, with no trees subject to any tree preservation order or afforded protection through conservation area legislation. The application has been accompanied by an Arboricultural Assessment which has been the subject of consultation with the BDBC Tree Officer and establishes that sufficient space is available to enable construction to occur without adversely compromising the longevity of the closest trees.

The relationship of the development at Plots 12 and 13 and the resultant enjoyment of the private amenity space has also been given attention noting that the proximity of the trees would cast shade as well as falling debris, thus possibly adding pressure for future felling. This was a matter that was particularly addressed by the Inspector for the previous appeal to this part of the site in 2013. Within the appeal, the Inspector concluded that the houses would be ‘pleasingly framed by a verdant canopy of trees and hedges’ and ‘in functional terms there would be enough space around the buildings to serve the needs of future residents’. The Inspector was additionally of the view that an occupier’s desire to maintain privacy and security would ‘take precedence over any aspirations for pruning and felling to increase natural light or useable garden area’. With planning permission remaining extant for this north east corner as the fallback position, it would be unreasonable to deviate from the conclusions of the Inspector when addressing the relationship to the existing trees. The proposal has therefore been met with no objection on arboricultural grounds subject to tree protection being secured through condition.

Ecology and biodiversity conservation The Council has a duty under the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006 to have full regard to the purpose of conserving biodiversity which extends to being mindful of the legislation that considers protected species and their habitats and to the impact of the development upon sites designated for their ecological interest. These requirements are also reflected within the NPPF (para 118) and Saved Policy E7 of the Local Plan with an emphasis placed upon conservation and enhancement. Notably the application has been subject of objection relating to matters of impact upon biodiversity with concern regarding the loss of, or stress upon, habitats which support wildlife. The development is not located upon any site that is designated for its ecological importance although does contain the existing barn and hedgerow boundaries which are used by bats and possibly have interest for nesting birds. With evidence of bats on site, the application was accompanied by supporting information to enable an assessment of the development upon the favourable status of the site for bats as a protected species under UK law via the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) and under the EU Habitats Directive, which is transposed into UK law by the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended). The development will therefore require a European Protected Species Licence (EPSL) which will need to be secured prior to the commencement of development, and whilst administered by Natural England as the statutory undertaker, the licensing process is mindful to any planning permission granted. In this regard, the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 requires the Local Planning Authority to satisfy itself that the development authorised by a planning permission would not be “detrimental to the maintenance of a population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range” and whether an EPSL is likely to be granted from Natural England. An EPSL can only be granted if the development proposal is able to meet three tests, which together are known as the ‘Derogation Tests’ and are as follows:

1. the consented operation must be for ‘preserving public health or public safety or other imperative reasons of overriding public interest including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment’; (Regulation 53(2)(e));

2. there must be ‘no satisfactory alternative’ (Regulation 53(9)(a)); and 3. the action authorised ‘will not be detrimental to the maintenance of the

population of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range’ (Regulation 53(9)(b)).

With regard to the first test, it is considered that the proposed residential development has an overriding public interest where there is an identified housing need and current shortfall against the council’s housing land supply requirements. With the development supported by the NPPF with reuse of brownfield land and also in principle by the BDBLP together with the site already benefitting from extent planning permission for the conversion of the barn, there are not considered to be any satisfactory, deliverable alternatives to the development. The proposal is considered to meet the first two derogation tests. In order to assess the development against the third test, sufficient details must be available to show how the impact upon bats will be mitigated and also how harm to the habitat will be compensated. As such, details of mitigation as well enhancement have been provided to the satisfaction of the Biodiversity Officer and can be secured through a planning condition. It is therefore considered that the proposal meets the final derogation test. With no objection to the application from the Biodiversity Officer and subject to the imposition of conditions to secure mitigation measures and enhancements, the proposal would accord with Saved Policy E7 of the BDBLP and the NPPF. Conservation of the Historic Environment The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires consideration of a proposal upon the setting of a heritage asset, which could comprise a listed building or conservation area. This requirement is reflected within the NPPF which requires that, when determining applications, account should be taken of the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of assets. When substantial harm is considered to arise, this needs to be weighed against the public benefits. Locally, Saved Policy E2 requires that development within the curtilage of, or adjacent to, a listed building must not detrimentally affect its setting. The proposed development directly affects the listed building which forms Leamington Court through its conversion to residential properties and the erection of new dwellings in its curtilage. The development has therefore been considered by the Conservation Officer, with support given to the removal of the link to create two separate buildings allowing the historic barn to sit as a single entity from its later extension. Whilst the enclave of properties about the historic barn creates a courtyard setting, this has not achieved a visual hierarchy to the extent as desired by the Conservation Officer to provide a spatial character reflective of an agricultural farmyard. This concern has however been balanced against the existing setting of the building which has been compromised by its later extension together with the edge of settlement location. Therefore, whilst the development would add a further urbanising effect to the character of the site, the new built form has been designed to not adversely dominate the setting

of the listed building. Furthermore, through the imposition of planning conditions controlling the final details of the scheme (e.g. materials, fenestration detail, landscaping), it has been concluded that the listed building would continue to be read as the principle structure on site. In addressing the requirements of the NPPF, the development is acknowledged to have a direct impact upon the setting of the listed building as a heritage asset. This impact however is determined to have less than substantial harm upon the significance of its setting and where harm does arise, this is to be mitigated in order to minimise conflict with the setting. The development would therefore preserve the character and appearance of this setting and complies with the requirements of the Town and Country (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, the NPPF and Saved Policy E2 of the Local Plan. Flood Risk and Drainage The NPPF requires that new development should be either directed away from areas at highest risk or alternatively demonstrated to be flood resilient and resistant, to include safe access and egress without increasing residual flood risk elsewhere. This applies a sequential approach, taking advice from the Environment Agency and Lead Local Flood Authorities to ensure that risks of flooding are adequately managed. In this regard, the site is located within Flood Zone 1 as determined by the Environment Agency Flood Risk Maps giving the site a low risk of flooding (less than 1 in 1000 annual probability). In addition, the site is located outside of any area of critical drainage. It is therefore considered that the units provided on site will not be at adverse risk of flooding and, through connection to the drainage system under agreement with the relevant authority, should not create any adverse increase in drainage issues off site. Utilities The site is presently served by existing utilities and it would be the responsibility of the developer to ensure that the resultant dwellings are connected in the future to sources of water, power and drainage. This would be secured through agreement with the statutory undertakers under their respective legislation such as the Water Industry Act 1991 which provides the legal mechanism to connect to local drainage networks and the water supply. In this regard, the application has been subject to consultation with the required authorities and in response concern has only been raised from Scottish and Southern Energy as to the relationship of the development to an overhead power line. This power line extends across the frontage of the site as opposed to any area subject to the siting of new dwellings and therefore would not directly require any relocation of the equipment owned and maintained by this third party. It would however be necessary for the developer to ensure appropriate protection is provided to the power line during construction and this would be a matter to agree outside of the planning process and directly with the energy provider. An informative is therefore included within the recommendation advising of this position.

Community Infrastructure Contributions Saved Policies C1, C2, C7, C9 and A2 of the BDBLP and the accompanying S106 Planning Obligations and Community Infrastructure Interim Planning Guidance seeks to ensure that development does not result in an adverse effect on existing infrastructure, and makes appropriate provision to mitigate documented impacts. It is therefore common to anticipate that development would either, by way of Obligation (legal agreement) make appropriate provision/improvements in line with the advice provided within the NPPF. Where mitigation is sought, due consideration has been given to the tests as set out within the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2015, namely that a planning obligation must be (a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms; (b) directly related to the development; and (c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. In having regard to the nature and location of the proposed development, a S106 agreement has been completed for the development which secures financial contributions towards works at East Oakley Village Hall and Newfound Recreation Ground. In addition to a S106 agreement, the developer would be required to complete a S278 agreement under the Highways Act 1990 to secure off site highway works which take the form of the provision of a pedestrian footway to the B3400. Conditions 1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

following approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority:

Block plan (dwg ref: 141012-117) - received 06/11/15

Site Plan (dwg ref: 141012-116 Rev A) - received 06/11/15

Design Scheme – Plots 1 to 4 - Ground Floor (dwg ref: 141012-106 Rev B) - received 26/02/16

Design Scheme – Plots 1 to 4 - First Floor (dwg ref: 141012-107 Rev B) - received 26/02/16

Design Scheme – Plots 1 to 4 - Elevations (dwg ref: 141012-108 Rev A) - received 26/02/16

Design Scheme – Plots 1 to 4 - Elevations (dwg ref: 141012-109 Rev A) - received 14/12/15

Design Schemes – Plots 6 to 8 - (dwg ref: 141012-110 Rev A) - received 02/09/15

Design Schemes – Plots 6 to 8 - (dwg ref: 141012-111 Rev A) - received 02/09/15

Design Schemes – Plots 5 and 11 - (dwg ref: 141012-112) - received 20/03/15

Design Schemes – Plots 12 and 13 - (dwg ref: 141012-113) - received 02/09/15

Design Schemes – The Cartshed/The Piggery - (dwg ref: 141012-114) - received 02/09/15

Design Schemes – The Stables - (dwg ref: 141012-115) - received 02/09/15

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

2. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3

years from the date of this planning permission. REASON: To comply with Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

3. No development shall commence on site until details and samples of the types

and colours of external materials to be used, including colour of paintwork and timber stain, together with door and window details, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the details so approved, prior to the occupation of the development, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: Details are required prior to development because insufficient details were submitted with the application and to ensure that the development will preserve the character and appearance of the area and respect the special architectural / historic interest of the listed building, in accordance with Saved Policies E1 and E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

4. No development shall commence on-site until full working details of the hereby

approved conversion, at a scale of 1:20 overall with details of windows, doors, glazed screens and rooflights at 1:5, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted details must be referenced against the approved plans, and must show the relationship with the surrounding / original fabric. The works shall then progress in strict accordance with the approved details, prior to the occupation of the development, unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority before varied on-site. REASON: Details are required prior to development because insufficient details were submitted with the application and to ensure that the development will preserve the character and appearance of the area and respect the special architectural / historic interest of the listed building, in accordance with Saved Policies E1 and E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

5. All external doors and windows as submitted and approved under condition 4

are to be inserted into the respective openings with a minimum 75mm reveal. REASON: To contribute towards the character of the site and to preserve the special architectural / historic setting of the listed building in accordance with Saved Policies E1 and E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

6. If previously unknown features of architectural, historic or archaeological

interest that would be affected by the hereby approved works are discovered during the progress of works on-site, an appropriate record together with measures to be taken to accommodate it within the approved scheme and/or to mitigate against its loss, must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before works continue on-site in relation to the affected works. Items of unrelated works may continue on-site unaffected.

REASON: To preserve the special architectural / historic interest of the listed building, and/or to allow for the recording of the of architectural, historic or archaeological interest of the listed building in accordance with Saved Policy E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

7. No development shall commence until details of both 'hard and soft landscape

details' have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

'Hard landscaping details' shall include the design, type, position and scale of boundary treatments, boundary treatment materials (including finishes) and hardsurfacing materials;

'Soft landscape details' shall include planting plan, specification (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment), schedules of plants, (including replacement trees where appropriate), noting species, planting sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate. This should also include a schedule of tree planting to include the specification of tree planting pits where appropriate with details of any irrigation or drainage infrastructure, tree root barriers (if necessary) to prevent damage or disruption to any proposed hard surfacing or underground services, drains or other infrastructure and details of the location of external lighting sufficient to demonstrate how lighting is to be achieved without conflict to proposed tree planting, with allowance for reasonable growth;

'The approved Hard and Soft landscaping shall be carried out in accordance with an implementation programme to be submitted and agreed within the Local Planning Authority. The Soft Landscaping Scheme shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the first occupation of the phase. All hard and soft landscape works relevant to the phase of development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Any trees or plants which, within a period of five years after planting, are removed, die or become seriously damaged or defective, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of species, size and number as originally approved, to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: Details are required in the absence of accompanying the application and to ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of landscape in accordance with the approved designs, in the interests of character and visual amenity of the area and the setting of the listed building in accordance with Saved Policies E1 (ii), E2, E6 and E7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 and NPPF.

8. No development shall take place on site until a schedule of maintenance for a

minimum period of five years for landscape areas has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The schedule shall include details of the arrangements for its implementation. Development shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved schedule, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: Details are required in the absence of accompanying the application and to ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of landscape in accordance with the approved designs, in the interests of character and visual amenity of the area and the setting of the listed building

in accordance with Saved Policies E1 (ii), E2, E6 and E7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 and NPPF.

9. 15% or more of market dwellings shall be built to Lifetime Mobility standards.

No development shall commence on site until details of which properties are to be built to Lifetime Mobility standards are submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. REASON: To ensure an appropriate co-ordinated high quality form of development and to accord with Saved Policy C3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Adopted Local Plan 1996-2011 and Housing Mix and Lifetime Mobility Standards Supplementary Planning Document.

10. No development shall commence on site until a fully detailed lighting scheme

has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The lighting scheme shall include full lighting specifications and address the cumulative effects of all external lighting sources upon nocturnal animals sensitive to external lighting (principally bats). The lighting shall be installed before the development is first occupied and shall thereafter be operated and maintained in accordance with the approved scheme. REASON: In the interests of the amenities of the area and potential impact upon foraging bats in accordance with Saved Policies E1, E6 and E7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. Details are required prior to development in the absence of being provided within the application documentation.

11. No deliveries of construction materials or plant and machinery and no removal

of any spoil from the site shall take place before the hours of 0730; nor after 1800; Monday to Friday, before the hours of 08:00; nor after 1300; Saturdays nor on Sundays or recognised bank or public holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

12. No work relating to the construction of the development hereby approved, including works of demolition or preparation prior to operations, or internal painting or fitting out, shall take place before the hours of 0730 nor after 1800 Monday to Friday, before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays nor on Sundays or recognised bank or public holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

13. No development shall commence on site until detailed drawings showing

modifications to the existing highway; as Hampshire County Council project scheme BDBC0171; have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Local Highway Authority (Hampshire County Council), pursuant to an Agreement to be made under Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980 between the Developer and the Local

Highway Authority. The alterations to the highway shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the Local Planning Authority in consultation with the Local Highway Authority before any part of the development is brought into use. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. Details are required prior to development in the absence of being provided within the application documentation.

14. No development shall commence on site, including any works of demolition,

until a Construction Method Statement with details, schedules and drawings that demonstrates safe and coordinated systems of work affecting or likely to affect the public highway and or all motorised and or non-motorised highway users, has been submitted to, and approved in writing by, the Local Planning Authority. The approved Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Statement shall include for:

i. compliance with The Construction (Design and Management) Regulations 2015 and in particular Part 3 Regulation 8 General duties, whereby construction must be undertaken ‘in a manner that secures the health and safety of any person affected by the project.’

ii. the parking and turning of vehicles of site operatives and visitors off carriageway (all to be established within one week of the commencement of development);

iii. loading and unloading of plant and materials away from the maintainable public highway;

iv. storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development away from the maintainable public highway;

v. wheel washing facilities or an explanation why they are not necessary;

vi. Maintaining access and providing a safe thoroughfare for 1 and 2 New Cottages during construction;

vii. measures to control the emission of dust and dirt during construction;

viii. a scheme for recycling and disposing of waste resulting from construction work; and

ix. the management and coordination of deliveries of plant and materials and the disposing of waste resulting from construction activities so as to avoid undue interference with the operation of the public highway, particularly during the Monday to Friday AM peak (08.00 to 09.00) and PM peak (16.30 to 18.00) periods.

REASON: In the absence of details being provided to accompany the planning application, details are required to ensure that the construction process is undertaken in a safe and convenient manner that limits impact on local roads and the amenities of nearby occupiers, the area generally and in the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

15. The dwellings hereby permitted shall not be occupied until provision for the

turning of vehicles and the parking of vehicles has been made within the curtilage of each property in accordance with the approved drawing 141012-116A and the areas so provided shall not be used for any purpose other than

the turning and parking of vehicles, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To provide adequate car parking in accordance with the Residential Parking Standards SPD and in accordance with Saved Policies E1 and A1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

16. No development shall commence until details for the secure storage [for a

minimum] of 2 bicycles for each property in accordance with detailed drawings to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The areas so provided shall not be used for any purpose other than the storage of bicycles, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In accordance with the Residential Parking SPD and to improve provision for cyclists in accordance with Saved Policy A2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. Details are required prior to development in the absence of being provided within the application documentation.

17. No development shall commence until full details of the refuse and recycling

storage and collection facilities have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be constructed and fully implemented before the use hereby approved is commenced and shall be thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. Details are required prior to development in the absence of being provided within the application documentation.

18. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General

Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any Order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no dwellings shall be occupied until the level of the land as hatched blue on the approved plan 141012-116A [attached] has been cleared so that the land and anything on it and any vegetation does not interrupt the space between 0.6m and 2.0m above the level of the carriageway and the resultant visibility splays shall thereafter be kept free of obstacles. REASON: In the interests of providing safe access and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

19. Protective measures, including fencing, ground protection, supervision, working

procedures and special engineering solutions shall be carried out in accordance with the report entitled ‘Findings of Arboricultural Assessment’ (ref EDP2008_03, July 2015) by EDP unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. REASON: To ensure that reasonable measures are taken to safeguard trees in the interests of local amenity and the enhancement of the development itself, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) and Saved Policies E1 and E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

20. No development shall commence on site until a noise survey has been carried

out to establish road traffic noise levels from the B3400 affecting the site. The

survey shall be carried out in accordance with a written protocol, details of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before the survey is carried out. Following completion of the noise survey, a noise report shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority which shall contain:

(a) the results of the survey; (b) the predictions of noise levels; (c) details of the design measures that will be used to mitigate against the road traffic noise; and (d) details of the building specifications of the dwellings which will be used to achieve the following noise levels with windows open: - 35 dB LAeq,1hr in living rooms and dining rooms (0700hrs – 2300hrs)

- 30 dB LAeq,1 hr and not regularly exceed 45 dB LAmax within bedrooms (2300hrs – 0700hrs)

- 55dB LAeq, in outdoor amenity space (0700hrs – 2300hrs).

The approved measures shall be implemented in full prior to the first occupation of any of the buildings hereby permitted and shall be thereafter maintained, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the absence of full details being provided to accompany the planning application, details are required to ensure that acceptable noise levels are achieved within the dwellings and amenity areas in the interests of residential amenity and in accordance with Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

21. No dwelling shall be occupied until all of the works which form part of the

scheme for protecting the proposed dwellings from noise as approved by the Local Planning Authority under condition 19 have been implemented and acoustic testing carried out by a suitably qualified and competent acoustic consultant to verify that the internal noise levels agreed in condition 19 have been achieved. The testing shall be carried out in accordance with a written protocol, details of which shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before test is carried out. REASON: To ensure that acceptable noise levels within the dwellings and amenity areas are not exceeded in the interests of residential amenity and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

22. No development shall commence on site until there has been submitted to and

approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:- (a) a desk top study carried out by a competent person documenting all the

previous and existing land uses of the site and adjacent land in accordance with national guidance as set out in Contaminated Land Research Report Nos. 2 and 3 and BS10175:2001;

and, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, (b) a site investigation report documenting the ground conditions of the site and

incorporating chemical and gas analysis identified as being appropriate by the desk study in accordance with BS10175:2001- Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites - Code of Practice;

and, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, (c) a detailed scheme for remedial works and measures to be undertaken to

avoid risk from contaminants/or gases when the site is developed and proposals for future maintenance and monitoring. Such scheme shall include nomination of a competent person to oversee the implementation of the works.

If during any works contamination is encountered which has not been previously identified then the additional contamination shall be fully assessed and an appropriate remediation scheme, agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. REASON: Details are required prior to commencement to ensure any soil, gas or water contamination on the site is remediated to protect the proposed occupants of the application site and/or adjacent land in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

23. The development hereby permitted shall not be occupied/brought into use until

there has been submitted to the Local Planning Authority verification by the competent person approved under the provisions of 22(c) that any remediation scheme required and approved under the provisions of condition 22(c) has been implemented fully in accordance with the approved details (unless varied with the written agreement of the Local Planning Authority in advance of implementation). Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority such verification shall comprise:-

- as built drawings of the implemented scheme; - photographs of the remediation works in progress; - certificates demonstrating that imported and/or material left in situ is free

of contamination.

