|
|
APPLICATION NO. |
|
|
|
SITE |
Site Of 1 Sugworth Crescent Radley Abingdon, OX14 2JR |
|
|
PARISH |
RADLEY |
|
|
PROPOSAL |
Erection of two dwellings with associated access and landscaping (as amended by plans received on the 25th of August 2022). |
|
|
WARD MEMBER(S) |
Diana Lugova Bob Johnston |
|
|
APPLICANT |
Mr P Everley |
|
|
OFFICER |
Nathaniel Bamsey |
|
|
RECOMMENDATION |
|
|
Officers recommend that planning permission is granted subject to the following conditions:
Standard 1. Commencement within 3 years 2. Approved plans
Prior to commencement 3. Access (Details not shown) 4. Drainage Details (Surface Water) 5. Drainage Details (Foul Water) 6. Landscaping Scheme (Submission)
Prior to occupation 7. Boundary Details (Details not shown) 8. Biodiversity Mitigation and Enhancement 9. Car Parking 10. Turning space in accordance with plan 11. Bicycle Parking 12. Landscaping Scheme (Implementation)
Compliance 13. Materials in Accordance with Application
Informatives 14. Works within the Highway 15. CIL 16. Radley Neighbourhood Plan Policies |
|
1.0 |
INTRODUCTION AND PROPOSAL |
|
|
1.1 |
This application is referred to planning committee at the request of Councillor Lugova, the local member.
|
|
|
1.2 |
The application site is 1 Sugworth Crescent. It lies within the parish of Radley but is located geographically immediately to the south of the village of Kennington. The site previously contained a single dwelling which has been demolished leaving an open plot. Planning permission has previously been granted on the plot for a single dwelling facing Sugworth Crescent (P21/V3119/FUL). This application relates to the southern portion of the site, to the south of the approved dwelling.
|
|
|
1.3 |
Neighbouring residential properties are to the west, in Sugworth Crescent and to the south along Sugworth Lane. Kennington Road is to the east. The South Kennington strategic housing site is to the north east and development of this site is well advanced. The application site is within the Oxford Green Belt.
|
|
|
1.4 |
This application seeks approval for the subdivision of the plot, leaving space for the approved dwelling facing Sugworth Crescent, and for the erection of a pair of semi-detached dwellings facing Kennington Road, and the creation of a new vehicular access to Kennington Road.
|
|
|
1.5 |
A site location plan is provided below, and the plans are attached at Appendix 1.
|
|
|
2.0 |
SUMMARY OF CONSULTATIONS & REPRESENTATIONS |
||||||||||||
|
2.1 |
A summary of the responses received is set out below. Comments made can be viewed in full online at www.whitehorsedc.gov.uk.
|
|
3.0 |
RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY |
|
3.1 |
P21/V3119/FUL - Approved (17/01/2022) Erection of one replacement dwelling with associated access and landscaping
P82/V1170/O - Refused (29/11/1982) Erection of a chalet bungalow. [site area approx. 810 sq. yards]. Land adjoining 1 Sugworth Crescent, Radley.
|
|
3.2 |
Pre-application History P20/V2473/PEM - Advice provided (23/11/2020) 4 x dwellings (3 x 2-bed apartments and 1 x 3-bed house) with associated access and landscaping works.
P19/V3088/PEM - Advice provided (10/03/2020) 4 x dwellings (3 x 2-bed apartments and 1 x 3-bed house) with associated access and landscaping works. |
|
4.0 |
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT |
|
4.1 |
The proposed development is not Schedule 1 or 2 development as defined by the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017, so an Environmental Impact Assessment is not required. |
|
5.0 5.1 |
MAIN ISSUES The main material planning considerations are the following:
· Green Belt policy and the principle of development · Design and character · Residential amenity · Access and parking · Flood risk and drainage · Ecology · Waste and recycling
|
|
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8 |
Green Belt policy and the principle of development Policy CP3 of LPP1 gives a hierarchy of settlements in the district. This defines Kennington as a Larger Village. Policy CP4 states that within the built-up area of Larger Villages there is a presumption in favour of sustainable development.
Policy PP.2 of the Neighbourhood Plan states that the Green Belt round Radley will be protected to maintain its openness and permanence. Inappropriate development outside the strategic sites and the Green Belt ‘inset’ area will not be supported except in the very special circumstance as identified in the NPPF and Policy CP13 of LPP1.
