DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT PANEL 17 JUNE 2013 Case No: 1300505FUL (FULL PLANNING APPLICATION) Proposal: PROPOSED ERECTION OF DWELLING FOLLOWING

DEMOLITION OF EXISTING STEEL FRAMED BARN Location: LAND SOUTH OF 3 MIDDLE STREET ELTON Applicant: M AND A RESTORATION LTD Grid Ref: 508794 293758 Date of Registration: 28.03.2013 Parish: ELTON

RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL 1. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND APPLICATION 1.1 The site fronts onto Middle Street, a classified road in Elton

Conservation Area. The site forms the eastern part of a former farm yard and its access. The site has recently been cleared of metal agricultural buildings following a conservation area consent for their demolition (1101157CAC refers).

1.2 On the adjoining, western part of the yard is a single storey stable

building, threshing barn and small open-fronted store which has recently been the subject of a permission to convert and extend to a single dwelling (1202030FUL refers). The access is shared with the western part of the yard and lies between Potters Cottage (unlisted) and No. 5 Middle Street (Grade 2 listed).

1.3 The main body of the site lies behind Potters Cottage. Potters

Cottage has a large rear extension with no rear windows on the rear-most wall and a high rear boundary wall separates Potters Cottage from the site.

1.4 Land behind the site is defined as open space for protection in the

Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995. It appears to be in agricultural use. Further to the rear, some distance away, is the grade II* listed park and garden associated with Elton Hall.

1.5 To the east side of the site are elevated gardens of neighbouring

properties and the back of Mulberry House, School Lane. 1.6 The proposal is to erect a dwelling behind Potters Cottage on the site

of a recently demolished farm building and subdivide the existing access.

1.7 The new dwelling would be predominantly two-storey with a single-

storey element to the front.

1.8 The application follows officer discussions with the applicants following the withdrawal of a similar proposal 1202031FUL for this plot.

1.9 A Unilateral Undertaking for bins has been received but corrections

are awaited from the applicant. 2. NATIONAL GUIDANCE 2.1 The National Planning Policy Framework (2012) sets out the three

dimensions to sustainable development - an economic role, a social role and an environmental role - and outlines the presumption in favour of sustainable development. Under the heading of Delivering Sustainable Development, the Framework sets out the Government's planning policies for : building a strong, competitive economy; ensuring the vitality of town centres; supporting a prosperous rural economy; promoting sustainable transport; supporting high quality communications infrastructure; delivering a wide choice of high quality homes; requiring good design; promoting healthy communities; protecting Green Belt land; meeting the challenge of climate change, flooding and coastal change; conserving and enhancing the natural environment; conserving and enhancing the historic environment; and facilitating the sustainable use of minerals.

3. PLANNING POLICIES 3.1 Huntingdonshire Local Plan (1995) Saved policies from the

Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995 are relevant and viewable at www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk/localplan95

H31: “Residential privacy and amenity standards” – Indicates

that new dwellings will only be permitted where appropriate standards of privacy can be maintained and adequate parking provided.

En2:“Character and setting of Listed Buildings” - indicates that

any development involving or affecting a building of architectural or historic merit will need to have proper regard to the scale, form, design and setting of that building

En5: “Conservation Area Character” - development within or

directly affecting conservation areas will be required to preserve or enhance their character and appearance.

En6: “Design standards in Conservation Areas” – in

conservation areas, the District Council will require high standards of design with careful consideration being given to the scale and form of development in the area and to the use of sympathetic materials of appropriate colour and texture.

En9- “Conservation Areas” - development should not impair

open spaces, trees, street scenes and views into and out of Conservation Areas.

http://www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk/localplan95

En20: Landscaping Scheme. - Wherever appropriate a development will be subject to the conditions requiring the execution of a landscaping scheme.

En22: “Conservation” – wherever relevant, the determination

of applications will take appropriate consideration of nature and wildlife conservation.

En25: "General Design Criteria" - indicates that the District

Council will expect new development to respect the scale, form, materials and design of established buildings in the locality and make adequate provision for landscaping and amenity areas.

3.2 Huntingdonshire Local Plan Alterations (2002) Saved policies from

the Huntingdon Local Plan Alterations 2002are relevant and viewable at www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk/localplan - Then click on "Local Plan Alteration (2002):

HL5 – Quality and Density of Development - sets out the

criteria to take into account in assessing whether a proposal represents a good design and layout.

3.3 Policies from the Adopted Huntingdonshire Local Development

Framework Core Strategy 2009 are relevant and viewable at http://www.huntsdc.gov.uk click on Environment and Planning then click on Planning then click on Planning Policy and then click on Core Strategy where there is a link to the Adopted Core Strategy.

CS1: “Sustainable development in Huntingdonshire” – all

developments will contribute to the pursuit of sustainable development, having regard to social, environmental and economic issues. All aspects will be considered including design, implementation and function of development.

CS3: “The Settlement Hierarchy” – identifies Elton as a

smaller settlement in which residential infilling will be appropriate within the built up area.