Thereafter the scheme shall be monitored and maintained in accordance with the scheme approved under condition 22(c), unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: Details are required prior to commencement to ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

24. All Bat protection and mitigation measures shall be carried out in accordance

with the Enims ‘Bat Method Statement’ dated July 2015. The development shall be carried out in complete accordance with mitigation proposals of the approved report, including the installation of bat boxes and access tiles on the building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: Bats are known to use the existing building of the proposed development site. All species of bats are European Protected Species and are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 thus the protection is a material consideration under Saved Policy E7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

25. Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 3 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 building, structure or other alteration permitted by Classes A, B, C, D, E of Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Order shall be erected on the application site without the prior written permission of the Local Planning Authority on an application made for that purpose. REASON: To prevent the overdevelopment of the site in the interests of the amenity of the area and to safeguard the amenities of the adjoining properties, and the setting of the listed building in accordance with Saved Policies E1 and E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

Informative(s):- 1. 1.1 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if

any), must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated.

1.2 This permission may contain pre-commencement conditions which require

specific matters to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before a specified stage in the development occurs. This means that a lawful commencement of the approved development CANNOT be made until the particular requirements of the pre-commencement conditions have been met.

1.3 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the Local Planning

Authority has a period of up to eight weeks to determine details submitted in respect of a condition or limitation attached to a grant of planning permission. It is likely that in most cases the determination period will be shorter than eight weeks, however, the applicant is advised to schedule this time period into any programme of works. A fee will be required for requests for discharge of any consent, agreement, or approval required by a planning condition. The fee chargeable is £97 per request or £28 where the related permission was for extending or altering a dwelling house or other development in the curtilage of a dwelling house. A fee is payable for each submission made regardless of the number of conditions for which approval is sought. Requests must be made using the standard application form (available online) or set out in writing clearly identifying the relevant planning application and condition(s) which they are seeking approval for.

2. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy

Framework (NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and proactive manner:-

considering the imposition of conditions.

In this instance:

seeking amended plans and additional information.

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

3. Birds nests, when occupied or being built, receive legal protection under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). It is highly advisable to undertake clearance of potential bird nesting habitat (such as hedges, scrub, trees, suitable outbuildings etc.) outside the bird nesting season, which is generally seen as extending from March to the end of August, although may extend longer depending on local conditions. If there is absolutely no alternative to doing the work in during this period then a thorough, careful and quiet examination of the affected area must be carried out before clearance starts. If occupied nests are present then work must stop in that area, a suitable (approximately 5m) stand-off maintained, and clearance can only recommence once the nest becomes unoccupied of its own accord.

4. The applicant’s attention is drawn to the presence of an 11,000 voltage

overhead power line which crosses the site. Contact should therefore be made with Scottish and Southern Energy to agree protection or modification of this circuit.

5. This Decision Notice must be read in conjunction with a Planning Obligation

required under the terms of Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended). You are advised to satisfy yourself that you have all the relevant documentation.

6. No vehicle must leave the site unless its wheels have been sufficiently cleaned

so as to minimise mud being carried onto the highway. Appropriate measures, including drainage disposal, must be taken and retained for the construction period. Non-compliance may breach the Highway Act 1980.

7. Consent under the Town and Country Planning Acts must not be taken as

approval for any works carried out within or over any footway, including a Public Right of Way, carriageway, verge or other land forming part of the publicly maintained highway. The development will involve works within the public highway. It is an offence to commence those works without the permission of the Local Highway Authority. In the interests of highway safety the development must not commence on-site until permission has been obtained from the Local Highway Authority authorising any necessary works, including street lighting and surface water drainage, within the publicly maintained highway. Public Utility apparatus may also be affected by the development. Contact the appropriate public utility service to ensure agreement on any necessary alterations. Advice about works within the public highway can be obtained from Hampshire County Council’s Area Office, telephone 0845 603 5633.

8. This Decision Notice must be read in conjunction with an Highways Agreement

completed under the terms of Section 278 of the Highways Act 1980 (as amended). You are advised to satisfy yourself that you have all the relevant documentation.

15/00975/FUL

Location Plan

15/00975/FUL

Site layout plan

15/00975/FUL

Plots 1- 4 Elevations

15/00975/FUL

Plots 6 - 8 Elevations

15/00975/FUL

Plots 5 and 11

The Cartshed The Piggery

15/00975/FUL

Plots 9 and 10

15/00975/FUL

Plots 12 and 13

Major Application Cttee: 6 April 2016 Item No. 2

Application no: 15/00976/LBC

For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address Leamington Court Andover Road Newfound Hampshire

Proposal Partial demolition of office building (B1a), and conversion of remainder to form 7 no. residential units including internal and external alterations

Registered: 30 March 2015 Expiry Date: 14 March 2016

Type of Application:

Listed Building Consent

Case Officer: Katherine Fitzherbert-Green 01256 845716

Applicant: Leamington Court Holdings Ltd

Agent: Mr Mark Pettitt

Ward: Oakley And North Waltham

Ward Member(s): Cllr Diane Taylor Cllr Rob Golding Cllr Stuart Frost

Parish: OAKLEY CP OS Grid Reference: 457830 151296

Recommendation: Approve subject to the conditions listed at the end of the report.

Reason for Approval 1. The proposal would preserve the special architectural and historic interest of the

Listed Building and as such complies with adopted policies and guidance, in particular the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) and the associated English Heritage Historic Environment Practice Guide; and Saved Policy E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

General comments This application for listed building consent is brought to the Development Control Committee in accordance with the scheme of delegation given Officer's recommendation for approval and the number of objections that have been received to the application. This application should be read in conjunction with application referenced 15/00975/FUL which is considered elsewhere in this Agenda. Planning Policy The application site is located outside of, but sits close to the Settlement Policy Boundary for Oakley and is therefore, for planning policy purposes, located within the countryside. Alongside the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 (NPPF), this application must be assessed against the Development Plan which comprises the Saved Policies of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 (BDBLP).

National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out the Government's planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied and is a material consideration in the determination of this planning application. It is considered that the following sections of the NPPF contain policies material to this application:

Core Principles

Section 7 (Requiring Good Design)

Section 12 (Conserving and enhancing the historic environment)

Decision Taking Adopted Local Plan 1996 - 2011 (saved policies) The Saved Policies of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 were adopted prior to the publication of the NPPF and therefore consideration has to be given to the degree of consistency with the Framework. The following Saved Policies of the Local Plan are relevant to the application and were found by the Council (June 2012) to have a limited degree of conflict with the NPPF:-

Policy E2 (Buildings of Historic or Architectural Interest) Emerging Local Plan The Council submitted the Emerging Local Plan (ELP) to the Planning Inspectorate for examination on the 9th October 2014 thus the Plan is currently ‘at examination’. An Exploratory Meeting was held in December 2014 to discuss the Inspector’s initial concerns to the ELP relating, in particular, to housing strategy issues as opposed to matters pertaining to the consideration of listed buildings. This decision was followed by public consultation during May/June 2015 on the proposed main modifications to the ELP with Examination hearings held during October and November 2015. A response from the Planning Inspector is awaited with adoption of the Local Plan expected during late Spring 2016. Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance

The Historic Environment: Listed Buildings SPG Other material documents

Town and Country (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990

National Planning Practice Guidance

English Heritage - Conservation Principles: Policies and Guidance

English Heritage Guidance `The Setting of Heritage Assets`

DCLG and English Heritage PPS5 Planning for the Historic Environment Practice Guide (Revision Note June 2012)

Description of Site The application site comprises an irregularly shaped area of 0.48 hectares positioned to the northern side of Andover Road (B3400) and directly opposite the residential area of Oakley. The site is on rising ground, with the area subject of the development being at a higher ground level than the highway. Access is taken via a bell mouth junction flanked with landscaped banks with a route remaining through the site to the agricultural land beyond via a gate sitting within the northern boundary. This agricultural land was historically subject to the grant of planning permission (ref BDB/75427) to create allotments, albeit this permission has since lapsed. The site accommodates a large Grade II listed timber barn dating from the early 19th century, which was originally ‘L’ shaped comprising of two five bay threshing barns set at right angles. The barn originally formed part of the Dell Farmstead and is included on the Statutory List as ‘Barn E of Dell Farmhouse’. The structure itself sits upon a brick plinth, is externally clad in weatherboarding or facing brick and sits under a tiled pitched roof. The barn was later extended during the 20th century to its north elevation and most recently used as offices, with the immediate grounds to the property laid as car parking or sits within an enclosed garden. The site additionally extends east within a strip of land sitting parallel to the rear of Nos 2 and 2 New Cottages to adjoin a woodland shelter belt. The site is visible from the public realm and whilst high hedges visually impact on the spatial relationship between the barns and Dell Farmhouse, the barn still retains a substantial degree of surrounding open space which helps reinforce the rural character of the host building. Proposal The application seeks listed building consent for the undertaking of internal and external alterations to facilitate the change of use of the building from B1 office space to Class C3 residential. The development proposes to accommodate four residential dwellinghouses within the original agricultural barn to comprise 1 no four bedroom unit, 2 no three bedroom units and 1 no two bedroom unit. These units are to be formed through a reorganisation of the internal divisions serving the former office use together with the demolition of a link which connects the original listed building to its later 20th century extension. Externally, the creation of the dwellinghouses would principally reuse existing openings to the barn albeit some modest alterations are required to the fenestration together with replacement fittings. The building would also receive replacement stained featheredged weatherboarding. This redevelopment and change of use of the listed building sits in conjunction with an application for planning permission (ref 15/00975/FUL) for the reuse of the building and site for the creation of a total number of 13 residential units. In addition to the units created from the converted barn, the site is also to receive further dwellings created from the conversion of the former extension to the property together with the erection of two pairs of semi-detached dwellings and two detached dwellings. The remainder of the site is to be laid out to provide parking and amenity space within a landscaped courtyard.

Consultations Conservation: - Original comments – Objection

The principal of conversion of the designated heritage asset from office to residential has previously been established;

Insufficient information to enable the assessment of the implications of the development

The principal of the demolition of the modern link is welcomed subject to sensitive demolition and remedial works to the listed barn;

Extension forward of the current site line will detract from the primary structure including the setting;

The proposed additional units are detrimental to the special interest including setting of the designated asset through significant spatial erosion and the introduction of a strongly cramped suburban character. The present historic relationship between Dell Farmhouse and the barn will be detrimentally affected.

Final comments - No objection subject to conditions

The amendments to the proposal address the internal arrangement of units 1 – 4 within the converted barn to reflect the principles established under the previously approved scheme (ref 14/01158/LBC) providing open plan first floor living accommodation through to the roof void with enclosed bedroom/bathrooms at the ground floor;

It is unfortunate that the current proposal re-positions and reduces the extent of the void extending from the ground floor through the property to the roof void from that previously approved, which would reduce the full appreciation of the historic character and origin of the property within each unit;

It is acknowledged however that a smaller extent of void would remain, therefore in balancing the proposal which brings the property back into use, it would be difficult to substantiate a reason for refusal.

Public Observations Original submission Four letters of objection were received to the original submission raising concerns on the following grounds (in summary): Principle of Development

Development is outside of the settlement policy boundary and contrary to Local Plan policies D6, D7, D8 and D9;

With the development of Manydown, the proposal is a far from sufficient contribution to the overall housing need to justify exception to current policies;

Previous redevelopment of old agricultural buildings at Leamington Court does not justify the proposed residential development;

The development is being forced through on the basis that it is a brownfield site, which it is not given that people already live at the site and are by definition, residents. Brownfield Site status cannot be used to further this application;

The Listed Building must be retained for future generations;

The development will not enhance and maintain the vitality of the local community;

Conversion of listed buildings is expensive and therefore the optimum number of cheaper new build units is of immense importance. The more requested, the greater of profit;

The proposed development is not contemplated by the Oakley plan which does not allow for the impact of the proposed development;

Allowing the development to proceed would undermine the Oakley plan and adversely impact on the overall balance of developments in the area.

Impact upon the character of the area/Design

Object to the high density of the development which is out of keeping with the rural location;

There is no contemporary/modern building in the original hamlet to Andover Road;

Any development, other than conversion of the barn, will not be keeping with the appearance or density of the rural area, nor recognise the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside;

Overshadow a much loved, iconic, local historical building;

The proposed development is too big and out of proportion for its location;

Newfound is already under threat from other developments;

Loss of local distinctiveness, abandoning the simple farming heritage.

Highway safety and traffic generation

The proposed development will add significant traffic to Andover Road which is struggling to cope with existing traffic levels during peak times and is set to get worse as other planned developments in the area proceed;

Andover Road is very busy/dangerous and very few cars observe the 30m/h speed limit;

The B3400 has no street lighting or footpath with land to the side of the access in private hands. A footpath to the south side of the B3400 could affect the stability of other properties and driveways and should be repositioned;

Increase in vehicle numbers accessing the site (inc. trade/delivery vehicles and visitors) above that of the former use of the offices and at all times of the day;

The access is dangerous as the development may not be seen until just before the turning, causing vehicles to break or turn suddenly;

The slip road is already used by young children for scooters and bikes, existing residents and dog walkers with more vehicles creating a serious safety risk;

The existing splayed junction does not provide clear sight along the B3400 in either direction with verges not cut giving rise to accidents at the bell mouth of the site;

No account made for the vehicles accessing allotments proposed to the north of the site with access blocked by a new hedgerow;

Difficult and dangerous access is provided to existing and proposed properties with the development providing a narrow blind bend to the rear of 1 New Cottages;

The development denies space for manoeuvring a caravan;

The application does not recognise private Rights Of Way over the development site;

No provision is made for visitor parking. Any visitor parking would block the access road;

Absence of on-site turning for delivery and refuse lorries;

Inadequate space provided for footpaths required by the residents;

Limited bus services in the area impacting upon travel from work or social activities and movements on a Sunday;

The bus stop cited within the application is no longer in use and not on a current bus route.

Amenity

Reduction in privacy due to noise, lights and traffic at all times from continued occupation of the site as opposed to Monday – Friday office hours;

Lack of respect for existing residents with an increase in noise and disturbance;

Light pollution with a loss of dark starlit skies;

Loss of space, loss of peace/an area of rural calm and compromised countryside views;

The proposed development will overlook the garden to Dell Farm causing a substantial loss of privacy due to the number of units proposed.

Natural Environment

Loss of, and stress to wildlife – bats, nesting birds (inc. Red Kites, Buzzards, Common Woodpeckers, Song Thrushes, Willow Tits, Barn Owl), badgers, foxes and Deer;

Change in the habitat characteristics of the area;

Retained large trees may be under attack by new residents if they overhang gardens;

Threat to tree roots with trees also to be deprived of light;

No sanction should be granted to the interference, lopping or destruction of trees;

Landscaping encumbers a right of access to 1 New Cottages;

No provision is made in the landscape plan for any footpaths.

Other matters

Inconsistent information contained within the application (e.g. no of proposed units);

Unaware of planning permission being granted on appeal for two houses in the same place as the currently proposed plots 12 and 13.

Not enough Broadband capacity to enable occupiers to work from home;

No local facilities;

The development will not create a comfortable mix of inhabitants;

No proof in the application that the proposal would create a safe and accessible environment;

The new build will not dilute the agrarian feel of the site for Newfounders;

Loss of views towards the existing countryside. Comments on Amendments to the application Three letters received maintaining objections submitted to the original plans and additionally raising the following comments (in summary):- Principle of Development

Previous redevelopment of old agricultural buildings at Leamington Court does not justify the proposed residential development;

Renaming the units (e.g. The Piggery, The Stables) does not make the development any more acceptable.

Design

Density and proximity of units is not in keeping or respectful of the rural location;

Levels of glazing is not appropriate;

The construction materials will not weather down giving modern residences. Highways

No account has been made of the access dangers onto and off of the B3400 with the splayed junction not providing clear sight along the highway;

Amendments have not reduced the number of vehicles entering onto or leaving the B3400 or truly solved turning and egress issues to existing properties;

Swept paths for vehicles are not appropriate to an ancient farmland setting;

No account has been made of the additional traffic through the site caused by users of allotments to be sited to the north of the site;

Increase in traffic volume would exacerbate existing dangers from an absence of street lighting or a footpath along the B3400;

The application does not recognise private Rights Of Way over the development site to 1 New Cottages;

An access shown on the drawings to 1 New Cottages is fiction. There will be need to reverse out of the property into the road opposite Unit no 10 which will be dangerous;

No provision for footpaths within the development given the reduced width of the existing access. A footpath is required for the residents.

Residential Amenity

Reduction in privacy from continued occupation of the site as opposed to Monday – Friday office hours due to noise, lights and traffic at all times.

Natural Environment

Endangers habitats;

Damage to/destruction of trees. Other Matters

Loss of employment to justify changing the use from offices;

Loss of views towards open countryside;

No provision made for heating oil or LPG storage suggesting other sources of energy are proposed which are expensive to run and unattractive for the assumed target market;

The local electricity supply is already under stress;

Has any market research been carried out to ensure that these properties will become homes at any point in the future due to a lack of amenities and public transport in this rural area?

Relevant Listed Building Consent History 15/00975/FUL Partial demolition of office building (B1a), and

conversion of remainder to form 7 no. residential units (C3); and, the erection of 6 no. residential units (C3) - incl. internal and external alterations, associated parking, turning, landscaping, and private amenity space.

Recommended for Approval

14/01158/LBC Change of Use from Commercial Offices to 9

No. residential units including internal and external alterations to existing building plus changes to associated car parking and external landscaping

Granted 29.08.14

BDB/73727 Erection of single storey extension Dismissed

appeal 20.09.11

BDB/69457 Change of use from commercial offices to 9 no.

residential flats. Internal and external alterations to existing building, landscaping and associated parking

Withdrawn 05.02.09

BDB/67541 Change of use from commercial offices to 9 no.

residential flats. Internal and external alterations to existing building, landscaping and associated parking

Withdrawn 28.01.08

BDB/66576 Change of use from commercial offices to 9 no.

residential flats. Internal and external alterations to existing building, landscaping and associated parking

Withdrawn 29.08.07

Assessment The key issues for consideration in the determination of this application concern the impact of the development upon the historic and architectural fabric of the listed building as a designated heritage asset. It is also necessary to have regard to the history for the site under reference 14/01158/LBC which remains extant and forms a material consideration to the acceptability of this current scheme. Principle of development The NPPF requires a Local Planning Authority to “identify and assess the significance of a heritage asset that may be affected by a proposal (including development affecting the setting of a heritage asset)…”. This assessment should consider the direct and indirect impacts of a proposal on a heritage asset, with weight to be given to the asset’s significance and conservation in order to avoid or minimise conflict to its significance or its setting. At the local level, Saved Policy E2 of the Local Plan provides the ability to demolish (in exceptional circumstances), alter and extend a listed building or undertake development within its curtilage. Impact upon the listed building The original 19th century listed 'L' shaped barn was formally part of the adjacent Dell Farm, which is listed in its own right as Grade II. The property was subsequently separated and the barn was greatly extended in the 20th century with a large 'barn-like' extension to the north with an associated linking structure, thus doubling the size of the property. The building has been used as offices although is subject to an extant

planning permission and listed building consent for a conversion to form nine residential units. The current proposal would continue the established principle of bringing the property back into use which is consistent with advice of Historic England which recognises that “listing a building isn’t about fossilising the same” but enabling such a building to be adapted to bring new life to its structure and use. However rather than repeating the form and layout of the extant listed building consent, the current application proposes a revised scheme which would remove a linking structure between the former barn and later extension, returning the original barn to a standalone building. This would then be converted to provide four residential units comprising 1 no 4 bedroom, 2no three bedroom and 1 no one bedroom units with alterations to the fenestration and new internal works. This revised scheme for the barn was initially met with objection from the Conservation Officer due to the proposed arrangement of the internal accommodation, which provided the traditional layout of living space at the ground floor with bedrooms and bathrooms above. This layout would have overly compartmentalised the first floor and therefore deemed to stifle an appreciation of the traditional open form of the barn, both vertically through to the roofspace and laterally across the floor space. This layout was deemed adversely detrimental to the preservation of the historic interest derived from the original use of the building and a retrograde step from the extant scheme. This extant scheme provides for a first floor open plan living space in order to retain a void through to the roof, and also wide views through the full height of the building from the ground floor. As such, the scheme has since been amended with a return to an internal arrangement that has open plan first floor living space and retains some views from the ground floor through to the roof void, albeit these have been reduced in extent from the previously consented scheme. The amended scheme has been deemed to be an improvement to the application and would retain enough of the historic character of the building as to be acceptable for consent subject to conditions addressing the final detailing. The proposal therefore accords with Saved Policy E2 of the Local Plan. Assessment of significance The NPPF requires a consideration of the harm to, or total loss of, significance of a designated heritage asset from development proposals. It is indicated that where the harm is to be substantial or result in total loss, then consent should be refused unless this is necessary to achieve substantial public benefits. In this instance, the building has already been reworked to provide office space and received listed building consent for conversion to a residential use. The scheme as now proposed would not lead to any harmful loss of significance, particularly given that the demolition works affect a later modern extension only. It is concluded that the current proposal for the listed barn would lead to less than substantial harm to this heritage asset and, through the detail to be secured through conditions, would also preserve the historic character and interest. Bringing the building back into use additionally brings a public benefit of providing a contribution to the local housing stock which outweighs some loss to the internal appreciation of the openness of the original structure as a barn. The proposal therefore complies with the requirements of the Town and Country (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and the NPPF.