The erection of new dwellings is inappropriate development in the Green Belt unless it meets one of the exceptions listed in policy CP13. These exceptions have been modified slightly by changes made in the NPPF when it was revised in 2019. The changes made in the NPPF mean that ‘limited infilling in villages’ is an exception to the restriction on new dwellings.
The immediate surroundings of the site have changed significantly in recent years due to the construction of the new housing development on the strategic allocation to the north-east. Prior to this new housing being constructed, Sugworth Crescent was physically separated from Kennington by significant gaps of undeveloped land between the main parts of the village and the mobile home sites to the north. However, the development of the strategic housing site has effectively physically linked the site to Kennington, and means the site is now considered by officers to fall within the built-up area of the village.
The provision of two dwellings is considered ‘limited’ in respect of the village of Kennington given its large size. The new buildings will be closely related to built form to the north and south and as such the development is also considered to constitute ‘infill’. Thus, as officers consider the proposed development to constitute limited infilling in a village, it is not inappropriate development in the Green Belt.
As officers consider the proposals are not inappropriate development, it is not necessary to assess the impact of the development on openness nor in terms of conflict with the purposes of including land within it as the NPPF does not require such an assessment for this exemption.
Objectors have referred to pre-application advice for the erection of a replacement dwelling, subdivision of the plot, and the erection of flats on the current application site, which stated that officers considered the proposals to be inappropriate development in the Green Belt. This was due to the replacement dwelling and the subdivision being proposed as a single development and as such officers did not consider the proposals constituted ‘limited infill’. For the reasons outlined above, the permission for the replacement dwelling facing Sugworth Crescent is considered to have materially changed the surroundings such that officers no longer consider the proposals to be inappropriate development.
|
|
5.9
5.10
5.11
5.12
5.13
5.14
5.15
5.16
5.17
5.18
|
Design and character
The development involves the subdivision of the plot and the erection of semi-detached dwellings. The proposed dwellings will front Kennington Road.
The subdivision of the plot will result in the plot of the previously approved dwelling fronting Sugworth Crescent will be shorter than the other plots on the Crescent. The pre-application response raised concerns that this would be harmful to local character as this would conflict with the established character around the Crescent. However, in respect of this application, officers consider the approved dwelling will ‘round off’ the Crescent and maintain the established character, whereas these new dwellings will be seen in a separate context along Kennington Road. It should also be noted that the dwelling that used to exist, no.1 Sugworth Crescent, fronted Kennington Road rather than the Crescent.
Officers consider the fact that the plot of the approved dwelling will be shorter than others on Sugworth Crescent will not be apparent in public views from either Sugworth Crescent or Kennington Road. The difference may be apparent from neighbouring properties, but any appreciation of the plot sizes from neighbouring properties is not a factor considered to be sufficient to warrant refusal of the application in this case. Thus, the subdivision of the plot is not considered to be harmful.
The new semi-detached dwellings themselves are designed to appear as a single dwelling from Kennington Road. The dwellings will be one-and-a-half storeys in height and feature dormer windows to the front. The proposed materials are brick and render to the walls and concrete tiles for the roof.
There are a variety of dwelling designs in the vicinity, but the predominant feature is of single storey or chalet style detached bungalows. The design of the proposed dwellings is considered to be in keeping with local character, due to their low eaves and their design, which gives the appearance of a single dwelling. The proposed materials are also considered to be acceptable.
The proposed dwellings will be served by a single access. Parking will be provided to the front of the dwellings and there will be a shared turning space. Concerns were raised with the amount of proposed hardstanding to the front of the dwellings and the urbanising effect this could have on the street scene. In response, amended plans have been submitted which push the proposed hardstanding back from the front of the plot. This will allow for landscaping between the new hardstanding and the highway to soften its appearance. Conditions are recommended requiring the submission and implementation of such a scheme.
With the landscaping condition attached it is held that the new hardstanding would not be visually harmful, especially given the hardstanding to the front of dwellings further north on Kennington Road.
Concerns have been raised that the proposals would constitute overdevelopment of the site. However, officers consider the development would not appear cramped, and the plot is considered of sufficient size to accommodate the additional dwellings.
For the reasons outlined above, and subject to the recommended conditions it officer hold that the development will not harm visual amenity and therefore the application accords with policy CP37.
|
|
5.19
5.20
5.21
5.22
5.23
5.24
5.25
5.26
5.27
5.28
5.29 |
Residential amenity
When considering the impact on amenity of applications for new dwellings it is necessary to assess both the impacts on neighbouring properties and on the intended occupiers.