Other Matters This application for Listed Building Consent has attracted a number of representations which mainly express concern to matters which sit outside of the statutory remit for determining applications for listed building consent. This remit considers only the impact of a development upon the preservation or enhancement of the fabric of the building itself. The concerns raised are therefore to be considered within the context of the associated planning application under reference 15/00975/FUL which requires consideration of the acceptability of the scheme against matters such as the setting of the Listed Building, residential amenity, the natural environment and the highway impacts. Conditions 1. The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

following approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority:

Block plan (dwg ref: 141012-117) - received 06/11/15

Site Plan (dwg ref: 141012-116 Rev A) - received 06/11/15

Design Scheme – Plots 1 to 4 - Ground Floor (dwg ref: 141012-106 Rev B) - received 26/02/16

Design Scheme – Plots 1 to 4 - First Floor (dwg ref: 141012-107 Rev B) - received 26/02/16

Design Scheme – Plots 1 to 4 - Elevations (dwg ref: 141012-108 Rev A) - received 26/02/16

Design Scheme – Plots 1 to 4 - Elevations (dwg ref: 141012-109 Rev A) - received 14/12/15

Design Schemes – Plots 6 to 8 - (dwg ref: 141012-110 Rev A) - received 02/09/15

Design Schemes – Plots 6 to 8 - (dwg ref: 141012-111 Rev A) - received 02/09/15

Design Schemes – Plots 5 and 11 - (dwg ref: 141012-112) - received 20/03/15

Design Schemes – Plots 12 and 13 - (dwg ref: 141012-113) - received 02/09/15

Design Schemes – The Cartshed/The Piggery - (dwg ref: 141012-114) - received 02/09/15

Design Schemes – The Stables - (dwg ref: 141012-115) - received 02/09/15 REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

2. The works to which this Listed Building Consent relate shall be begun before the

expiration of 3 years from the date of the consent. REASON: To comply with Section 18 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 (as amended by Section 51(4) of the Planning and Compensation Act 2004) and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented consents.

3. No works shall commence on-site until a fully-detailed materials schedule has been submitted to and approved by the Local Planning Authority in writing. The submitted schedule must specify in detail the proposed materials, timber stain to be used on the building and methods of workmanship proposed and must be accompanied by labelled samples as applicable to each building part. Following the approval of the schedule, but prior to the commencement of above-ground works, a 1m² sample panel of brickwork shall be prepared on-site for inspection by the Local Planning Authority, to demonstrate the approved brick sample in use with a proposed mortar, bonding and pointing specification, to be subsequently confirmed to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority as an addendum to the approved materials schedule. The works shall then proceed in strict accordance with the approved schedule unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: Details are required prior to development because insufficient details were submitted with the application and to ensure that the development will preserve the special architectural / historic interest of the listed building, in accordance with Saved Policy E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

4. No works shall commence on the windows and doors hereby approved, until full

joinery details, at a scale of 1:5, including type of finish, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The submitted details must be referenced against the approved plans, and must show the relationship with the surrounding / original fabric. The works shall then progress in strict accordance with the approved details unless agreed otherwise in writing by the Local Planning Authority before varied on-site. REASON: Details are required prior to development because insufficient details were submitted with the application and to ensure that resultant details will preserve the special architectural / historic interest of the listed building, in accordance with Saved Policy E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

5. All external doors and windows are to be inserted into the respective openings

with a minimum 75mm reveal. REASON: To preserve the special architectural / historic interest of the listed building, in accordance with Saved Policy E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

6. If previously unknown features of architectural, historic or archaeological interest

that would be affected by the hereby approved works are discovered during the progress of works on-site, an appropriate record together with measures to be taken to accommodate it within the approved scheme and/or to mitigate against its loss, must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before works continue on-site in relation to the affected works. Items of unrelated works may continue on-site unaffected. REASON: To preserve the special architectural / historic interest of the listed building, and/or to allow for the recording of the of architectural, historic or archaeological interest of the listed building in accordance with Saved Policy E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

Informative(s):- 1. 1.1 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if

any), must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated.

1.2 This consent may contain pre-commencement conditions which require

specific matters to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before a specified stage in the development occurs. This means that a lawful commencement of the approved development CANNOT be made until the particular requirements of the pre-commencement conditions have been met.

1.3 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the Local Planning

Authority has a period of up to eight weeks to determine details submitted in respect of a condition or limitation attached to a grant of planning permission. It is likely that in most cases the determination period will be shorter than eight weeks, however, the applicant is advised to schedule this time period into any programme of works. A fee will be required for requests for discharge of any consent, agreement, or approval required by a planning condition. The fee chargeable is £97 per request or £28 where the related permission was for extending or altering a dwelling house or other development in the curtilage of a dwelling house. A fee is payable for each submission made regardless of the number of conditions for which approval is sought. Requests must be made using the standard application form (available online) or set out in writing clearly identifying the relevant planning application and condition(s) which they are seeking approval for.

2. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy

Framework (NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and proactive manner:-

seeking further information following receipt of the application;

considering the imposition of conditions

In this instance:

the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit, In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

3. The developer is advised that if works are carried out without strict compliance

with the above conditions, approved plans and details an offence will have been committed under the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 rendering the building owner, their agent and the person carrying out such works liable to prosecution. In cases of doubt you should contact the Local Planning Authority for further advice prior to the commencement of works.

15/00976/LBC

Location plan

15/00976/LBC

Site layout plan

15/00976/LBC

Plots 1- 4 elevations

15/00976/LBC

Plots 1- 4 elevations

15/00976/LBC

Plots 1- 4 - Ground floor plan

15/00976/LBC

Plots 1-4 - First floor plan

Minor Application Cttee: 6 April 2016 Item No. 3

Application no: 15/01565/RET

For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address 8 Test Road Whitchurch Hampshire RG28 7LP

Proposal Erection of a replacement fence (retrospective)

Registered: 21 May 2015 Expiry Date: 22 June 2015

Type of Application:

Retention of Development (Section 73A)

Case Officer: Jon Willetts 01256 845509

Applicant: Mr D Old Agent:

Ward: Whitchurch Ward Member(s): Cllr Eric Dunlop Cllr Keith Watts

Parish: WHITCHURCH CP OS Grid Reference: 446366 147943

Recommendation: It is RECOMMENDED that:

A) the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

The unauthorised timber fence and 9no. fence posts, by virtue of their inappropriate height, design and materials, would neither preserve nor enhance the special character and appearance of Whitchurch Conservation Area. By reason of being an inappropriate boundary treatment, the development is contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Saved Policies E1 and E3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011, and the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document 2008 (Appendix 4 - The Historic Environment: Conservation Areas).

B) if the Head of Law and Governance is satisfied with the evidence, and in the opinion of the Planning Development Manager it is expedient to do so, enforcement action as defined in Section 171A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended), be initiated requiring:

i) The reduction in height of the 7no. timber fence panels and 9no. concrete posts fronting the plot and as outlined in red on Appendix A as attached to a height not exceeding 1m; or

ii) Remove the 7no. timber fence panels and 9no. concrete posts and concrete base fronting the plot and as outlined in red on Appendix A as attached and make good all affected surfaces

Period of compliance: Within 2 months of the date of this notice.

Reasons for Refusal 1. The unauthorised timber fence and 9no. fence posts, by virtue of their

inappropriate height, design and materials, would neither preserve nor enhance the special character and appearance of Whitchurch Conservation Area. By reason of being an inappropriate boundary treatment, the development is contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Saved Policies E1 and E3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011, and the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document 2008 (Appendix 4 - The Historic Environment: Conservation Areas).

General comments This application has been brought to the Development Control Committee at the request of Cllr. K. Watts for the following reason: "I would like the Committee to consider the de-minimis effect on this breach on the character of the Conservation Area in light of recent decisions, notably the Committee`s explicit decision to disregard the firm recommendation of a Conservation Officer to refuse the application to "extend" the small bungalow "Brushwood" in The Lynch into a four bedroom house that now blights the Conservation Area". This request is supported by Cllr. E. Dunlop. Planning Policy 8 Test Road lies within Whitchurch Conservation Area and is subject to the following guidance:- National Legislation Section 72 Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas Act) 1990 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) Core Planning Principles Section 7 (Requiring good design) Section 12 (Conserving and enhancing the historic environment) Decision Taking Adopted Local Plan 1996 - 2011 (saved policies) Policy E1 (Development Control) Policy E3 (Areas of Architectural or Historic Interest) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance Design and Sustainability SPD - Appendix 4: The Historic Environment: Conservation Areas

Description of Site 8 Test Road is a brick and tile semi-detached bungalow located south of the roadside and west of the allotment gardens adjacent to the River Test in Whitchurch. The property is a modern dwelling of a linear footprint with an attached flat-roofed garage to the east. Access is via a brick-lined and gravel driveway flanked by low brick walls and piers. The property is an unlisted building within Whitchurch Conservation Area Proposal Retrospective planning permission is sought for the erection of a replacement fence (retrospective). The timber fence consists of 7no. timber panels and 9no. concrete posts laid upon a concrete base set back approximately 0.3m from the property boundary fronting the roadside. The fence measures approximately 1.73m in height and 22m in length with a 1m return at its eastern end. Consultations Whitchurch Town Council: - No objection Tree Officer: - No objection Highways Officer:- No objection Public Observations Two letters have been received both expressing objection to the proposal on the following grounds (in summary):

The timber and concrete fence is not in keeping with the character of Test Road and replaced a privet hedge that retained the owner`s privacy;

The fence erected is out of scale with others on the street and with the low fences within the site itself;

The fence presents a blank face to the street;

Justification for the fence on the basis that cars damaged the hedge is incorrect as car owners avoided the hedge as to not damage the paintwork of their vehicles;

Vegetative measures or a more `in keeping` boundary treatment such as a privet hedge, or a low brick wall should be sought;

The posts project above the panels and the concrete material is inappropriate and sits incongruously with the typical boundary treatments found within the conservation area;

No planting mitigation has been considered;

The excessive height of the fence would affect the visibility splays of the host property and the application lacks sufficient details or accurate plans.

Relevant Planning History BDB/15570 Erection of garage and formation of new

access

Granted 26.09.83

Assessment It is noted that the information regarding the fence and the plans are rudimentary however, the fence has already been built and is in-situ. An appropriate assessment of the proposals can therefore be made on this basis with consideration additionally given to the public representations. Planning history Photographic evidence illustrates that the property frontage previously consisted of a privet hedge set adjacent to the existing driveway access. In December 2014 this hedge was removed and replaced with a timber panel fence approximately 1.73m in height supported by 9no. concrete posts. A subsequent enforcement investigation revealed that the fence, due to its height (i.e. exceeds 1m) and its relationship adjacent to the highway sits contrary to permitted development rights afforded to the landowner under the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015. The fence therefore has been erected without the benefit of planning permission and is therefore unauthorised. The applicant was therefore advised to either reduce the fence to 1 metre in height to constitute permitted development or to submit an application to seek planning permission for its retention. The current application seeks permission to retain the fence as built. Principle of development The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires consideration of a proposal upon the setting of a heritage asset, which could comprise a listed building or conservation area. Section 72 of this Act sets out that the local planning authority should, when considering to grant consent `have special regard for the preservation or enhancement of the character or appearance of the conservation area’. In determining planning applications Paragraph 131 of the NPPF also states that local planning authorities should take account of the desirability of new development making a positive contribution to local character and distinctiveness. When substantial harm is considered to arise, this needs to be weighed against the public benefits. Locally, Saved Policy E3 of the Local Plan states that development within conservation areas will only be permitted where proposals would preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the conservation area. Page 5 of Whitchurch Conservation Area Appraisal also infers that the contribution of individual hedgerows should not be underestimated in relation to the character of the conservation area and their significance is implicit. Guidance for boundary treatments is additionally provided within paragraph 2.10 of Appendix 4 of the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document 2008. This states that the type of boundary treatments can be very important by shaping views and scapes and that close-board fencing will rarely be appropriate in historic contexts. Finally paragraph 14 of Whitchurch Village Design Statement infers that development should define plot boundaries beside public roads, paths or scenic views by using natural features such as weathered brick, flint or other traditional walling, railings or hedging.

Impact on the character of the conservation area/ design 8 Test Road is one of a pair of inter-war houses that protrude out into the corridor of open land along the north banks of the River Test. There is an absence of a pavement on this side of the road and boundary treatments are predominantly verdant hedges interspersed with mature trees. To the northern side of the road sits a symmetrical housing terrace dating to the late C19 with front gardens and boundary walls together with a few box hedges set above a pavement. Although the road contains a high density of vehicular roadside parking, this mix of soft and hard boundary treatments presents a strong east-west aspect that positively contributes to the character and appearance of the conservation area. The proposed fence at 1.73m high presents a large barrier between the property and the roadside beyond. The regimented concrete posts have neither a traditional form nor finish, and the large timber panels visually disrupt the sense of openness afforded to the roadside. The height of the panels are additionally excessive and offer little in the way of permeability through the site and the fence obscures the relationship of the dwellinghouse with the streetscene thus creating an un-active frontage and an insular plot. It is recognised that the applicant seeks to retain a level of privacy, however no evidence has been submitted to illustrate that less intrusive boundary measures have been considered that would better respect the character of the area. Whilst it is noted that there are a small number of timber fences to the western end of the road at the junction of Winchester Street, these examples are positioned side on to their respective properties and are not principal boundary treatments. Boundaries sitting adjacent to the highway along the remainder of the road either consist of a traditional brick walls with piers, or much softer screening provided by hedges. Given that traditional boundary features are identified as important characteristics within the conservation area, and that the fence erected would contribute little to local distinctiveness, the impact of the development upon the character of the prevailing roadside would be negative. As such, the proposals as they stand would neither preserve, nor enhance, the character and appearance of the conservation area and would not be supported. Parking The public representations have expressed concern regarding the impact of the fence subject of this application upon highway visibility. These concerns are acknowledged and have been subject of discussion with the Highways Officer. In addressing matters of highway safety, it is concluded that, whilst the fence panels are higher than the previous hedge, the visibility splays of the existing access would not be excessively impeded given that the fence has been set back 0.3m from the property boundary. The increase in height of the fence above that of the previous hedge is therefore considered to have a marginal impact upon safe access and egress and therefore would not warrant a refusal of the proposal on highway grounds.

Trees The fence is understood to have replaced a small mature evergreen privet hedge and whilst this is regrettable, there would be no arboricultural implications to warrant the refusal of the scheme on tree grounds. In summary By virtue of the inappropriate height, design and materials, the timber fence panels and concrete fence posts has a direct impact upon the conservation area as a heritage asset and gives rise to substantial harm upon its significance which cannot otherwise be mitigated at its current height and position. The development fails to preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area and is contrary to national and local guidance contained within the Town and Country (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, the NPPF and Saved Policy E3 of the Local Plan. For these reasons it is recommended the application for retrospective planning permission be refused and that enforcement action be undertaken requiring either the reduction of the timber fence panels and the 9no. fence posts to 1 metre in height, or to remove the timber panels and posts from the site in their entirety. Informative(s):- 1. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy

Framework (NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and proactive manner:-

considering the imposition of conditions.

In this instance:

the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

15/01565/RET

LOCATION PLAN

Minor Application

Cttee: 6 April 2016 Item No. 4

Application no: 15/03077/HSE For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address Ringshall, The Street, Bramley Hampshire

Proposal Erection of two storey side and front extensions, with single storey front extension to form entrance porch. Erection of new boundary fence and entrance gates

Registered: 11 September 2015 Expiry Date: 10 December 2015

Type of Application:

Householder Permission

Case Officer: Stephanie Humphreys 01256 845578

Applicant: Yateley Drawing Service Ltd

Agent: Mr Chris Barnes

Ward: Bramley And Sherfield

Ward Member(s): Cllr Chris Tomblin Cllr Nicholas Robinson

Parish: BRAMLEY CP OS Grid Reference: 465291 159365

Recommendation: the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

Reasons for Refusal 1. The use of the proposed vehicular access to The Street, due to the shared

arrangement with the neighbouring property ‘Rosemullion’ and inadequate sightlines would cause undue interference with the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway. As such the proposal is contrary to Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan (1996-2011) and Policy HW6 of the Hampshire County Council Highway Maintenance Management Plan 2014.

2. The proposed two storey side extensions, by virtue of their unsatisfactory design,

disproportionate bulk, footprint, scale and massing, would dominate and compete with the character of the original dwelling. The proposal would therefore fail to form subservient additions to the main property which would result in material harm to both the external appearance of the dwelling and character of the wider area. As such the proposed development would be contrary to Section 7 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2012), Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan (1996-2011) and Appendix 13 of the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (2012).

General comments This application has been called to Committee at the request of Councillor Robinson and Councillor Tomblin:- "This application has been recommended for refusal. This should be assessed by Development

Control for the following reasons;

- To allow members to view the application within the context of its street setting to assess any impact.

- There are no objections from the parish council, other than to the access which has subsequently been modified and the objection has now been withdrawn.

- There are no objections from the ward councillors." Planning Policy The site lies within the Bramley Settlement Policy Boundary. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) Core Principles Section 7 (Requiring good design) Decision-Taking Adopted Local Plan 1996 - 2011 (saved policies) Saved Policy E1 (Development Control) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance

Design and Sustainability SPD – Appendix 13 Extending Your Home and Replacement Dwellings

Supplementary Planning Document 2012

Residential Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document 2008 Description of Site The application property is a detached two storey dwellinghouse of brick and tile construction with existing vehicular access to the south-western side of the plot from Ringshall Gardens. Proposal The proposed development comprises the erection of 2no two storey side extensions on each side of the dwelling and a single storey front extension comprising a porch to the north-eastern side of the dwelling. The proposal also includes the construction of an additional vehicular access to serve the property from The Street and for the installation of timber gates and fencing with brick piers. The proposed two storey side extensions measure 3.05m in width, 7.9m in depth and 7.5m in height to both side elevations of the property. The proposed side extensions project forward of the existing principal elevation by 2.3m with a height of 6.2m. The proposed single storey front extension measures 3.7m in width, 1.8m in depth and 3.2m in height. The proposed materials for the extensions are brickwork elevations, clay tiled roofs and PVC openings with the exception of a timber front door.

The proposed timber entrance gates measure 3.65m in width, with 1m wide fencing on either side and gate posts measuring 0.45m in width. The maximum height of the gates and posts are 2m. Amended Plans Amended parking and tree plans received 11/03/2016 illustrating access gates and trees. Consultations Bramley Parish Council: "Bramley Parish Council object to the above planning application on the following grounds: There is concern about the safety of the proposed new entrance onto The Street. It

is very close to the corner of Ringshall Gardens and would pose a safety issue to pedestrians and vehicles exiting Ringshall gardens.

There have been two other planning applications in recent years which have resulted in new entrances on to the Street. The first of these was BDB/74864 for 9 Pheabens Field, and the other was BDB/67645 for a new house build in 2008 opposite Middle Farm. Both of these had new exits out onto the C32. However, in both instances there was clear visibility as they were on to a straight section of the C32. This is not the case with the Ringshall application, where the exit onto the C32 is close to a bend in the road, and is also very close to the exit from Ringshall Gardens. Bramley Parish Council ask that planners look very carefully at the safety issues this poses.

The proposed gates for the new exit onto The Street would not be in keeping with the current street scene, particularly with high hedges."

Councillor C Tomblin: "Looking at this application I have the following comments:- 1. Concern over the access to the Street - located on the corner of the road would seem a danger to C32 traffic due to its close proximity to the junction. 2. Note trees to be removed - will our tree officer be consulted as to their value - and loss to the street scene?" Councillor N Robinson: As per above call-in request. Highways Officer: Objection to the proposed access due to increased risk and hazard from conflict to nearby junction and the proposed shared crossing is sub-standard in terms of width for a shared access. Public Observations It should be noted that three letters of representation were submitted within the supporting documents to the application however these letters were dated pre-submission and it has not been verified whether the comments made relate to the submitted plans. The three letters are therefore not valid for the purposes of representation on this application.

Five letters of support received, summarised as follows:- it is inappropriate to apply blanket planning policies; proposal would retain the sense of character and be in keeping; historically there was an access directly onto the C32; the proposed access would have excellent visibility; applicant confirmed additional planting to maintain privacy. Three letters of objection received, summarised as follows:- description wording is misleading; proposed access would be dangerous/ difficult; proposed gates would interrupt the flow of traffic; disingenuous, pre-worded statements of support were given to neighbours to return

to the applicant which is not official or approved method; access from Ringshall Gardens would be safer; hazardous access proposed. Relevant Planning History None. Assessment Principle of development It is noted that the above call-in request states that the Parish Council objection has been withdrawn however no further correspondence has been received directly from the Parish to confirm this position, or to state support. In this respect the original objection raised by the Parish remains valid. Saved Policy E1 states that proposals for new development will be permitted provided that they are of a high standard of design, make efficient use of land and respect the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. The Policy continues to say that proposals should respond to the local context of buildings in terms of design, spacing, reinforce attractive qualities of local distinctiveness and enhance areas of poor design; extensions should respect their host building. The application site lies within the Bramley Settlement Policy Boundary wherein the principle of development is acceptable in accordance with Saved Policy E1. Therefore the principle of extensions to the property is acceptable, subject to design and amenity issues being considered. Impact on the character of the area/design The design of the proposed two storey side extensions is unsatisfactory in that it is not subordinate to the host property in any respect as required within Appendix 13 of the SPD. The side extensions demonstrate no reduction from the existing property's ridge line and no set back from the principal elevation wall. The resultant footprint increase would dominate the character of the original modest dwelling. The proposed design is almost symmetrical in appearance and with the proposed additional driveway would

have the appearance of a pair of semi-detached dwellings served by separate vehicle accesses. The proposal would result in an over-development of the site, with the proposed two storey extensions almost meeting the extent of the boundary on both sides. The proposal would result in the dwelling having a greater presence and bulk within the streetscene due to the loss of trees on the front curtilage and the loss of the visual gap between the built form of the host property and the adjacent bungalow, Rosemullion. The proposal would generate a dominant relationship towards the closest neighbouring properties to the east, which are modest bungalows. The applicant quotes Appendix 13 of the SPD in the submitted Design and Access Statement and asserts that subservient design would not be in-keeping with the property. The applicant has mis-interpreted the SPD in that it acknowledges extensions may not be able to be designed to be subservient in all respects, however it establishes that some part of the proposal should be subservient (i.e. height, footprint or set-back from the principal elevation). This proposal, which has not been amended, does not demonstrate subservience to the host property in any respect. The proposed two storey side extensions have the same depth and height as the existing house and the width of the side extensions could not be greater without exceeding the boundary of the site. The existing 2 storey dwelling is 9.9 metres wide and the proposed resultant two storey bulk of the property would increase by 64% to 15.45m in width. Given the height and bulk of the proposal combined with the overly large footprint, the proposal would not be subordinate to the existing dwelling in any respect. With regards to the proposed access, the visual impact of an access directly from The Street would create a revised appearance of the dwelling and curtilage due to the loss of trees on the front curtilage. Whilst the proposed access gates would not be in-keeping with the character of the area, which consists primarily of open frontages with low-level boundary treatment, as low-level fencing or gates could be installed along the front boundary under permitted development, it is not considered that the harm arising from the height of the gates would be so overriding as to justify a separate reason for refusal. Impact on neighbouring amenities The proposal would result in altered relationships to existing neighbouring properties however it is considered that this would not generate any undue overbearing, overshadowing or loss of light impacts to the closest residential properties such to warrant a separate refusal reason. The relationship to Rosemullion is such that the additional first floor bulk close to the neighbouring boundary would impact the front curtilage and intervening garage as opposed to the more immediate private areas to the rear. Whilst the proposal includes additional first floor windows in the rear, given the existing situation of views into the far end of neighbouring curtilages, this proposal would not generate any significant overlooking above the current levels and would be acceptable in terms of neighbouring amenity. No objections are raised in this regard.

Parking and highway safety The proposed additional vehicular access, directly from The Street is considered to be potentially hazardous and sub-standard in terms of its vehicular crossover width and achievable sightlines. The Highways Officer has raised objection in this regard and has noted the manoeuvring would be difficult. The Highways Officer considers that the additional access would be likely to harm the safety and convenience of users of the adjacent highway. As such, due to the material highways safety concerns raised by the Highways Officer, the adverse impacts of the proposed access are considered to be significant and demonstrable such to warrant a separate refusal reason. In respect of the existing access from Ringshall Gardens, insufficient information has been provided to the proposed alteration of the existing access. The proposed drawings indicate a double-width crossover however the existing access is only suitable for a single car. The Highways Officer has raised no in-principle objection to the possible revision to the existing access however further information would be required in respect of the visibility splays and construction information, which could have been conditioned if all other matters were acceptable. The amended plans received did not materially change the design of the proposed vehicular access, proposed extensions or relationship to neighbouring properties therefore no re-consultations were undertaken. Other matters Councillor Tomblin's representation noted the loss of trees in the front curtilage. Whilst the loss of ten mature trees is recognised as a clear disbenefit of the proposal, the site is not located within a Conservation Area and no trees on the site have Tree Protection Orders. The loss of the trees could occur at any point without requiring express consent from the Authority. As such, the Tree Team have not been consulted on the application and no objection is raised in this respect. The amended Trees Plan demonstrates new landscaping for the proposal. Informative(s):- 1. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy

Framework (NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and proactive manner:-

seeking further information following receipt of the application; seeking amendments to the proposed development following receipt of the

application; considering the imposition of conditions.

In this instance:

the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit,

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

15/03077/HSE

Location Plan

15/03077/HSE

Site and Parking Plan

15/03077/HSE

Existing and Proposed elevations

Front

Rear

Minor Application

Cttee: 6 April 2016 Item No. 5

Application no: 15/03119/FUL For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address Crowshott Park Farm Hollington Lane Highclere Newbury

Proposal Erection of a five bedroom house, garages and stabling following demolition of farm and stable buildings

Registered: 18 September 2015 Expiry Date: 31 December 2015

Type of Application:

Full Planning Application

Case Officer: Trevor Campbell-Smith 01256 845661

Applicant: Mr Patrick Todd Agent:

Ward: Burghclere, Highclere And St Mary Bourne

Ward Member(s): Cllr John Izett Cllr Graham Falconer

Parish: HIGHCLERE CP OS Grid Reference: 443322 160059

Recommendation: the application be REFUSED for the following reason:

Reason for Refusal 1. The proposed development would introduce an inappropriate and incongruous

form of development which would be at odds with the distinctly rural character and appearance of the area. The proposal would therefore not preserve or improve the intrinsic character and beauty of this part of the countryside and would be of detriment to the setting of the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. As such the proposal would be contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012), Saved Policies E1 and E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 and Appendix 14: Countryside Design Summary of the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document and the Highclere and Penwood Village Design Statement.

General Comments: This application is brought before the committee at the request of Councillor Falconer, supported by Councillor Izett for the following reason: “Recent decisions in Highclere have been contentious because of the interpretation of the NPPF and its relationship with existing BDBC planning policies for rural communities and settlement policy boundaries. There is also the issue of the absence of the Local Plan. Last year a similar application in the same road was approved, namely, 14/00233, this could Lead to an appeal if 03119 were refused and the reasons were not watertight. Nearby, 15/01804 was approved in August although it was objected to by the Parish Council and the Highclere Society and all affected residents who disagreed with the interpretations of “sustainability”, access to shops etcetera.

Thus, in order to ensure that a clear, justifiable decision is made based upon acceptable Interpretations of policy, NPPF and planning guidelines and that subsequent grounds for Appeal or formal complaint are minimised then the decision should be made at committee.” Planning Policy The site lies outside any Settlement Policy Boundary and as such is considered to be in the countryside. The site is also within the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) Core Principles – Achieving Sustainable Development Section 4 (Promoting Sustainable Transport) Section 6 (Delivering a Wide Choice of Quality Homes) Section 7 (Requiring Good Design) Section 11 (Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment) Decision-Taking Adopted Local Plan 1996 - 2011 (Saved Policies) Policy D5 (Residential and other Developments within Settlements) Policy D6 (New Residential Accommodation in the Countryside) Policy E1 (Development Control) Policy E6 (Landscape Character) Policy E7 (Nature/Biodiversity Conservation) Policy A1 (Car Parking) Policy A2 (Encouraging Walking, Cycling and the Use of Public Transport) Policy C1 (Section 106 Contributions) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and Interim Planning Guidance

Design and Sustainability SPD - Appendix 4 - The Historic Environment - Appendix 5 - Construction Statements - Appendix 6 - Waste and Recycling - Appendix 7 - Places to Live - Appendix 14 - Countryside Design Summary - Appendix 16 - Residential Amenity Design Guidance

Residential Parking Standards SPD

S106 Planning Obligations and Community Infrastructure Interim Planning Guidance Note (April 2012)

Supplementary Planning Document `Basingstoke Environment Strategy for Transport (BEST)

Landscape & Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Document

Landscape Character Assessment SPD

Highclere and Penwood Village Design Statement

Other Material Documents

National Planning Practice Guidance (2015)

The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010

Hampshire County Council Transport Contributions Policy 2007. Description of Site The application site is located to the northern side of Westridge and to the rear of the relatively modern detached dwelling of Crowshott Park Farm. The site currently contains a number of former agricultural buildings that were originally associated with the existing dwellinghouse. Access to the application site is taken from Westridge and passes to the east of the existing dwelling. The application site is surrounded to the north east and west by open countryside and dwellings to the southern side of Westridge are generally detached within generous plots with little evidence of back land development. Proposal Planning permission is sought for the erection of a five bedroom detached two storey dwelling with associated triple garage with storage at first floor level and three bay stable. The proposed dwelling would be orientated such that its front elevation would face eastwards and it would measure 18.3m in width at ground floor level, reducing to 15.5m in width at first floor level, 9.9m in depth and would have a hipped pitched roof with flat roofed central section to a maximum height of 8.8m. Chimneys to the northern and southern side elevations would project 0.8m above the ridge. The front elevation of the dwelling would have a symmetrical pattern of fenestration and a central portico to the main entrance. Revised plans were submitted on the 9 December 2015 which amended the proposal to a four- bedroom two storey dwelling measuring 13.7m in width 12.4m in depth with a ridge height of 7.7m. The proposed dwelling would have a more traditional design and irregular plan form than originally proposed. The proposal also incorporates the erection of a detached triple garage measuring 10.7m x 8.3m with a ridge height of 6.1m and a 3 bay stable measuring 12.8m by 6.2m with a ridge height of 5.7m. Consultations Ward Councillors: see Cllr Call in comments above. Highclere Parish Council: “There is no comment from the Parish Council”. North Wessex Downs AONB: No comments received. Local Highway Authority: Original comments: Objection

In its current form the application would not enable the Highway Authority to make a favourable recommendation;

Additional information or amended drawings are required to address concerns relating to access, parking and turning and the provision of facilities on site for both the existing and proposed dwelling.

Amended Plans – No objection subject to conditions. Landscape Officer:- Original comments – Objection

Adverse and unacceptably significant impact on the visual amenity and landscape character of the local area;

Greater density of residential development in the countryside;

Change from agricultural to domestic usage resulting in increasing suburbanization and loss of rural character (e.g. domestic paraphernalia, likelihood of external lighting) and formalising of the landscape (e.g. grand entrance features, increased hard landscaping and car parking);

Alteration from the existing farmstead layout of single dwelling adjacent to the lane and farm buildings to the rear, into the proposed housing layout with two separate dwellings;

Harmful to the existing local landscape character due to the loss of this farmstead setting;

Adds to the “disproportionate number of large executive-style family homes” erected in the last 10 years, highlighted as an issue by the Highclere Village Design Statement, and could set a precedent for future development of similar agricultural plots;

Development sited away from, rather than fronting onto the lane is uncharacteristic and detrimental to local character.

Amended Plans – Objection

Amended plans show modifications to the design and layout of the proposed buildings including alterations from 5 bedroom to 4 bedroom dwelling;

Modifications reduce the ‘grand’ appearance of the original proposal. Landscape objections remain based on the fundamental alteration of character resulting from the development considered in its entirety;

The proposal would result in a greater density of residential development in the countryside;

Change from agricultural to domestic usage would result in increased suburbanisation of the area with a loss of rural character resulting from domestic paraphernalia, car parking, hard landscaping etc;

The alteration from existing typical farmstead layout (single dwelling adjacent to the lane with farm buildings to the rear) into housing layout of access road and two separate dwellings will be damaging to local landscape character with the loss of this farmstead dwelling and its association with the management of the surrounding agricultural land;

Residential development sited away from, rather than fronting onto, the lane is uncharacteristic and detrimental to local character.

Biodiversity Officer: No objection Environmental Health Officer: No objection subject to conditions. Tree Officer: No objection. Public Observations Ten letters of objection have been received raising the following issues:

New development in Highclere should reflect the needs of the community, for example smaller dwellings for starter homes or downsizing.

The site has no agricultural use and is in residential curtilage and as such represents garden land development.

Is this development solely for economic gain?

There is a new build opportunity on the opposite side of the road.

The existing buildings blend into the landscape, and the proposed change is not sustainable or in keeping with the landscape.

The proposed development may lead to ancillary development such as tennis courts, pools or a menege adding to the potential for light pollution.

The permitting of this development will set a precedent for similar sites in the area.

The availability of local amenities should be considered.

The proposal will be visible from neighbouring dwellings.

The proposed dwelling and associated outbuildings are excessive in size and unsympathetic in design.

The proposal would lead to additional traffic.

The developments at Alma Farm and The Shieling are sited adjacent to Hollington Lane. This is back land development.

If the existing buildings are no longer required they should be removed and the land returned to pasture.

The proposal is development by stealth. Two letters (duplicates) received expressing support on the following grounds:

Will remove the unsightly barn.

Will also retain the rural nature of the area while not damaging the character of the village.

Highclere is a village well suited to sympathetic and well planned expansion with individual infills of this type.

Relevant Planning History BDB/68408 Application for Certificate of Lawfulness

for non-compliance with condition 2 of

planning permission BDB/26309 relating

to the occupation of the dwelling

(persons employed in agriculture)

Granted 21.05.08

BDB/31073 Continued siting of mobile home

(renewal of temporary permission

bdb021383)

Granted 12.02.91

BDB/26309 Erection of farm workers dwelling and

double garage

Granted 08.03.89

BDB/21383 Siting of mobile home Refused 29.01.97

Assessment Principle of development Planning Law requires that applications for planning permission must be determined in accordance with the development plan, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case the development plan for the area is the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 (BDBLP). Since the adoption of the BDBLP the National Planning Policy Guidance has been introduced. The NPPF constitutes guidance, which LPA must have regard to (as advised in Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004). The NPPF does not change the statutory status of the development plan as the starting point for decision making. The NPPF constitutes guidance for local planning authorities and decision-takers both in drawing up plans and as a material consideration in determining applications. At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking. This means “approving development proposals that accord with the development plan without delay”; and where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting planning permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would be significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole or where specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted. For the purposes of decision-taking, Paragraph 211 of the NPPF is clear that the policies within the Local Plan should not be considered out-of-date simply because they were adopted prior to the publication of the Framework. Paragraph 212 is clear that the policies within the NPPF are material considerations which Local Planning Authorities should take into account from the day of publication (27 March 2012). Given that the Saved Policies of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 were not adopted in accordance with the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (but were adopted under the transitional arrangements), Paragraph 215 of the NPPF is considered to apply to the current Local Plan. This states that “due weight should be given to relevant policies in existing plans according to their degree of consistency with this framework (the closer the policies in the plan to the policies in the framework, the greater the weight may be given)." This means that in determining applications, consideration needs to be given to the degree of consistency a Saved Policy has with regard to the NPPF. The site lies outside of any designated Settlement Policy Boundary as defined by Saved Policy D5 in the Adopted Local Plan (1996 to 2011) and is therefore considered to be located in the open countryside where the principle of development is more restricted. Saved Local Plan Policy D6 is therefore considered to apply. On 21 June 2012, a paper went to Planning and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny Committee which included a review of the Saved Local Plan policies in terms of their consistency with the NPPF. This agrees that Saved Policies D5 and D6 should be continued to be used, as they are generally in conformity with the NPPF. Saved Policy D6 restricts new homes in the countryside, only permitting new residential development in the countryside where (i) it is a "one for one replacement of an existing dwelling"; or (ii) "results from the conversion of an existing building"; or (iii) where it

"involves residential development on sites which comply with Saved Policies D8 or D9" where the site is a rural exception sites (e.g. for affordable housing, community facilities etc) or a rural brownfield site. Rural Brownfield sites are defined within the NPPF as ''Land which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land (although it should not be assumed that the whole of the curtilage should be developed) and any associated fixed surface infrastructure. This excludes: land that is or has been occupied by agricultural or forestry buildings; land that has been developed for minerals extraction or waste disposal by landfill purposes where provision for restoration has been made through development control procedures; land in built-up areas such as private residential gardens, parks, recreation grounds and allotments; and land that was previously-developed but where the remains of the permanent structure or fixed surface structure have blended into the landscape in the process of time. As the barns at the site where originally constructed in association with the agricultural use of the land at the time the area of the site occupied by them does not fall within this definition of previously developed land. Whilst there are buildings at the site occupied in association with the keeping of horses at the site, there is no planning history to indicate that a change of use for the keeping of horses has ever been granted at the site as such the site is not considered to be a rural brownfield site. As this proposal is for a new-build dwelling rather than a replacement dwelling or conversion of an existing building the proposal does not comply with criteria (i) and (ii) of Saved Policy D6. With respect to criteria (iii) of Saved Policy D6, the site does not involve the development of a site which would be considered to be a brownfield site under Saved Policy D9 of the BDBLP and the site is not being offered as a rural exception site under Saved Policy D8. The proposal therefore conflicts with these Saved Policies of the Local Plan. Isolated dwellings in the countryside The NPPF imposes a requirement to consider whether the proposal contributes to sustainable development through the social, environmental and economic merits of the development. In considering new housing in rural areas Paragraph 55 of the NPPF advises that:

"To promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. For example, where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby."