The proposed dwellings will be built to the rear of the recently approved dwelling facing Sugworth Crescent, to the north of the application site. The north wall of the proposed dwellings will be over 12m from the rear elevation of the approved dwelling. This exceeds the minimum distance recommended in the Design Guide and this ensures that occupants of the approved dwelling will not suffer harm from loss of outlook, visual intrusion, or overshadowing.
No upper floor side facing windows are proposed so there will be no overlooking of the approved dwelling or its amenity space. The amenity space of the new dwelling will be reduced in size but it will still provide sufficient private amenity space for the intended occupiers of that dwelling.
The distance to the existing dwellings in Sugworth Crescent and Sugworth Lane prevents harm to these neighbours from overshadowing, overdominance or visual intrusion.
The proposed dwellings have first floor, rear-facing bedroom windows. Due to the angled relationship, these will offer views of the end of the rear garden of no 3 Sugworth Crescent. This is not considered to result in harm from a loss of privacy given that the angled relationship will ensure that only the rearmost part of the garden is in direct view, and given that the distance between the windows and the boundary will be at least 9m. Moreover, the near perpendicular relationship between the rear elevation of the proposed dwellings and the rear elevation of no 3 will prevent any overlooking into habitable rooms.
The new dwellings will be at least 25m from the rear elevations of the dwellings along Sugworth Lane. Officers consider this distance is sufficient to prevent harm to these neighbours from overlooking.
It is considered to be unlikely that the erection of two semi-detached dwellings will not generate noise or disturbance which would be harmful to neighbour amenity given the domestic nature of the use.
The new dwellings will enjoy sufficient internal space and all habitable rooms will benefit from adequate outlook and natural light. There will be side facing ground floor windows in the proposed northern dwelling which will face the rear of the approved dwelling. These will be secondary windows in the rooms they serve and, given intervening boundary treatments, will not cause harmful overlooking to this dwelling.
Both dwellings will benefit from rear amenity space which exceeds the minimum recommended for three-bedroomed dwellings in the Design Guide. The northernmost dwelling’s garden will be visible from the first-floor rear window of the approved dwelling to the north. However, the distance from this window to the boundary is considered to be sufficient to prevent the rear amenity space suffering from harmful overlooking. Thus, both dwellings will benefit from adequate private amenity space.
For the reasons outline above, the proposed development is not considered to harm the amenity of neighbouring properties and the intended occupiers will enjoy a sufficient living environment. Thus, officers consider the application accords with policy DP23.
|
|
5.30
5.31
5.32
5.33
5.34
5.35
5.36
|
Access and parking Policies CP33, CP35, and CP37 of LPP1, and policy DP16 of LPP2 require development to provide safe and convenient access, sufficient car and cycle parking in line with Oxfordshire County Council standards and adequate provision for loading, unloading, circulation, servicing and vehicle turning. Development must also minimise the impact on the highway network and promote more sustainable modes of transport where appropriate.
Policy PP.9 of the Neighbourhood Plan supports development where it complies with other development plan policies and can be satisfactorily accommodated within the existing highways network.
Policy PP.10 of the Neighbourhood Plan states that development should, where appropriate, support the achievement of the Radley Cycling and Walking Strategy. On site measures include the provision of secure cycle storage
The provision of two dwellings is not considered to generate significant additional amounts of traffic which would harm the local highway network.
The site is very close to bus stops on both sides of the road providing regular services to Kennington and Oxford northbound and Radley and Abingdon southbound. National Cycle Route 5 also runs along Kennington Road connecting to Oxford and Abingdon. Thus, despite the site being some distance from the village centre, sustainable modes of transport are feasible, and occupants will not be solely reliant on the private motor car. Cycle parking is provided within the curtilage of the dwellings to further encourage the use of active modes of travel. A condition is recommended requiring the installation and retention of this cycle parking.
The new dwellings will be accessed via Kennington Road to the east. The former dwelling on the site was also accessed to the east, but at a point further to the north. The highways officer therefore requests a condition requiring submission of details of this access to ensure adequate vision splays are secured, and this is recommended.
Each dwelling will be provided with two car parking spaces and a shared turning area. The highways officer is satisfied that this parking and turning arrangement accords with standards. Conditions are recommended requiring the parking and turning area to be laid out prior to first use and retained to ensure adequate parking remains and vehicles will be able to enter and leave the site in a forward gear.