Paragraph 55 goes on to say that Local Planning Authorities should avoid new isolated homes in the countryside unless there are special circumstances. It is considered that the term 'isolated' can have two distinct dimensions as informed by recent applications and appeal decisions. Firstly whether the site is physically remote; and secondly whether it has easy access to services and facilities. In considering whether this site is physically isolated, the decision of the Inspector with regard to 15/00583/FUL (Land at Andover Road, Highclere) is considered to be relevant. In addressing the appeal proposal for two detached dwellings, the Inspector concluded that "I am satisfied that the new houses’ would be sited in a location that would be

accessible to these local services and facilities. Whilst the opportunities to use public transport are limited at certain times of the day, this is not uncommon in rural areas. Indeed the Framework recognises that opportunities to maximise sustainable transport solutions will vary from urban to rural areas." This application site is located less than 250m from the appeal site and as such, having regard to the Inspector's decision, it is considered that the site could not be considered to be a site where the proposed development would lead to an isolated dwelling in the countryside. Sustainable Development In considering the broader aims of the NPPF's definition of sustainable development, the Council must also consider whether the cumulative social, environmental and economic merits of the development outweigh this overriding conflict with policy. The economic role of the NPPF requires proposals to contribute to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy. The social role requires planning to support strong, vibrant and healthy communities and states that it should create a high quality built environment. The environmental role states that the natural built and historic environment should be protected and enhanced and should mitigate and adapt to climate change. The proposed development would encourage a degree of associated economic growth through the actual physical building works. Furthermore, the future occupants would also undoubtedly contribute to the local economy and the continued viability of local shops and services in the area. However given the development refers to only a single dwelling, any economic role would be limited, and therefore is afforded limited weight. In terms of the social role, the proposal would create a single additional dwelling at a time when the Council is unable to demonstrate a 5 year housing supply position. Whilst a single dwelling would not make a significant contribution to the Council's housing supply position, it is still a positive social contribution nonetheless. However, the scheme proposes a large detached house on a substantial plot of land in the countryside. In this regard, the development is not considered to meet any identified social or affordable housing needs in the area, nor would it assist in meeting the overriding social need to of providing smaller units of accommodation. In this regard the development is not considered to provide any significant social benefits to the local community. With regard to the environmental role of this development, the proposal would result in a single dwelling which can reasonably be expected to demonstrate a degree of inherent sustainability through compliance with Council supported energy efficiency and building regulations standards. To summarise, in terms of its contribution to meeting the Borough's housing shortfall and associated economic growth, the principle of the development is afforded some weight. This must however, be balanced against the impacts of the proposal on the setting of the AONB, the character of the area and its visual amenities, the amenities of neighbours and highway safety and this is carried out below.

Impact on the Landscape Character/Visual Amenity The Landscape Officer raised objection to both the initial proposal and also to revised plans which reduced the number of bedrooms within the proposed dwelling and its scale and also reduced the scale of the associated outbuildings. Local objection has also been received as to the landscape impact. It is acknowledged that the revised proposal would have a marginally reduced impact due to its reduction in scale. The proposed erection of a dwelling in this location would however, alter the existing farmstead layout of single dwelling adjacent to the lane and farm buildings to the rear. This layout of single depth dwellings with outbuildings or garden space and agricultural land beyond is characteristic of the built form in the immediate area. It is considered that the proposed housing layout creating two separate dwellings one to the rear of the other would represent an uncharacteristic and unwarranted intrusion in to the countryside both through the domestic form of the proposed dwelling and also the increased level of domestic outbuildings as well as paraphernalia such as hard surfacing, sheds greenhouses, washing lines and such like. It is considered that the proposed development would therefore be adversely harmful to the rural setting of the site, would be out of keeping with the surrounding built forms and thus would be detrimental to the existing local landscape character, and the setting of the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty. The harm to the landscape character is not outweighed by the modest benefits associated with the proposed development. The application is therefore recommended for refusal as contrary to Saved Policies E1 and E6 of the Local Plan. Trees The proposal is considered to have no impact upon significant trees and as such is considered to comply with Saved Policy E1 in this regard. Biodiversity The Bat surveys submitted in support of this application have confirmed that the existing structures at the site are not used by bats and as such the Biodiversity Officer has raised no objection to this proposal. Accordingly it is considered that the application would comply with Saved Policy E7 of the Local Plan and no objection is raised in this regard. Contamination The Council's Environmental Health Team do not object to the granting of planning permission subject to the inclusion of the standard conditions addressing contaminated land, which are required due the sensitive use proposed (residential) and the existence of clay and sand pits associated with a brick kiln in the close proximity to the development site. Impact on Neighbouring Amenities The nearest residential dwelling to the application site would be the original dwelling on the site which is sited approximately 30m from the proposed dwelling and orientated at

right angles to it. Given this relationship it is considered that neither the existing or proposed dwelling would result in loss of residential amenity to the other in terms of loss of light, overbearing or loss of privacy to the other. Highways and refuse The Highways response to the initial submission raised an objection to the proposal on the basis that the parking facilities as shown on the plans did not appear to offer adequate parking provision. Revised plans submitted on the 8 March 2016 amended the car parking layout at the site and the Highway Officer has confirmed that this would provide adequate parking for both the existing and proposed dwellings and has raised no objection to the proposal. The Highway Officer has recommended conditions requiring a construction method statement, details of waste storage and collection points and creation and the provision and retention of parking. If all other matters with regard to this application had been deemed acceptable such conditions would be considered reasonable and could be imposed. Community Infrastructure Contributions As the proposal would result in the net increase of one unit of accommodation, it is common that such developments would require either on site or through an obligation, mitigation towards increased pressures on local infrastructure (e.g. public open space). Such mitigation is secured in accordance with the tests of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 122, in that they are: (a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms (b) directly related to the development, and; (c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development. This application has been scoped and no contributions have been identified and as such no legal agreement is required. Informative(s):- 1. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy

Framework (NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and proactive manner:-

offering a pre-application advice;

seeking further information following receipt of the application;

seeking amendments to the proposed development following receipt of the application;

considering the imposition of conditions.

In this instance:

the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit,

was provided with pre-application advice.

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

15/03119/FUL

Location Plan

15/03119/FUL

Block Plan

15/03119/FUL

Proposed Elevations

Minor Application Cttee: 06 April 2016

Item No. 6

Application no: 15/03859/HSE

For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address Elm Cottage Baughurst Road Baughurst Hampshire

Proposal Erection of a two storey side/rear extension and extension of existing conservatory

Registered: 10 November 2015 Expiry Date: 28 January 2016

Type of Application:

Householder Permission

Case Officer: Stephanie Humphreys 01256 845578

Applicant: Mr Richard Dance Agent: Mr Steve Lovatt

Ward: Baughurst And Tadley North

Ward Member(s): Cllr Michael Bound Cllr Robert Tate

Parish: BAUGHURST CP OS Grid Reference: 458215 161479

Recommendation: the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

Reasons for Refusal 1. Insufficient information has been submitted to be able to adequately assess the

impact of the development on biodiversity, particularly bats. Additional information needs to be provided by the applicant in order to comply with the council's duty to discharge its statutory obligations in respect of protected species. As such the proposal is contrary to Saved Policy E7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan (1996-2011) and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 with regards European protected species.

2. The proposed two storey rear and side extensions, by virtue of their unsatisfactory

design, disproportionate bulk, footprint, scale and massing, would dominate and compete with the character of the original dwelling. The proposal would therefore fail to form subservient additions to the main property which would result in material harm to both the external appearance of the dwelling and character of the wider area. As such the proposed development would be contrary to Section 7 of the National Planning Policy Framework (2012), Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan (1996-2011), Appendix 13 of the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document (2012) and the Baughurst Village Design Statement (2004).

General comments This application has been brought before the Committee at the request of Councillor Bound and Councillor Tate for the following reason: "The reason for refusal of this application is, I believe, debatable and somewhat subjective.

Therefore, I feel that the application would be best decided by Development Control Committee after a Committee viewing of the application site. My request for viewing is supported by Cllr Robert Tate." Planning Policy The site lies outside of any Settlement Policy Boundary. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) Core Principles Section 7 (Requiring good design) Section 11 (Conserving and enhancing the natural environment) Decision-Taking Adopted Local Plan 1996 - 2011 (saved policies) Saved Policy E1 (Development Control) Saved Policy E6 (Landscape Character) Saved Policy E7 (Nature/Biodiversity Conservation) Saved Policy A1 (Car Parking) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance

Design and Sustainability SPD - Appendix 13 - Extending Your Home and Replacement Dwellings - Appendix 14 – Countryside Design Summary

Supplementary Planning Document 2012

Landscape and Biodiversity Supplementary Planning Document 2008

Countryside Design Summary (Appendix 14) of the Design and Sustainability Supplementary

Planning Document 2008

Residential Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document 2008

Baughurst Village Design Statement (2004). Other material documents

Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010

Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 Description of Site The property is a detached two storey brick and tile cottage which has previously been extended across two storeys to the rear together with the erection of a detached garage to the north. There is vehicular access to the property from the north-west of the plot and a public right of way footpath (Baughurst 49) runs along the northern boundary.

Proposal The proposed development comprises the erection of a two storey side and rear extension together with the extension of the existing conservatory. The proposed two storey rear extension measures 8.1m in depth, 8.5m in width and 6.75m in height. The proposed two storey side extension measures 7.9m in depth, 2.8m in width and 6.3m in height. The proposed extended conservatory measures 2.7m in depth, 3.4m in width and 3.35m in height. The proposed materials for the development are brickwork elevations and slate roofs to match the existing property. In respect of the proposed extended conservatory, the materials have not been expressly stated. Consultations Councillor M Bound:- As per call-in request. Councillor R Tate:- As per second of call-in request. Baughurst Parish Council:- No objection. Biodiversity Officer:- Objection, on the grounds that insufficient information has been submitted to adequately assess the impacts on biodiversity in accordance with Saved Policy E7. Public Observations None received. Relevant Planning History BDB/71305 Erection of a side/rear conservatory

Granted 06.11.09

BDB/64313 Erection of a two storey rear extension, erection

of a detached double garage and creation of a

new access (Amendment to planning permission

BDB/62668 to increase roof height and create

room in the roof space of garage).

Granted 23.10.06

BDB/62668 Erection of a two storey rear extension, erection

of a detached double garage and creation of a

new access.

Granted 16.03.06

Assessment Principle of development Saved Policy E1 states that proposals for new development will be permitted provided that they are of a high standard of design, make efficient use of land and respect the amenities of neighbouring occupiers.

The Policy continues to say that proposals should respond to the local context of buildings in terms of design, spacing, reinforce attractive qualities of local distinctiveness and enhance areas of poor design; extensions should respect their host building. The site lies outside of any Settlement Policy Boundary and is therefore considered to be within a countryside location. Impact on the character of the area/design The property has been previously extended at two storey level to the rear with a two storey detached garage having also been added to the north of the dwelling at close proximity. The significant extensions approved under BDB/62668 and BDB/64313 are considered to have reached the maximum level of additional footprint and bulk which would respect the original character of the cottage. Any further two storey extensions to the rear are therefore considered to be dominant and over-development of the host property. The original cottage (prior to the two storey extensions being approved) was modest and measured 9.1m in width and 6.1m in depth whereas the proposal would result in a dwelling measuring 11.9m in width and 18m in depth. This proposal would result in a dwelling that is three times its original cottage depth into the plot. Furthermore, the design of the proposed two storey rear and side extensions are not subordinate to the existing property and whilst a minor drop-down in the ridge height of 0.45m is proposed, it is not considered sufficient to outweigh the material harm generated by the significant footprint and depth of the proposal. The resultant footprint increase would dominate the character of the original modest dwelling. The proposal would also result in the dwelling having a greater presence and bulk within the streetscene with the excessive resultant depth of 18m being harmful to visual amenity, particularly travelling north when viewed from Baughurst Road. The overly deep design has not been broken up satisfactorily with adequate combination of single storey elements or visual distinctiveness and the series of four dormer windows and expanse of 9.25m of side conservatory are not in keeping with the character of the property or wider area. As such the proposal would fail to form subservient additions to the main property which would result in material visual and character harm to both the external appearance of the dwelling and character of the wider area and this is considered to be significant such to warrant a standalone refusal reason. Impact on neighbouring amenities Due to the significant separation distances between residential properties and the sparsely populated nature of the area it is considered that the development would not unduly harm the private amenities of any nearby properties. As there is an intervening field between Elm Cottage and Ione to the south-east it is not considered that the dormer windows would generate any undue overlooking or undue overbearing or overshadowing impacts to nearby residential curtilages. The proposal is therefore considered to be acceptable in terms of neighbouring amenity. Biodiversity The applicant provided an initial bat survey report with the application which was conducted in January 2016. The report outlines that no evidence of bats was found at

the time however there were gaps under tiles which allowed sunlight and airflow which could be accessed by bats. The Biodiversity Officer was consulted and raised concerns that the findings of the bat survey did not appear to concur with the images provided in the report or taken by the case officer during the site visit. The Biodiversity Officer noted numerous lifted slates and other potential ingress points for bat species and therefore conducted his own site visit in January. The Biodiversity Officer's findings from the visit showed that the structure provides numerous access points for bats, in the form of slipped and lifted tiles and significant gaps between the PVC barge boards and timber cladding on the dormer windows. The findings of the Biodiversity Officer are entirely contrary to the findings of the ecologist who provided the initial report therefore further clarification is required. In line with good practice guidance, the Biodiversity Officer has outlined the need for a Phase 2 emergence/re-entry bat survey. The Biodiversity Officer has also advised that guidance dictates a Phase 2 survey requires that a series of 3 emergence/re-entry surveys should be undertaken at an appropriate time of year (May-September) by a suitably experienced ecologist. It may, however, be adequately appropriate for a bat specialist to undertake more detailed external inspection to advise whether works could be carried out under a supervised and precautionary mode of operation. The applicant has been requested to provide such additional information however no further correspondence or supporting information has been provided to date. Case law determines that the submission of such information cannot be subject to a planning condition therefore, in the absence of clarity of the presence/absence of a European protected species, the application is also refused for this reason. Parking The proposal would result in an increase in bedrooms from four to five (or possibly six as the study is of sufficient size to be used as a bedroom). However as the dwelling sits within a rural location for the purposes of the Residential Parking Standards SPD, whether the property has four or more bedrooms the parking provision required remains at four on site spaces. The existing on-site parking provision is adequate to accommodate four vehicles and no objection is raised in this regard. Informative:-

1. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and proactive manner:-

seeking further information following receipt of the application seeking amendments to the proposed development following receipt of the

application considering the imposition of conditions

In this instance:

the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

15/03859/HSE

Location Plan

15/03859/HSE

Site Plan

15/03859/HSE

Proposed Elevations

15/03859/HSE

Proposed Floor Plans

Minor Application Cttee: 6 April 2016 Item No. 7

Application no: 15/04543/HSE

For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address 2 The Plantation Sherfield Green Sherfield-on-Loddon Hook

Proposal Erection of two storey side and single storey front and rear extensions and new access drive

Registered: 24 December 2015 Expiry Date: 4 February 2016

Type of Application:

Householder Permission

Case Officer: Stephanie Humphreys 01256 845578

Applicant: Mr Christopher Lennard

Agent: Mr Lawrence Nardi

Ward: Bramley And Sherfield

Ward Member(s): Cllr Chris Tomblin Cllr Nicholas Robinson

Parish: SHERFIELD ON LODDON CP

OS Grid Reference: 467746 157622

Recommendation: the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report.

Reason for Approval 1. The proposal is of a high standard of design, respects the amenities of

neighbouring occupiers and preserves the character and appearance of the Conservation Area in line with Saved Policies E1 and E3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Adopted Local Plan (1996-2011).

General comments This application is brought to the Development Control Committee in line with the Council's Scheme of Delegation given the number of objections received and the Officer's recommendation for approval. Planning Policy The site lies within the Sherfield on Loddon Settlement Policy Boundary and Sherfield on Loddon Conservation Area. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) Core Principles Section 7 (Requiring good design) Section 12 (Conserving and enhancing the historic environment) Decision-Taking

Adopted Local Plan 1996 - 2011 (saved policies) Saved Policy E1 (Development Control) Saved Policy E3 (Areas of Architectural or Historical Interest) Saved Policy A1 (Car Parking) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance

Sherfield on Loddon Conservation Area Appraisal 2004

Design and Sustainability SPD 2008 - Appendix 4 - Conservation Areas - Appendix 13 - Extending Your Home and Replacement Dwellings

Residential Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document 2008 Description of Site The property is a two storey semi-detached dwelling of brick and tile construction sat within a group of 3 pairs of semi-detached properties with almost identical design apart from the staggered nature of the dwellings. Proposal Planning permission is sought for the erection of a two storey side extension with single storey front extension and for the creation of a revised driveway. The proposed two storey extension measures 3.7m in width, 7.4m in depth and 7.4m in height. The proposed single storey front extension measures 10.9m in width, 3m in depth and 3.8m in height. The proposed driveway alterations comprise the creation of a vehicular access and construction of on-site parking. The proposed materials for the extensions are brickwork elevations, tiled roofs and UPVC openings to match the existing dwelling in all respects. The proposed access and parking areas are to be laid to gravel. Consultations Sherfield on Loddon Parish Council: "Sherfield-on-Loddon Parish Council objects to this proposal on the grounds that the plans for the extension, in particular the front extension, are not in keeping with the neighbouring properties also bearing in mind the location is in such a prominent position in the conservation area." Councillor C Tomblin: No comments received. Councillor N Robinson: "I have major concerns regarding the above planning application. The property is either in or on the very edge of the conservation area and views to or from the conservation area are affected by the extension to the front of the house. Does the conservation officer know of the application? The house is one of a row of six matching houses built for farm workers in the late 1940s/early1950s and are considered by many people to be a feature of "The Green" in Sherfield , an extension to the front will spoil the symmetry of the set. I have no objection the rest of the proposal though I am concerned that work has already started on the foundations."

Public Observations Five letters of objection received, summarised as follows; adverse impact on the overall appearance mis-match of styles property is important to the history and integrity of the village proposal would be detrimental to the vista proposal is not sympathetic to the area proximity to neighbouring dwellings adverse impacts to neighbouring amenity building work has already begun - disregard for planning proposal would be out of character front extension not in-keeping proposal would encroach upon the joint path front parking area would overlook no.1 The Plantation works have started and caused damage to no.1 The Plantation no party wall notice has been served covenants on properties restricting driveways if others in the future developed in the same way could become unbalanced.

It is noted that one letter also contained neutral comments, as follows; the drawings indicate the proposal stays within the scale of existing dwellings proposal is well-considered request no future openings at first floor level request no future first floor extension to rear.

Relevant Planning History None. Assessment Principle of development Saved Policy E1 states that proposals for new development will be permitted provided that they are of a high standard of design, make efficient use of land, respect the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. The Policy continues to say that proposals should respond to the local context of buildings in terms of design, spacing, reinforce attractive qualities of local distinctiveness and enhance areas of poor design; extensions should respect their host building. This proposal is considered to meet these criteria of Saved Policy E1. Saved Policy E3 sets out that development within Conservation Areas will be permitted provided they preserve or enhance their special character or appearance. This proposal is considered to preserve the character of the Conservation Area and improve the external appearance of the dwelling in line with Saved Policy E3. The Sherfield on Loddon Conservation Area Appraisal denotes the key features of the historic area including The Green and views across it. No particular regard to The Plantation properties is given within the Conservation Area Appraisal or Area Map.

The notable buildings within the Conservation Area Map identify some of the neighbouring properties as notable buildings including Kings Barn to the north-west and Chestnut Cottage to the south-east which are both set forward compared to the host property. Nearby listed buildings include Court Farm House to the north-west and Ye Old Winton Cottage to the south-east. The host property is considered to be at a significant distance from these historic and notable properties so as not to generate any adverse impacts upon them as a result of this proposal, particularly considering the intervening dwellings and curtilages. Impact on the character of the area/ design The proposed two storey side extension would result in the dwelling having a greater presence in the streetscene compared to the existing situation. It is acknowledged that the two storey side and single storey front elements of the proposal would result in a visual change from the wider public realm however it is considered that the proposed revised external appearance would in fact be an improvement to the existing principal elevation when viewed from the highway and The Green. Whilst the proposal would not retain the symmetry of gaps between dwellings or the presence of single storey flat roofed side and front extensions, the proposal would preserve the setting of the Conservation Area. The proposals would not appear as a dominant feature in comparison to the host dwelling given the extent of single storey additions and the roof design. The proposals would form sizeable yet proportionate additions to the host dwelling due to the stepping down of the ridgeline, use of dormer window in the front elevation and balance of single storey elements. The proposal would retain a visual gap between the host property and no.3 The Plantation which would not generate any terracing effect. The objections received in respect of the front and side extensions are acknowledged however the visual change to the principal elevation would not result in any significant or demonstrable visual harm to the character of the dwelling or setting of the Conservation Area such to warrant a refusal reason. The resultant view would be altered from the existing situation however given the set-back variations of the three semi-detached groups of dwellings, a break in the visual repetition of design is not considered to be harmful in itself. Impact on neighbouring amenities The proposed single storey front and two storey side extensions would have no significant or harmful impacts upon the amenities of neighbours and no objections are raised in this regard. The proposed two storey extension would be located at a distance of 3m from the side elevation wall of no.3 The Plantation and the intervening neighbouring flat roofed outbuilding and timber connecting storage building would remain. No openings are proposed within the first floor of the proposed side extension and this would respect the neighbouring amenities of the adjoining occupiers of no.3 The Plantation. Any potential loss of light generated by the additional first floor bulk is not considered to be significant due to the existing relationship between properties. The proposed two storey side extension would not extend past the rear elevation walls of the adjacent neighbouring properties and as such, would not detrimentally impact upon the

occupiers of these properties by way of overbearing, loss of light or loss of privacy to any extent which would warrant refusal of this application. Angled views of neighbouring curtilages would be achievable from the additional first floor rear elevation window however such views would not be dissimilar to existing views achieved from rear elevation windows. As such the private amenities currently enjoyed by the occupiers of both no's 1 and 3 The Plantation would not be compromised by the proposed development. Whilst the above representation is acknowledged in respect of views of no.1 The Plantation achievable from the proposed parking area, such views when sat within a parked vehicle would not be above and beyond the existing views achievable externally on the front curtilage. No material harm would be generated by the proposal in terms of overlooking or loss of privacy. The proposals are considered to respect the amenities of neighbouring occupiers and no objections are raised in this regard. Parking The proposal includes areas for the parking of three vehicles, in line with the Residential Parking Standards SPD. The proposed change of use of the land for a vehicle crossover is considered to be acceptable however the applicant will be notified by way of an informative that Hampshire County Council consent would be required for the construction of such a crossover. Other matters The representations referred to working having started on site and this is acknowledged. It was observed upon the site visit that internal works were on-going and that areas to the rear had been excavated. No foundations or other works had commenced, therefore the works observed do not prejudice this recommendation or undermine the planning process. With respect to any damage caused by internal works, these are a civil matter to be dealt with outside of the planning system. The plans were re-assessed following queries having been received as to party wall notifications and it was considered that no additional notices needed to be served on adjoining owners as controlled by the planning process. The representation in respect of covenants on the land restricting driveways is not a material planning consideration. Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

following approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority:

Location Plan - received 23/12/2015

Proposed Block Plan - received 23/12/2015

Proposed Elevation and Floor Plan (Drawing No.2844.01) - received 23/12/2015

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

2 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this planning permission. REASON: To comply with Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

3 The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the

development hereby permitted shall match, in type, colour and texture those on the approved plans and application forms unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

4 Notwithstanding the provisions of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning

(General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015 no additional openings shall be inserted in the first floor north-western side elevation of the building without the prior permission of the Local Planning Authority on an application made for the purpose. REASON: To protect the amenity and privacy of the occupiers of adjacent properties in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

Informative(s):- 1. 1.1 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if

any), must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated.

1.2 This permission may contain pre-commencement conditions which require specific matters to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before a specified stage in the development occurs. This means that a lawful commencement of the approved development CANNOT be made until the particular requirements of the pre-commencement conditions have been met.

1.3 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the Local Planning Authority has a period of up to eight weeks to determine details submitted in respect of a condition or limitation attached to a grant of planning permission. It is likely that in most cases the determination period will be shorter than eight weeks, however, the applicant is advised to schedule this time period into any programme of works. A fee will be required for requests for discharge of any consent, agreement, or approval required by a planning condition. The fee chargeable is £97 per request or £28 where the related permission was for extending or altering a dwelling house or other development in the curtilage of a dwelling house. A fee is payable for each submission made regardless of the number of conditions for which approval is sought. Requests must be made using the standard application form (available online) or set out in writing clearly identifying the relevant planning application and condition(s) which they are seeking approval for.

2. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy

Framework (NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and proactive manner:-

considering the imposition of conditions

In this instance:

the application was acceptable as submitted and no further assistance was

required

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

3. Consent under the Town and Country Planning Acts must not be taken as

approval for any works carried out within or project under or project over any footway, including a Public Right of Way, carriageway, verge or other land forming part of the publically maintained highway. The development will involve works within the public highway. It is an offence to commence those works without the permission of the Local Highway Authority, Hampshire County Council. In the interests of highway safety the development must not commence on-site until permission has been obtained from the Local Highway Authority authorising any necessary works, including street lighting and surface water drainage, within the publically maintained highway. Public Utility apparatus may also be affected by the development. Contact the appropriate public utility service to ensure agreement on any necessary alterations.

The construction of the vehicular crossing will require approval and licensing by the Local Highway Authority, further advice about works within the public highway can be obtained from Hampshire County Council’s Area Office, telephone 0300 555 1388. Information on crossings - http://www3.hants.gov.uk/roads/highway-information/vehicular-crossings.htm

Location Plan

15/04543/HSE

Proposed Block Plan

15/04543/HSE

Existing and Proposed Elevations

15/04543/HSE

Minor Application

Cttee: 6 April 2016 Item No. 8

Application no: 15/04550/FUL For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address Land Adjoining 27 Swan Street Kingsclere Newbury

Proposal Erection of 1 no. 2 bed dwelling following demolition of existing shed.

Registered: 24 December 2015 Expiry Date: 4 February 2016

Type of Application:

Full Planning Application

Case Officer: Stephanie Humphreys 01256 845578

Applicant: Mr M Harrison Agent: Mr F Dowling

Ward: Kingsclere Ward Member(s): Cllr Cathy Osselton Cllr Donald Sherlock

Parish: KINGSCLERE CP OS Grid Reference: 452507 158496

Recommendation: the application be REFUSED for the following reasons:

Reasons for Refusal 1. The proposal would fail to preserve the setting of the Listed Building, 27 Swan

Street, and the scale, form, and design of the proposed new dwelling would fail to preserve or positively enhance the character and appearance of the Conservation Area. As such the proposal would be contrary to the National Planning Policy Framework 2012, Sections 66 and 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and Saved Policies E2 and E3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

2. The proposed development would cause undue interference with the safety and

convenience of users of the adjacent footpath due to additional vehicle movements and inadequate visibility splays. Private rights for motorised and non-motorised access for the proposed dwelling from Swan Street Lane to the boundary of the site have not been established and the proposal does not demonstrate acceptable on-site parking provision. As such the proposed development would be contrary to the Residential Parking Supplementary Planning Document 2008, Saved Policies E1 and A1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 and National Planning Policy Framework March 2012.

General comments This application has been called to the Committee at the request of Councillor Osselton and Councillor Sherlock; "This building has been redesigned into a two bedroom property and in no way will it fail to preserve the setting of the listed building. It has been designed to fit in with the area. The owner of the land has vehicular access to the proposed building site and the

proposed new build will not cause undue interference with regard to safety and convenience of users of the adjacent footpath. It is not envisaged that traffic movement will increase." Planning Policy The site lies within the Kingsclere Settlement Policy Boundary and Kingsclere Conservation Area. The site is within the curtilage of a Grade II Listed Building. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) Core Principles Section 7 (Requiring good design) Section 11 (Conserving and enhancing the natural environment) Section 12 (Conserving and enhancing the historic environment) Decision taking Adopted Local Plan 1996 - 2011 (saved policies) Saved Policy A1 (Car Parking) Saved Policy A2 (Encouraging Walking, Cycling and the Use of Public Transport) Saved Policy D5 Residential and Other Development within Settlements) Saved Policy E1 (Development Control) Saved Policy E2 Buildings of Historic or Architectural Interest) Saved Policy E3 (Areas of Architectural or Historical Interest) Saved Policy E7 (Nature/Biodiversity Conservation) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance

Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document - Appendix 4 - Conservation Areas - Appendix 13 – Extending Your Home and Replacement Dwellings - Appendix 16 – Residential Amenity Design Guidance

Residential Parking Standards Supplementary Planning Document 2008

Kingsclere Conservation Area Appraisal 2004

Kingsclere Village Design Statement 2002 Description of Site The site lies to the south-east of Swan Street and is accessed via a public right of way footpath, no.86. The site comprises the easternmost area of the residential curtilage for no.27 Swan Street, a Grade II listed property, which at present includes grassed areas and a dilapidated residential shed of corrugated sheeting construction. Proposal The proposal comprises the demolition of an existing residential shed and for the erection of a two-bedroom detached dwellinghouse. The proposed dwelling measures 5.8m in width, 7.9m in depth and 7m in height to the ridgeline (8m to the chimney). The

proposed materials for the dwelling are brickwork elevations, plain clay tile roof and painted timber casement windows and doors. The proposed boundary treatments are post and wire fencing with hedging. The proposed surface for the parking areas is gravel and the proposed cycle and bin store is also of brick and tile construction with a timber door serving the cycle shed and an open air side to the bin store. The proposed cycle shed and bin store measures 2.5m in width, 2.5m in depth and 3.1m in height. Consultations Kingsclere Parish Council:- "Access is not suitable and this is too much infill in the Conservation Area. Our neighbourhood plan, which is close to completion, states 'Heritage assets within the Parish especially listed buildings in the Conservation Area, and their settings, must be protected, conserved and enhanced when development proposals are brought forward.' Footpath 86 is a footpath. The Parish Council have vehicle access rights to the Recreation Ground for mowing. 27 Swan Street may have vehicle access rights at the start of the footpath to the property but not to the shed at the back. To our knowledge no vehicular access has been permitted to the shed at the rear of the property." Councillor D Sherlock:- No individual comments received, seconded call-in request. Councillor C Osselton:- As per call-in request. Highways Officer:- Objection due to right of access not being demonstrated, inadequate parking and visibility splays. Conservation Officer:- Objection due to design and impacts on Listed Building and Conservation Area. Environmental Health Officer:- No objection subject to conditions. Biodiversity Officer:- No objection subject to condition. S106 Officer:- No contributions required. Public Observations Six letters of objection received, summarised as follows; unsuitable access highway safety implications - hazardous additional cars and traffic parking layout insufficient detrimental impacts to the listed building detrimental to the character and appearance of the area dwelling would be dominant to neighbouring properties loss of privacy and overlooking overshadowing drainage issues additional noise and disturbance for neighbouring occupiers

adverse views into and out of the nearby AONB no direct waste collection service available for existing properties via the track -

black refuse sacks left out as collection vehicles cannot use the footpath. Relevant Planning History 15/02520/FUL Demolition of shed and erection of a two

bedroom dwelling

Withdrawn 28.10.15

Assessment Principle of development The application site lies within the Kingsclere Settlement Policy Boundary and as a form of small scale development it can be considered against Saved Policy D5 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. This Saved Policy states that there is potential to accommodate additional residential and other development within Settlement Policy Boundaries. The proposed dwelling would provide for an additional dwellinghouse and it must be acknowledged that the new dwelling would add to the local housing stock and make a positive, albeit small, contribution towards reducing the current deficit of housing, which is a clear social benefit. Therefore, the principle of additional residential development is considered to be acceptable, subject to the assessment of all other material considerations. The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 requires consideration of a proposal upon the setting of a heritage asset, which includes a Listed Building or Conservation Area. Paragraph 34 of the NPPF requires that when determining applications, account should be taken of the importance of the asset and should only be approved where less than substantial harm would result which can be balanced against the public benefits of the proposal. Impact on the character of the area/ design The proposed development would not be visible from the public highway to the north-west (Swan Street) however public views would be achievable from the public footpath (no.86) to the south. The design of the proposal is not considered to be harmful to the character of the Conservation Area however the close proximity of the proposed dwelling to the existing Listed Building, sitting 14m to the east, is considered to have an adverse and harmful effect on its setting. The Listed Building is presently afforded a large curtilage which defines and contributes to its setting with this space to be compromised by the proposed dwelling. The Conservation Officer has raised objections to the design in that the proposal would not compliment the adjacent listed building, or positively enhance the character and appearance of this part of the Conservation Area. This relates to the overall design and layout of the site and it is accepted that the design of the dwelling itself may be appropriate in other locations for example where there is greater distance from heritage assets. Concerns have also been raised by the Conservation Officer that no historical analysis of the site has been undertaken in order to establish the relationship of the host

building and outbuildings within the setting of the Listed Building, for example any hierarchy which may have been in existence and the importance of the space around the Grade II listed dwelling. Due to the proximity of the proposed dwelling to the Listed Building it is considered that the proposal would have a direct impact upon the setting of the listed building This impact would generate an undesirable relationship which gives rise to substantial harm to the significance of this heritage asset which is not outweighed by the public benefit of providing an additional dwelling. The development therefore fails to preserve or enhance the setting of the listed building contrary to the requirements of the Town and Country (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990, guidance contained within the NPPF and Saved Policy E3 of the Local Plan. Impact on neighbouring amenities The proposed development would be located within close proximity of neighbouring residential properties to the north (23B Swan Street) and north-east (no's 11-14 Brimley Hill Court). It is accepted that the proposed dwelling would have additional impacts upon occupiers of these properties in respect of loss of light and overshadowing during certain parts of the day due to its southern and south-western relationship to the existing properties. However, it is not considered that the additional impacts would be significant or demonstrably harmful such to form a reason for refusal. Objections have been raised in respect of overbearing impacts to neighbours due to the raised nature of the site compared to the properties to the north and north-east, however the proposed relationship to these properties is considered to be acceptable within an established residential settlement and the additional impacts would not justify a standalone refusal reason. Highways safety and parking Within the Design and Access Statement, the applicant has incorrectly asserted that the public footpath (no.86) is a private drive serving no's 23B, 27 and 27 Swan Street. It has not been demonstrated that vehicular access rights over the footpath would be afforded to an additional dwelling. The Highways Officer has raised a holding objection to the proposal due to outstanding issues, as no information has been included to satisfy that unobstructed right of way and rights of access to the site are provided. Arrangements for servicing and deliveries during construction and post occupation have not been specified and the proposal does not indicate visibility splays or sightlines. Objections are therefore raised in this regard as the proposal would be likely to cause undue interference with the safety and convenience of users of the adjacent footpath. Private rights for motorised and non-motorised access for the proposed dwelling from Swan Street Lane to the boundary of the site have also not been established and the proposal does not demonstrate acceptable on-site parking provision or adequate visibility splays. As such, the proposal does not comply with the Residential Parking Standards SPD and would be likely to cause adverse impacts to the safety and convenience of footpath users.

Environmental health The Environmental Health department were consulted on this application due to the proposed residential use being sensitive to contamination and the residential setting being sensitive to noise. The Environmental Health Officer has commented to say no objections are raised to the proposal subject to conditions in respect of contaminated land investigation, remediation if required and noise during construction and from deliveries. If all other matters had been acceptable then these conditions would have been included. Biodiversity The Biodiversity Officer has raised no objection to the proposal, subject to a condition and informative. If all other matters had been acceptable then the condition and informative would have been included. Section 106 agreement The application has been scoped in line with normal process for additional dwellings and no local need in terms of infrastructure projects to support the proposed additional residents has been identified therefore no contributions are being sought on this application. Informative(s):- 1. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy

Framework (NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and proactive manner:-

offering a pre-application advice considering the imposition of conditions and or the completion of a s.106 legal

agreement

In this instance:

the applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

Location Plan

15/04550/FUL

Site Plan

15/04550/FUL

Elevations and Floor Plans

15/04550/FUL

Minor Application Cttee: 6 April 2016 Item No. 9

Application no: 15/04570/HSE

For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address 4 Lime Kiln Cottages Lime Kiln Cottage Lane Old Burghclere Newbury

Proposal Erection of single storey rear extension following demolition of existing porch .Construction of a replacement bay window to front of property.

Registered: 6 January 2016 Expiry Date: 22 March 2016

Type of Application:

Householder Permission

Case Officer: Nicola Marchant 01256 845468

Applicant: Mrs M Thijssen Agent: Mr Bruce Reay

Ward: Burghclere, Highclere And St Mary Bourne

Ward Member(s): Cllr John Izett Cllr Graham Falconer

Parish: BURGHCLERE CP OS Grid Reference: 446877 157517

Recommendation: the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions listed at the end of this report.

Reasons for Approval 1. The proposed development is appropriate in design terms and would neither

dominate or compete with the host building and as such complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012); Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 and Appendix 13 of the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document.

2. The proposed development would be of an appropriate design and relates to its

surroundings in a sympathetic manner and as such complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012); Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 and Appendix 13 of the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document 2008.

3. The proposed development would not result in an undue loss of privacy or cause

undue overlooking, overshadowing, overbearing or noise and disturbance impacts to neighbouring properties and as such complies with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011

General comments This application has been brought to the Development Control Committee, in line with the scheme of delegation, due to the number of objections received and the Officer's recommendation for approval.

Planning Policy The site is located outside any Settlement Policy Boundary, therefore Countryside Policies apply. The site is also located within the North Wessex Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) Core Principles Section 7 (Requiring Good Design) Section 11 (Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment) Decision-Taking Adopted Local Plan 1996 - 2011 (saved policies) E1 (Development Control) E6 (Landscape Character) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD's and SPG's) and interim planning guidance Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document – Appendix 13 - Extending Your Home and Replacement Dwellings Description of Site A two storey terraced cottage located in a row of similar properties. The property has a private rear garden enclosed by fencing and an open front garden. Proposal Planning permission is sought for the erection of a single storey extension located to the rear of the property and the construction of a replacement bay window to the front of the property. The rear extension measures 4.8m in width and 4m in depth, with an overall height of 3.2m. The front bay window measures 3.8m in width and 1.9m in depth, with an overall height of 3.1m. Amended plans were received on the 8th March 2016 altering the panels to the front porch. Consultations Burghclere Parish Council:- “Please can it be noted that Burghclere Parish Council OBJECTS to the application 15/04570/HSE, at 4 Lime Kiln Cottages, Lime Kiln Cottage Lane, Old Burghclere, for the construction of a single storey rear extension, following the demolition of existing porch, and the construction of a replacement bay window to the front of the property. The reasons for the objection are it is inappropriate in both size and the materials used. The roof of the rear extension will lead to increase in noise in rain.

It is very out of keeping with the other cottages. Lime Kiln Cottages is a row of 15 cottages, in two blocks of six-which all look identical in appearance - and a final row of three. Number 4 is within one of the rows of six identical cottages. This front bay window, which appears far larger than a bay window, would stand out considerably in the middle of this row of traditional cottages. It is an area of outstanding natural beauty and the cottages can be seen from neighbouring sites of special scientific interest at Ladle Hill and Beacon Hill. The extensions will lead to a loss of privacy for the immediate neighbours. We would also like to draw your attention to a reasonably new, inappropriately oversized garden shed already in the rear garden, which we believe measures around 5m by 2.4m. Biodiversity:- No Objection (informative to be added) Public Observations Four letters received expressing objection on the following grounds:

the proposal will have a detrimental effect on the area

imbalanced extension which would fundamentally change the original cottage

removal of significant structure and original features

the extension and bay window are not in keeping with the existing properties which are of historic interest

the extension is too large (extends 4m) and is disproportionate to the rest of the property

unneighbourly extension by virtue of its size, location and overshadowing effect

the extension is overpowering and dominant to the neighbouring properties

spoils the character of flow of the rural setting of the cottages

the roof is out of keeping due to the shallow pitch

loss of privacy and overlooking from the south of the bay window

inappropriate materials for a Victorian terrace property

there is no detailing of materials being used except larch boarding

the type of roof in wet weather will increase noise levels

fire safety issue with use of wooden clad walls and timber construction affecting the adjoining neighbours

the existing outbuildings and the extensions would likely exceed the total permitted (50%)

would the proposed extension comply with party wall laws

will the connection to the sewer pipe work and electricity have to be moved?

the drainage which serves all the cottages runs through the gardens of these properties. A pole in the garden of no .4 carries the electricity and phone - will there be disruption of service?

where will materials be stored whilst the works are undertaken?

further information requested as to how the extension would be built without damaging the existing fence on the boundary

Concerns regarding working hours. What measures will be in place to ensure work does not occur during unsocial hours.