Subject to the recommended conditions it is held that the development will not harm the local highway network nor highway safety and more sustainable modes of transport are encourage in accordance with relevant policies in the development plan.
|
|
5.37
5.38
5.39
5.40
5.41
5.42
|
Flood risk and drainage Policy CP42 of LPP1 seeks to minimise the risk and impact of flooding by directing new development to areas with the lowest probability of flooding, ensuring that all new development addresses the effective management of all sources of flood risk and does not increase the risk of flooding elsewhere.
Policy PP.13 of the Neighbourhood Plan supports development where it is demonstrated that surface water drainage will not add to the existing site runoff or cause any adverse impact to neighbouring properties and the surrounding environment. Unless demonstrated to be inappropriate sites should incorporate Sustainable Urban Drainage (SUDs), with run-off rates no greater than greenfield sites.
Policy PP.14 of the Neighbourhood Plan supports development where there is adequate sewerage infrastructure both on and off the site to serve the site and no problems will result for existing users.
The site is not within a Flood Zone nor in an area identified as a critical drainage area. The council’s drainage engineer was consulted on this application, and they have no objection subject to the submission of both surface and foul water drainage schemes.
Neighbours have raised concerns about sewerage capacity in the area. however, the drainage engineer has raised no concerns regarding this and the details of foul water drainage requested will ensure that foul water is adequately drained from the site.
With the recommended conditions attached it is held that the development will not be at risk from flooding nor increase the risk of flooding elsewhere and foul water will be adequately managed, in accordance with policies CP42, PP.12 & 13.
|
|
5.43
5.44 |
Ecology Policy CP46 of LPP1 states that development that conserves, restores and enhances biodiversity will be permitted whilst net loss of biodiversity will be avoided.
The site is currently grass/shrub. It is considered that it is unlikely that the site provides a habitat for legally protected species nor is it likely that the site has significant biodiversity value. Thus, the development is unlikely to harm protected species. To ensure there is a net gain in biodiversity it is recommended that a condition be attached requiring the installation of bat and bird boxes on the site. With the recommended condition attached officers consider the application accords with policy CP46.
|
|
5.45
5.46 |
Waste and recycling
The site plan submitted with the application shows storage for bins within the curtilage of each dwelling and side access allowing these bins to easily be taken for presentation at the kerbside. Thus, it is held that adequate provision for the processing, storage and collection of waste and recycling is provided, and the application therefore accords with policy DP28.
|
|
5.47 |
Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)
The development is CIL liable. A self-build exemption may be sought but this must be agreed prior to commencement.
|
|
5.48 |
Pre-commencement conditions Pre-commencement conditions are recommended. Agreement to these conditions was received via email on the 10th of October. |
|
6.0 |
CONCLUSION |
|
6.1 |
Officers consider that the development is acceptable in principle and is not inappropriate development in the Green Belt. Subject to the recommended conditions, the development will be unharmful and in accordance with the relevant policies of the development plan and the NPPF. Therefore, officers recommend that planning permission should be granted. |
|
|
The following planning policies have been taken into account:
Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2031 Part 1 (LPP1) policies: |
|
|
CP01 - Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development CP03 - Settlement Hierarchy CP04 - Meeting Our Housing Needs CP13 - The Oxford Green Belt CP33 - Promoting Sustainable Transport and Accessibility CP35 - Promoting Public Transport, Cycling and Walking CP37 - Design and Local Distinctiveness CP40 - Sustainable Design and Construction CP42 - Flood Risk CP43 - Natural Resources CP44 - Landscape CP46 - Conservation and Improvement of Biodiversity
Vale of White Horse Local Plan 2031 Part 2 (LPP2) policies: DP02 - Space Standards DP16 - Access DP23 - Impact of Development on Amenity DP28 - Waste Collection and Recycling
|
|
|
Radley Neighbourhood Plan policies: PP.2 - Green Belt PP.9 - Roads PP.10 - Cycling and Walking PP.13 - Surface drainage PP.14 - Sewerage
National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF)
Planning Practice Guidance (PPG)
Joint Design Guide SPD (2022)
Equalities Act 2010 The proposal has been assessed against section 149 of the Equalities Act. It is considered that no identified group will suffer discrimination as a result of this proposal.
Human Rights Act, 1998 The application has been assessed against Schedule 1, Part 1, Article 8, and against Schedule 1, Part 2, Article 1 of the Human Rights Act, 1998. The harm to individuals has been balanced against the public interest and the officer recommendation is considered to be proportionate.
Author: Nathaniel Bamsey Contact No: 01235 422600 Email: planning@whitehorsedc.gov.uk |