Relevant Planning History

None

Assessment Principle of development Saved Policy E1 states that proposals for new development will be permitted provided that they are of a high standard of design, make efficient use of land and respect the amenities of neighbouring occupiers. The Policy continues to say that proposals should respond to the local context of buildings in terms of design, spacing, reinforce attractive qualities of local distinctiveness and enhance areas of poor design; extensions should respect their host building. Impact on the character of the area/ design The application property sits within a terrace of similar cottages which appear on the Council’s Local List of Buildings of Architectural or Historic Interest. However many of the properties have been altered and extended over time, with several dwellings having extended to the rear in varying forms and scales, ranging from flat roofed to larger pitched roof extensions and with a mix of materials, which varies from brick and timber with slate or felt roofs. Given the range of alterations already undertaken, the terrace no longer has an overall single cohesive appearance. The proposed application seeks replacement works to the dwelling with a new bay window to the front of the property and a single storey extension located to the rear. Given the changes that have occurred to the appearance of the terrace, it is considered that the current proposal would not appear disproportionate in size or out of keeping in terms of the design. Notwithstanding this, a number of concerns have however been raised regarding the proposal. Firstly, objection has been received to the replacement bay window which is larger than the structure it is replacing. Whilst this has been noted, given the overall depth and height of the proposal, it is considered that it would not adversely dominate the host dwelling. The proposal would appear as a proportionate addition to the property and, as a lightweight structure in appearance, would form a subservient relationship with the property. The materials for the bay window would be brick to match the existing with a slate roof and this is considered to be acceptable. Concerns have also been raised by Burghclere Parish Council and the neighbouring properties regarding the size of the proposed rear extension and the selection of materials. The rear extension would be visible in the public domain given that views can be gained from the surrounding area; however the extension would be seen within the existing mixed appearance of the terrace as opposed to generating any significant or demonstrable harm. Furthermore the extension with its timber structure would sit parallel to an existing extension to the adjoining property which is additionally timber clad. With the proposed materials not appearing out of keeping in the local area, or having such a demonstrable impact upon the character of the cottage itself or the street scene, the proposed development would not justify a reason for refusal on design grounds.

Impact on neighbouring amenities It is noted that concerns have been raised that the proposed single storey rear extension would be dominant and over powering causing shadowing particularly to no. 3 and no. 5 Lime Kiln Cottages. These concerns are noted however, given the depth and overall height of the proposal, it is considered that it would not have a significant impact in terms of overbearing or overshadowing to these neighbours. It should also be noted that the property could undertake a rear extension 3m from the rear wall of the property with an eaves height of 3m and an overall height of 4m under permitted development rights. The height of the current proposal for a rear extension is 3.1m. The proposed bay window would be located approximately 1.2m from the neighbouring property to the north of the application site (no .3) and 0.2m from the neighbouring property to the south of the application site (No.5). It is noted the proposal would be located in close proximity to these neighbours and a concern has been raised by the neighbouring property at no. 5 regarding the bay window causing a loss of privacy and will block their light. However, given the overall depth of the proposal and the lightweight appearance, it is considered that it would not result in any adverse loss of privacy or blocked light to either neighbour.

Noise and disturbance Concerns have been raised regarding noise generated from the proposed materials for the rear extension. Noise is a material planning consideration whereby the NPPF seeks to ensure that the planning system should avoid the generation of “unacceptable levels” of noise pollution where this would give rise to “significant adverse impacts on health or quality of life”. With the proposed use of profile sheeting not being an unusual building material, there is no evidence that this would generate any significant adverse impact as to warrant a refusal on noise grounds. Reference has also been made to the potential for disturbance during the construction. Whilst the proposed construction would generate some noise, it is not considered that the scale of the works and as such, limited duration would be such as to justify the control of construction hours through the imposition of a planning condition. An informative has however been included to ensure that the development is undertaken whilst being mindful of neighbouring amenities. Parking The proposal would not have an impact upon the current parking situation or highway safety. Other A concern has been raised regarding the proposed rear extension encroaching on the land of number no. 3 Lime Kiln Cottages. The appropriate land ownership notice has however been served on the owner of no. 3 as part of the planning application. The concerns, as well as matters seeking to protect a neighbour’s fence, are private issues between the parties involved.

Finally, concerns have also been raised regarding the Party Wall Act, the possibility of fire resistance given the proposed materials and with reference to the connections to the existing utilities. These issues are however not material planning considerations that could be considered within the planning application process but matters to be dealt with under Building Regulations. Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

following approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority:

Site and Location Plan as Proposed (Dwg PL01.02) - received 24/12/15 Plans, Elevations and Section as proposed (Dwg PL01.01 B) - received 08/03/16

REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

2 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3

years from the date of this planning permission. REASON: To comply with Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

3 The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the

development hereby permitted shall be as specified in the approved plans and particulars unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of visual amenity and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

Informative(s):- 1. 1.1 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if any),

must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated.

1.2 This permission may contain pre-commencement conditions which require

specific matters to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before a specified stage in the development occurs. This means that a lawful commencement of the approved development CANNOT be made until the particular requirements of the pre-commencement conditions have been met.

1.3 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the Local Planning Authority

has a period of up to eight weeks to determine details submitted in respect of a condition or limitation attached to a grant of planning permission. It is likely that in most cases the determination period will be shorter than eight weeks, however, the applicant is advised to schedule this time period into any programme of works. A fee will be required for requests for discharge of any consent, agreement, or approval required by a planning condition. The fee chargeable is £97 per request or £28 where the related permission was for extending or altering a dwelling house or other development in the curtilage of

a dwelling house. A fee is payable for each submission made regardless of the number of conditions for which approval is sought. Requests must be made using the standard application form (available online) or set out in writing clearly identifying the relevant planning application and condition(s) which they are seeking approval for.

2. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy

Framework (NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and proactive manner:-

seeking amendments to the proposed development following receipt of the application;

considering the imposition of conditions

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

3. If at any time during the proposed works bats, or signs of bats, are found then all

works must stop and advice should be sought from Natural England before any further work on the buildings proceeds. All bats and their roost sites are protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 from disturbance and harm.

4. The applicant is advised that work relating to the construction of the development

proposed together with deliveries of construction materials and machinery should not take place before the hours of 0730; nor after 1800; Monday to Friday, before the hours of 08:00; nor after 1300; Saturdays nor on Sundays or recognised bank or public holidays in order to have consideration the residential amenities of neighbouring properties.

15/04570/HSE

Site Location and Block Plan

15/04570/HSE

Proposed plans

Minor Application Cttee: 6 April 2016 Item No. 10

Application no: 16/00300/FUL

For Details and Plans Click Here

Site Address Land Rear Of Greenacres Aldermaston Road Pamber Green Hampshire

Proposal Erection of 2 no. three bedroom bungalows

Registered: 4 February 2016 Expiry Date: 24 March 2016

Type of Application:

Full Planning Application

Case Officer: Lucy Page 01256 845515

Applicant: Mr Ray Looby Agent: Mr Dennis Matthews

Ward: Pamber And Silchester

Ward Member(s): Cllr Marilyn Tucker Cllr Roger Gardiner

Parish: PAMBER CP OS Grid Reference: 460987 159496

Recommendation: Subject to satisfactory information being provided to demonstrate that any noise generated from the adjoining site would not result in a significant adverse impact upon the health and quality of life for future occupants of the proposed development, it is RECOMMENDED that the application then be APPROVED subject to the conditions listed at the end of the report. Should the requirement set out above not be satisfactorily secured, then the Planning and Development Manager be delegated to REFUSE permission for appropriate reasons.

Reasons for Approval 1. The proposed development would be of an appropriate design and relates to

surrounding development in a sympathetic manner and as such complies with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012); Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 and Appendix 13 of the Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document 2008.

2. The proposed development would preserve the setting of the neighbouring Listed

Building and as such complies with adopted policies in particular the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) and Saved Policy E3 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

3. The proposed development would not result in an undue loss of privacy or cause

undue overlooking, overshadowing, appear overbearing or create noise and disturbance impacts to neighbouring properties and as such complies with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

4. The development would not cause a significant adverse impact on highway safety to warrant a refusal of the application and the proposal complies with Saved Policies A1 and E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

General comments This application is brought to the Development Control Committee in accordance with the Scheme of Delegation, given the Officer’s recommendation for approval and the number of objections that have been received to the application. Planning Policy The site is located outside of any Settlement Policy Boundary and is therefore located within the countryside. National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (March 2012) Core Planning Principles - Achieving Sustainable Development Section 7 (Requiring good design) Section 11 (Conserving and Enhancing the Natural Environment) Section 12 (Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment) Decision taking Adopted Local Plan 1996 – 2011 (Saved Policies) Policy A1 (Car Parking) Policy A2 (Encouraging Walking, Cycling and the Use of Public Transport Policy E1 (Development Control) Policy E3 (Areas of Architectural or Historic Interest) Policy E6 (Landscape Character) Policy E7 (Nature/Biodiversity Conservation) Policy D6 (New Residential Development in the Countryside) Policy C1 (Section 106 Contributions) Policy C2 (Affordable Housing) Policy C3 (Housing Mix) Supplementary Planning Documents and Guidance (SPD’s and SPG’s) and Interim Planning Guidance

Design and Sustainability Supplementary Planning Document - Appendix 5 'Construction Statements' - Appendix 6 'Storage and Collection of Waste and Recycling' - Appendix 14 'Countryside Design Summary' - Appendix 16 'Residential Amenity Design Guidance'

Residential Parking Standards SPD;

Housing Mix and Lifetime Mobility Standards SPD

Landscape Character Assessment SPG

Landscape and Biodiversity SPD

S106 Planning Obligations and Community Infrastructure Interim Planning Guidance

Adopted Interim Green Space Standards Other Material Documents

Basingstoke Environment Strategy for Transport (BEST);

National Planning Practice Guidance

The Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990

Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended)

Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Species Regulations 2010 (as amended)

Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act (2006)

The Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010 (Revised 2015) Description of Site The site comprises a paddock area to the rear of Greenacres. The site is bound to the north and west by residential properties and beyond Green Lane to the east is the Grade II Listed dwelling, Barnstead. There is a retail nursery and landscaping contracting business to the south of the site which has recently been sold off separately from the Greenacres dwelling. There is an agricultural style storage building associated with this use which sits adjacent to the southern boundary of the site. Proposal The proposal is for the erection of 2 no. three bedroom detached bungalows utilising the existing access onto Aldermaston Road. Consultations Pamber Parish Council – “The proposed development would sit directly adjacent to what is now a much larger agricultural facility. The agricultural tie on the existing dwelling has only recently been removed.” Waste – No objection Conservation – No objection Trees – No objection subject to condition Biodiversity – No objection subject to condition Natural England – No comments received Highways – No objection subject to condition Environmental Health – Noise survey required Public Observations Four letters of objection have been received and are summarised below:

Development would constitute an intrusion on the environment of this rural area.

If allowed, further applications would follow and erode the countryside in this area.

Pamber Green is still designated as countryside and as such new housing would only be permitted on an exceptional basis. This is just a random use of land.

Believe the Barnstead application was granted on the basis of a one for one replacement dwelling and not an invitation to build on any available land within Pamber Green.

Incorrect plans which suggest more available space and omit the existing commercial buildings. It is impossible to determine the effect of the proposed development.

Further development will add to current difficulty of access and egress onto the A340.

Application states that the development is not visible from the public footpath. A public footpath extends along the whole of the rear of the site and it gives a clear view of the proposed development.

Supporting information suggests that the buildings are used to produce biomass. It is understood that these were for the storage of contractors vehicles for the neighbouring business. Do they have permission for biomass?

The commercial units omit strong unpleasant odours. The bungalows would be much closer than other properties and the odour would be unbearable.

No details of how the connection to the mains sewer would be achieved. Access across the Greenacres site is of a significant distance and access to the Green Lane sewer would require permission to cross land not in the applicant’s ownership.

Extra dwellings will exacerbate problems with the existing sewage system.

The land is very close to a 16th Century Cottage, the floor of which is two feet lower than surrounding area and even a bungalow would block light from garden and windows.

Direct overlooking from the lounge and two bedroom windows comprising a significant loss of privacy.

Unable to determine the level of overshadowing.

Unable to determine the proximity of the properties to the Oak tree line.

Four letters of support have been received and are summarised below:

There is clearly a need for more places to live in this popular area.

It is not going to be an overdevelopment

It is reasonable to use the existing access.

The traffic movements on the adjoining site far exceeds any additional residential traffic generated by this development

The development is in compliance with local planning.

Existing recently planted trees and additional planting would appear more than adequate.

The piece of land has negligible use for anything else.

Permission for large farm/industrial buildings has been given directly adjoining the site and these bungalows would slot in between them and other residences.

For nearly 30 years the applicants have given much to the locality and employment of scores of youngsters when they were the owners of Greenacres Nursery which has now been sold due to applicant’s ill health.

Consent has recently been granted for a dwelling in closer proximity to the neighbouring Listed Building than this site.

The proposal would be ideally suited to the local surroundings and not invasive into the countryside.

The village area needs to grow and additional housing in the local building plan is much needed instead of these extremely built up estates springing up around Basingstoke.

Two further letters were received expressing neither support or objection and are summarised below:

No direct objection to the application but concerned about the potential for any amendment seeking access from Green Lane which is an unadopted, unmade cul-de-sac maintained by existing residents.

A dual access would provide a through route which would exacerbate existing problems and change the rural character of the lane.

It would be appropriate for a specific restriction to prohibit access to the two bungalows from Green Lane.

Relevant Planning History 13/02179/ROC Removal of condition 5 of planning permission

BDB/8816 to remove agricultural worker tie

Refused 19.12.13

14/03528/LDEU Application for certificate of lawfulness for the

occupation of the dwelling by persons other

than those employed in agriculture

Granted 16.02.15

BDB/77875 Application for a Certificate of Lawfulness for

use of land as retail nursery and landscaping

contracting business including tree surgery and

administration and storage associated with

such uses.

Granted 06.06.13

BDB/09352 Erection of a single storey dwelling to replace

existing mobile home on part holding 3.24 Ha 8

Acres

Granted 01.04.80

BDB/08816 Outline permission for erection of a single

storey dwelling to replace existing mobile

home on part holding 3.24 Ha 8 Acres

Granted 03.01.80

BDB/48779 Erection of single storey side extension and

associated parking

Granted 31.10.00

BDB/47319 New conservatory and proposed 2 bedroom

granny annex ( single storey)

Refused 20.04.00

The site has recently been separated from the existing retail nursery business to the south of the site which was established under planning application ref: BDB/77875 in 2013. Assessment

Principle of Development In determining planning applications the Local Planning Authority (LPA) must have regard to Section 36 (6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, which requires that proposals be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The site is situated outside of any defined Settlement Policy Boundary under Saved Policy D5 of the Adopted Local Plan and is therefore considered to be in the countryside where the principle of development is more restricted.

NPPF The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) sets out the Governments planning policies for England and how these are expected to be applied. The NPPF is a material consideration in the determination of this planning application. The weight given to relevant policies in the Development Plan is therefore dependent on their conformity with the policies in the NPPF. Paragraph 14 of the NPPF sets out a presumption in favour of sustainable Development. 'For decision taking this means that where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date, granting permission unless: (i) any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in the Framework taken as a whole; or (ii) specific policies in the Framework indicate that development should be restricted.' On 21 June 2012 a paper went to Planning and Infrastructure Overview and Scrutiny Committee which included a review of Saved Local Plan Policies in terms of their consistency with the NPPF. This confirmed that Saved Policy D6 should continue to be used as it is generally in conformity with the NPPF. Saved Policy D6 restricts new housing in the countryside unless it is a one-for-one replacement of an existing dwelling, the conversion of an existing building or involves residential development on sites which comply with Saved Policies D7, D8 or D9 of the Local Plan. The proposal does not accord with Saved Policy D6. Policies under the NPPF include consideration of whether the development is sustainable against the social, environmental and economic aspects of the development. In considering new housing in rural areas, Paragraph 55 advises that 'To promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities. For example, where there are groups of smaller settlements, development in one village may support services in a village nearby.' Paragraph 55 goes on to say that Local Planning Authorities should avoid new isolated homes in the countryside unless there are special circumstances, including: essential accommodation for a rural worker...re-use redundant buildings and lead to enhancement of immediate setting...or represent innovative design.' The applicant has not put forward special circumstances and therefore consideration is given to whether the site is isolated as set out below.

Isolated development and sustainable location In accordance with Paragraph 55 of the NPPF it is necessary to consider whether the site is isolated (i.e. physically remote and whether it has easy access to services and facilities). The site is not considered to be physically remote given the proximity to neighbouring dwellings and built form and given the siting of the plot which clearly appears as part of the cluster of development of Pamber Green. Pamber Green does not benefit from a school, shop, church or public house. The site has been evaluated in terms of transport sustainability and it is considered to be marginally sustainable due to the limited accessibility by a choice of transport means. In particular walking within the area poses difficulties due to the narrow unpaved roads within the vicinity which are unlit and do not have pedestrian footways. However, there are bus services offering opportunities for travel links with Basingstoke and Baughurst operating every 20 minutes weekdays and Saturdays and every 30 minutes on Sundays. In considering the balance of whether such limited accessibility represents harm outweighing the perceived benefit, it is acknowledged that the new dwellings would add to the local housing stock and would make a positive, albeit small, contribution towards reducing the current deficit of housing in the area, which is a clear social benefit. The development would also provide employment during construction and the expenditure associated with two additional households would support the local economy. New native hedgerow planting and tree planting around some of the boundaries of the site will represent a biodiversity benefit and whilst these latter benefits would be very modest, they nevertheless weigh in favour of the proposal. As such the proposed dwellings are not considered to be isolated and would not be contrary to paragraph 55 of the NPPF. Matters which may outweigh such benefits may include the impact upon the setting of the adjacent listed building, the open landscape character; and the rural highway network. These will be considered below. Housing Land Supply Shortfall On 27 March 2015, Full Council agreed that 850dpa should be used as the annual housing requirement for the emerging Local Plan and for use in determining the borough’s 5 year land supply position. Based on the 850 dpa requirement, the Council can only demonstrate 3.5 years of supply using the Sedgefield Method. This proposal would contribute, albeit in a small manner towards the Council’s current housing shortfall. Visual Impact on the Landscape The site is set in a rural landscape however it is seen in the context of the surrounding pattern of development which includes residential dwellings sited along the A340, to the north and north-east of the site along Green Lane and to the west, the existing property, Greenacres. There is a large agricultural style storage building adjoining the site to the south which forms part of the nursery and landscaping business. The site

currently forms part of the paddock area associated with the residential property Greenacres.

Views from Aldermaston Road The bungalows would be located to the rear of the existing property Greenacres, on a grass paddock area where a number of young trees have been planted. The front elevation of the proposed bungalows would be set back approximately 145m from the Aldermaston Road accessed via the vehicular entrance which serves the existing dwelling. Although accessed from the Aldermaston Road, views from this public vantage point are limited by the distance of the site from the road and the location of the existing dwelling and other buildings associated with the Greenacres site. It is not considered that introducing two single storey dwellings onto this piece of land would have a significant impact on the landscape when viewed from this particular public vantage point and is acceptable in this regard.

Green Lane

The paddock is partially screened along the eastern boundary by trees and hedging that filters some of the views from Footpath Pamber 10 running parallel with the hedge and leading into Green Lane, an unadopted road serving a number of residential properties. The proposal would require the removal or replanting of a number of immature trees within the paddock however there are no proposals to remove any of the boundary vegetation along Green Lane. A 7m wide landscaping strip would be retained along the northern boundary and a further strip of between 2m and 7m would be retained between the garden boundary and the boundary of the site to the east. The rear elevations of the proposed bungalows would be set a minimum of 15m from the boundary with Green Lane and would be seen in the context of the surrounding pattern of residential development to the north and the nursery buildings to the south. It is considered that whilst an existing undeveloped, green space between built form would be lost, the scale and design of the development in combination with the existing and proposed landscaping would enable the development to sit comfortably into the landscape. Trees There are a number of semi-mature trees which have been planted within the site and other more mature trees around the site boundary and adjacent to the driveway. It is considered that subject to suitable conditions requiring tree protection and details of the location of any proposed utilities, the development on this site could be successfully accommodated without detriment to retained trees in accordance with Saved Policies E1 and E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 1996 – 2011. Conservation The proposed development of two bungalows would be located on land adjacent to Green Lane but accessed from Aldermaston Road. The rear elevation of the closest proposed dwelling would be situated 25m west of Barnstead, a Grade II Listed, 17th Century timber framed house with attached barn. This is a similar distance to that between the dwelling Upwey to the north and this Listed Building. A new dwelling has

recently been permitted to the rear of Barnsted (15/03172/FUL) and an amended scheme at the site is currently under Officer consideration. The siting and modest scale of the proposed bungalows, their single storey nature and the existing and proposed boundary treatment in combination with the current context of Barnstead, which is largely surrounded by modern residential developments, is such that it is considered that the proposed development would preserve the setting of this Listed Building in accordance with Saved Policy E2 of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan 1996 – 2011 and also the requirements of the NPPF by giving rise to less than substantial harm as stipulated by paragraph 134. Impact on Neighbouring Amenity

Upwey Upwey is a detached property to the north of the application site. There would be a distance of approximately 26m between the side elevation of the closest bungalow and this dwelling. Concern has been raised by the occupants in relation to the impact of the development on their amenity as a result of overlooking from the four windows which are proposed in the side elevation serving the living room and two bedrooms. Whilst the proposal would introduce new dwellings onto land which is currently free from development, it is considered that the single storey nature of the proposal in combination with the existing and proposed screening, and the distance between the closest property and the side elevation of Upwey is such that their amenity would be maintained to an acceptable level. The distance between the development and this neighbouring property is such that no overshadowing onto this dwelling would result. The proposal is in accordance with Basingstoke and Deane Saved Local Plan Policy E1 and the Residential Amenity Design Guidance in the Basingstoke and Deane Design and Sustainability SPD.

Barnsted An objection has also been received with regards to amenity from the occupants of Barnsted which is Grade II Listed cottage to the east of the site. The rear elevation of the closest bungalow would be situated approximately 18m from the boundary with Green Lane and 25m from the side elevation of Barnsted which sits side on to the lane. Ground floor windows and doors serving the lounge, kitchen and utility of both proposed dwellings would be set on the eastern elevation facing towards Barnsted and Green Lane however it is considered that the distance between in combination with the existing boundary treatment, will mitigate any adverse visual impact or loss of amenity to this neighbouring property.

Greenacres, Meadow Croft, Barncroft

The rear elevation of the existing dwelling at Greenacres is approximately 79m from the front elevation of the proposed bungalows. This distance along with the single storey nature of the development is such that no significant overlooking would result. The existing access onto the site runs between Greenacres and the neighbouring property to the north, Meadow Croft. The proposed development would utilise this access and would then be extended beyond the existing garage serving Greenacres

and adjacent to the side boundary with Barncroft. The amount of additional vehicular movements associated with two additional dwellings and the generous spacing of these neighbouring properties within their plots is such that the impact on their amenity as a result of the extended driveway and increase in vehicular movements along it would not be significant and is considered acceptable. Amenity for the occupants of the new dwellings The application site size can adequately provide for the amenity requirements generated by the proposal in relation to private garden space, bin and cycle storage, parking and landscaping. In terms of the amenity space, a minimum garden depth of 11m is provided for the development with the total area for each dwelling exceeding the 60m² stated within the Council's Residential Amenity Guidance. The proposal is considered acceptable in relation to the amenity of the occupants of the new dwellings.

Noise

Comments have been made in relation to the possible effect of noise from the neighbouring business to the south (Greenacres Nursery) on the occupants of the new dwellings. The horticultural use of that site was established under a Certificate of Lawfulness application as such there are no restrictions on the opening hours of the business. Furthermore no conditions were imposed on the hours of use of the existing storage buildings as these operate ancillary to the existing nursery. The permitted use of the buildings is for storage of materials and equipment associated with the nursery. There is a condition to restrict the use of the building for ancillary purposes to the nursery business. Where a proposed development may be noise sensitive and affected by existing commercial noise sources, a noise assessment should to be carried out and a report to be submitted as part of the planning application submission and this is currently being undertaken. Given the close proximity of a tree surgeon business operating on the adjacent land south of the proposed development site (Greenacres Garden Centre site), noise from activities undertaken by this business has the potential to significantly affect the amenity of the proposed dwellings. It is accepted that some noise would be generated from the Greenacres Nursery site and the new occupants of the proposed bungalows would therefore be impacted upon to a degree. The NPPF seeks to ensure that the planning system should avoid the generation of “unacceptable levels” of noise pollution where this would give rise to “significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life”. Locally, Saved Policy E1 gives consideration to avoiding noise impacts which would harm living and working conditions or the enjoyment of the built and natural environment. The applicant is currently undertaking a noise assessment and any conclusions will be reported in the update paper. Contaminated Land During a site visit the Environmental Health Officer noted that a lean to which would be removed to extend the driveway is made from asbestos cement and that there was a sheet of the same material protruding from the ground in front of the lean-to. Conditions on any permission are therefore necessary to ensure that risks from land contamination

to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. Odour Comments have been received in a letter of representation with regards to possible odour issues from the neighbouring former Greenacres Nursery site which now also includes a tree surgery business. The Environmental Health Officer has visited this neighbouring site during the assessment of this application and has confirmed that he raises no objections in relation to odour from the activities carried out at this site and the proposed development. Highway Impact and Parking The site has an established, shared vehicular access onto Aldermaston Road, the A340. The gated access is set-back 6.7m from the carriageway, providing sufficient length for a car to stop clear of the road for opening and closing of the gate. The area of the site proposed for development is on the eastern side, some 125m from Aldermaston Road. There is area in the intervening distance which could be used for manoeuvring and parking of vehicles and for storage of construction materials during a period of building. Saved Policy E1(iii) of the Basingstoke and Deane Local Plan requires that any highway movements generated by new development are not of an inappropriate type or level, with safe and convenient access also provided for users of a site. This is considered in conjunction with Saved Policy A1 (Parking) and the relevant SPD on parking provision. Paragraph 32 of the NPPF advises that “development should only be refused on transport grounds where the residual cumulative impacts of development are severe”. In relation to parking provision, the site is in a rural area where each three bedroom property would require 3 parking spaces plus secure parking for 2 long and 1 short stay cycle space. The submitted layout plan indicates that each dwelling has a detached garage plus outside parking and turning and whilst the garages have dimensions smaller than recommended there would be sufficient space for parking in the driveways and cycles could be stored in the garages. The parking provision indicated therefore meets the parking standards. Waste In accordance with Appendix 6 of the Waste and Recycling SPD, the developer of the site, or the new owners, will be responsible for purchasing the bins 1x140L waste bin, 1x240L recycling bin and 1xglass box will be required for each new property. The Council operates a 'kerbside' collection. Residents are expected to place their bins/boxes at the closest point to the highway on collection day which would be on Aldermaston Road. The Highways Officer has raised no objections to the development and a condition requiring full details of location of the refuse and recycling storage and collection facilities has been added.

Biodiversity The site appears to mostly be regularly mown grass interspersed with newly planted trees which has limited biodiversity interest however there are records of reptiles (slow-worm) within the land immediately to the north. If the development were to proceed it would be prudent to undertake a phased vegetation clearance using hand operated tools (e.g. brush cutters) to cut any grassy vegetation to 20cm, followed by a cut at 10cm and then keep the vegetation short. It is noted that there are also piles of rubble; the rubble should ideally be hand loaded into or moved and if any reptiles are encountered advice from the Local Planning Authority should be sought. The proposed development would involve the removal of some young trees and shrubs and therefore the applicant’s attention is drawn to the provisions of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) which makes it an offence to kill or harm birds or damage or destroy their eggs. To avoid contravening these provisions no works should be carried out that might damage an active bird’s nest during the bird breeding season (March to August inclusive). The Biodiversity Officer has considered the proposals and raises no objection subject to informatives relating to nesting birds and reptiles. The application has been amended to provide additional native planting around some of the garden boundaries and it is considered that these measures would provide a biodiversity enhancement and are appropriate. The site is within the Impact Risk Zone for the Pamber Forest and Silchester Common Site of Special Scientific Interest and Natural England has been notified. Any comments received from Natural England will be reported in the update paper. Section 106 agreement The application has been assessed with regard to whether two new dwellings in this location would attract the requirement for contributions to mitigate for the impact of additional residents. There are no CIL compliant schemes in the vicinity of the site to which the development could contribute towards and therefore in this particular instance no S106 agreement is required. Affordable Housing The application site area is 0.17 hectares and the number of dwellings is two which is below the threshold that triggers the requirement for affordable housing. Flood Risk and Drainage The NPPF requires that new development should be either directed away from areas at highest risk or alternatively demonstrated to be flood resilient and resistant, to include safe access and egress without increasing residual flood risk elsewhere. The site is within Flood Zone 1 as determined by the Environment Agency Flood Risk Maps giving the site a low risk of flooding (less than 1 in 1000 annual probability). Concern has been raised with regard to the likely route for sewers. The applicant has confirmed verbally that they intend to utilise the public sewer on Aldermaston Road and

the submitted information states that foul sewage will be disposed of by mains sewer and as such this would be controlled by the sewage undertaker. Other Matters Comments have been received that it would be appropriate to apply a specific restriction to prohibit access to the two bungalows from Green Lane however the application has been submitted and is being considered on the basis that the existing access onto Aldermaston Road will be used to serve this development. Conclusion The proposed development would provide two additional units of residential accommodation which would contribute, albeit in a small manner, towards the Council’s housing shortfall. Furthermore, the development would provide for a design and layout that would contribute to the character and appearance of the area, provide for appropriate on-site parking and protect the privacy and amenity of adjacent dwellings. The development would preserve the setting of the neighbouring Listed Building. The introduction of two bungalows in this location would be seen in the context of the surrounding pattern of development. The buildings would not be physically isolated and would be accessible to local facilities. The development can be considered to be sustainable development and any adverse impact identified would not significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits of the proposed development. The proposal is therefore in accordance with paragraphs 14 and 123 of the National Planning Policy Framework and Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan (1996 – 2011). It is considered that subject to the receipt of additional information to demonstrate that any noise generated from the adjoining Greenacres Nursery site would not result in a significant adverse impact upon the health and quality of life for future occupants of the proposed development then the application would be acceptable with regards to the amenity of the occupants. Conditions 1 The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the

following approved plans unless otherwise agreed in writing with the Local Planning Authority:

Roof plan PL-05 received 8 February 2016

Proposed Elevations PL-06 received 8 February 2016

Proposed Block Plan PL-03 Rev A received 18 March 2016 REASON: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning.

2 The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of 3 years

from the date of this planning permission. REASON: To comply with Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase

Act 2004 and to prevent an accumulation of unimplemented planning permissions.

3 No development shall commence on site until details of the types and colours of external materials to be used, including colour of mortar, together with samples, have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the details so approved unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: Details are required prior to commencement of development in the interests of the visual amenities of the area and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

4 No development shall commence on site until details of measures to be taken to

prevent spoil/mud being deposited on the public highway from vehicles leaving the site during the construction works have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Such measures shall be fully installed and implemented before the development commences and shall be retained for the duration of the construction period in order that no vehicle shall leave the site unless it has been cleaned sufficiently to prevent mud/spoil being deposited onto the highway. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. Details are required in the absence of being included within the application submission.

5 Prior to commencement of development the developer shall ensure that there is

provision to be made for the parking and turning on site of operatives' and construction vehicles together with storage on site of construction materials. The provision shall be retained and used for the intended purpose for the duration of the construction period and that area shall not be used for any purposes other than the parking and turning of vehicles and storage of construction materials respectively. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

6 No work relating to the construction of the development hereby approved,

including works of demolition shall take place before the hours of 0730 nor after 1800 Monday to Friday, before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays, nor on Sundays or recognised public or bank holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996 – 2011.

7 No deliveries of construction materials or plant and machinery and no removal of

any spoil from the site shall take place before the hours of 0730 nor after 1800 Monday to Friday, before the hours of 0800 nor after 1300 Saturdays, nor on Sundays or recognised public or bank holidays, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To protect the amenities of the occupiers of nearby properties during the construction period and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996 – 2011.

8 No development shall commence until details of both 'hard and soft landscape details' have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority as required:

'Hard landscaping details' shall include the design, type, position and scale of boundary treatments, boundary treatment materials (including finishes) and hardsurfacing materials;

'Soft landscape details' shall include planting plan, specification (including cultivation and other operations associated with plant and grass establishment), schedules of plants, (including replacement trees where appropriate), noting species, planting sizes and proposed numbers/densities where appropriate and should include the retention of existing boundary treatments. This should also include a schedule of any tree planting to include the specification of tree planting pits where appropriate with details of any irrigation or drainage infrastructure, tree root barriers (if necessary) to prevent damage or disruption to any proposed hard surfacing or underground services, drains or other infrastructure and details of the location of external lighting sufficient to demonstrate how lighting is to be achieved without conflict to proposed tree planting, with allowance for reasonable growth;

'The approved Hard and Soft landscaping shall be carried out in accordance with an implementation programme to be submitted and agreed within the Local Planning Authority. The Soft Landscaping Scheme shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the first occupation of the phase. All hard and soft landscape works relevant to the phase of development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Any trees or plants which, within a period of five years after planting, are removed, die or become seriously damaged or defective, shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of species, size and number as originally approved, to be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: Details are required in the absence of accompanying the application and to ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of landscape in accordance with the approved designs, in the interests of character and visual amenity of the area and the setting of the listed building in accordance with Saved Policies E1 (ii), E2, E6 and E7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 and NPPF.

9 No development shall take place on site until a schedule of maintenance for a

minimum period of five years for landscape areas has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The schedule shall include details of the arrangements for its implementation. Development shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved schedule, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: Details are required in the absence of accompanying the application and to ensure the provision, establishment and maintenance of a reasonable standard of landscape in accordance with the approved designs, in the interests of character and visual amenity of the area and the setting of the listed building in accordance with Saved Policies E1 (ii), E2, E6 and E7 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011 and NPPF.

10 No development shall take place until details of the habitat enhancement scheme have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development shall be carried out and thereafter maintained in accordance with the details so approved, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: Details are required prior to development as Section 11 of the NPPF requires there are net gains in biodiversity as a result of planning decisions, therefore the above condition is necessary to help compensate for habitat loss resulting from the development and help to maintain the biodiversity of the area in the long term, in accordance with Policy E7 of the Local Plan.

11 The dwellings hereby permitted shall not be occupied until provision for the

turning of vehicles and the parking of 3 cars and storage for a minimum of 2 bicycles has been made within the curtilage of each property in accordance with the approved drawings and the areas so provided shall not be used for any purpose other than the turning and parking of vehicles and storage of bicycles, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policies E1 and A1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

12 No development shall commence until full details of the refuse and recycling

storage and collection facilities have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be constructed and fully implemented before the use hereby approved is commenced and shall be thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. REASON: In the interests of highway safety and in accordance with Saved Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011. Details are required prior to development in the absence of being provided within the application documentation.

13 No development including site clearance, demolition, ground preparation,

temporary access construction/widening, material storage or construction works shall commence on site until a Tree Protection Plan has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall include the specification and positioning of temporary tree protective fencing and ground protection where required. The approved tree protection shall be erected prior to any site activity commencing and maintained until the area is to be landscaped. No development or other operations shall take place other than in complete accordance with the Tree Protection Plan, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To ensure that reasonable measures are taken to safeguard trees in the interests of local amenity and the enhancement of the development itself in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) and Saved Policies E1 and E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

14 No development including site clearance, demolition, ground preparation,

temporary access construction/widening, material storage or construction works shall commence on site until a plan showing the location of all proposed utility

services has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This shall include gas, electricity, communications, water and drainage. No development or other operations shall take place other than in complete accordance with the Utility Plan, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

REASON: To ensure that reasonable measures are taken to safeguard trees in the interests of local amenity and the enhancement of the development itself, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework (March 2012) and Saved Policies E1 and E6 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

15 Prior to any demolition works on the site an asbestos survey should be

undertaken. If any asbestos containing material (ACM) is identified it should be removed from site and disposed of by a licensed asbestos contractor in accordance with the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012.

REASON: To ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

16 With the exception of demolition no works pursuant to this permission should

commence until there has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority:-

a. a post-demolition site investigation report documenting the ground conditions

of the site and incorporating chemical analysis identified as being appropriate by the Councils Environmental Health team and in accordance with BS10175:2011 - Investigation of Potentially Contaminated Sites - Code of Practice;

and b. a detailed scheme for remedial works and measures to be undertaken to

avoid risk from contaminants/or gases when the site is developed. The scheme must include a timetable of works and site management procedures and the nomination of a competent person to oversee the implementation of the works. The scheme must ensure that the site will not qualify as contaminated land under Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 and if necessary proposals for future maintenance and monitoring. This must be conducted in accordance with DEFRA and the Environment Agency’s ‘Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination, CLR11’.

and c. The development should not be occupied/brought into use until there has

been submitted to the Local Planning Authority verification by the competent person that any remediation scheme required and approved has been implemented fully in accordance with the approved details (unless varied

with the written agreement of the Local Planning Authority in advance of implementation). Unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority such verification shall comprise;

As built drawings of the implemented scheme;

Photographs of the remediation works in progress;

Certificates demonstrating that imported and/or material left in situ is free of contamination;

Information which demonstrates that all presumed asbestos containing material has been removed from the application site and disposed of by a licensed asbestos contractor in accordance with the Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012.

REASON: The following steps are therefore necessary to ensure that risks from land contamination to the future users of the land and neighbouring land are minimised, together with those to controlled waters, property and ecological systems, and to ensure that the development can be carried out safely without unacceptable risks to workers, neighbours and other offsite receptors in accordance with Policy E1 of the Basingstoke and Deane Borough Local Plan 1996-2011.

Informative(s):- 1. 1.1 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the above conditions (if

any), must be complied with in full, failure to do so may result in enforcement action being instigated.

1.2 This permission may contain pre-commencement conditions which require

specific matters to be submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before a specified stage in the development occurs. This means that a lawful commencement of the approved development CANNOT be made until the particular requirements of the pre-commencement conditions have been met.

1.3 The applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that the Local Planning

Authority has a period of up to eight weeks to determine details submitted in respect of a condition or limitation attached to a grant of planning permission. It is likely that in most cases the determination period will be shorter than eight weeks, however, the applicant is advised to schedule this time period into any programme of works. A fee will be required for requests for discharge of any consent, agreement, or approval required by a planning condition. The fee chargeable is £97 per request or £28 where the related permission was for extending or altering a dwelling house or other development in the curtilage of a dwelling house. A fee is payable for each submission made regardless of the number of conditions for which approval is sought. Requests must be made using the standard application form (available online) or set out in writing clearly identifying the relevant planning application and condition(s) which they are seeking approval for.

2. The applicant’s attention is drawn to the protection of breeding birds under the

Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.This makes it an offence to kill or harm birds or damage or destroy their eggs. To avoid contravening these provisions it would

be advisable to avoid carrying out any work that might damage an active nest during the bird breeding season (March to August inclusive).

3. The applicant’s attention is also drawn to the protection of reptile species under

the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981.This makes it an offence to kill or harm reptiles. To avoid contravening these provisions it would be advisable to carry out a phased vegetation clearance and hand remove any rubble piles etc.

4. In accordance with paragraphs 186 and 187 of the National Planning Policy

Framework (NPPF) in dealing with this application, the Council has worked with the applicant in the following positive and proactive manner:-

Offering a pre-application advice service;

Seeking further information following receipt of the application;

Seeking amendments to the proposed development following receipt of the application;

Considering the imposition of conditions and/or the completion of a s106 legal agreement.

In this instance:

The applicant was updated of any issues after the initial site visit.

In such ways the Council has demonstrated a positive and proactive manner in seeking solutions to problems arising in relation to the planning application.

16/00300/FUL

Location Plan

16/00300/FUL

Proposed site layout

16/00300/FUL

Proposed elevations

16/00300/FUL

Proposed floor plans