CS10: “Contributions to Infrastructure Requirements” –

proposals will be expected to provide or contribute towards the cost of providing infrastructure and of meeting social and environmental requirements, where these are necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms.

3.4 The following policies from the Draft Huntingdonshire Local Plan to

2036: Stage 3 (2013) are relevant:

Policy LP 1 “Strategy and principles for development” – Development proposals will be expected to amongst other matters: a. prioritise the use of previously developed land in accessible locations; c. make efficient use of land, buildings and infrastructure within existing settlements whilst preserving local character and distinctiveness;

http://www.huntingdonshire.gov.uk/localplanhttp://www.huntsdc.gov.uk/

e. maximise opportunities for use of public transport, walking and cycling; i. reduce water consumption and wastage, minimising the impact on water resources and quality and managing flood risk; and j. protect and enhance the historic environment and the range and vitality of characteristic landscapes, habitats and species.

Policy LP 2 “Contributing to Infrastructure Delivery” – A

proposal will be supported where it makes appropriate contributions towards the provision of infrastructure, and of meeting economic, social and environmental requirements.

Policy LP 3 “Communications Infrastructure” – A proposal

including homes, employment or main town centre uses will support and help implement the aims and objectives of the 'Connecting Cambridgeshire' broadband initiative.

Policy LP 10 “Development in Small Settlements” – A

proposal which is located within the built-up area of Elton will be considered on individual sustainability merits, taking into account whether it is in accordance with other policies of this Local Plan.

Policy LP 13 “Quality of Design” – A proposal will need to be

designed to a high standard based on a thorough understanding of the site and its context. A proposal for homes will be expected to demonstrate how they achieve the criteria of the ‘Building for Life’ standard or equivalent successor standards in order to achieve high quality development.

Policy LP 14 “Reducing Carbon Dioxide Emissions” – A

proposal will be supported where it can be demonstrated that viable efforts to reduce carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have been incorporated.

Policy LP 15 “Ensuring a High Standard of Amenity” – A

proposal will be supported where a high standard of amenity is provided for existing and future users and residents of both the surroundings and the proposed development.

Policy LP 17 “Sustainable Travel” – A proposal will be

supported where it is demonstrated that: a. opportunities are maximised for the use of sustainable travel modes; b. traffic volumes can be accommodated and will not cause significant harm to the character of the surrounding area; c. any adverse effects of traffic movement to, from and within the site including the effect of car parking is minimised; d. a clear network of routes is provided that provides connectivity and enables ease of access, to, around and within the proposal and with the wider settlement for all potential users, including those with impaired mobility; and e. safe and convenient pedestrian and cycle routes, including links to new and existing services, facilities, footpaths, bridleways and the countryside are provided where appropriate and if possible formalised as rights-of-way.

Policy LP 18 “Parking Provision” – A proposal will be

supported where it incorporates appropriately designed vehicle and cycle parking with a clear justification for the level of provision proposed, having regard to: a. the potential to increase the use of alternative transport modes including public transport, walking and cycling; highway safety; b. servicing requirements; c. the needs of potential users; and d. the amenity of occupiers of nearby properties.

Policy LP 28 ‘Biodiversity and Protected Habitats and

Species’ A proposal will be supported where it does not give rise to significant adverse impact on: protected species, priority habitats or species.

Policy LP 31 “Heritage Assets and their Settings” – A

proposal which affects the special interest or significance of any heritage asset or its setting must demonstrate how it will conserve, and where appropriate enhance, the asset.

Supplementary Planning Guidance -Huntingdonshire Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document 2007. -Huntingdonshire Landscape and Townscape Assessment Supplementary Planning Document 2007. 4. PLANNING HISTORY 4.1 1101156FUL Demolition of 2 metal sheds. Conversion, renovation

and extension of 2 redundant stone barns to 2 dwellings with garden and communal parking areas. Granted permission August 2011. Approved plans attached.

4.2 1101157CAC Demolition of 2 metal sheds (1 directly behind Potters

Cottage and the other on the back boundary of the site behind a 2-storey barn). Granted consent in August 2011.

4.3 1202030FUL Extension to and conversion of farm buildings to form

dwelling relating to east part of site of 1101156FUL. Granted permission March 2013. Approved plans attached.

4.4 1202031FUL Proposed detached dwelling following demolition of

steel barn relating to east part of site of 1101156FUL. Withdrawn March 2013.

5. CONSULTATIONS 5.1 Elton Parish Council –Object and make the following comments

(copy attached). 1. Approval was granted for 2 dwellings utilising the original historic stone buildings on the site. Now all the stone buildings are being amalgamated into a single very large dwelling and further consent sought for an additional very large dwelling on the site. The effect of this is to compromise the historic form of the traditional farmyard by sub-dividing it in a manner which detracts from the historic building form and arrangement and thus the character and appearance of the conservation area.

2. The size of the proposed dwelling on a limited site means there is a very small garden in relation to the size of the dwelling and no space to turn vehicles entering and leaving the site. Given the area of historic farmyard available this is not acceptable. 3. The Parish Council have, in previous applications, raised concerns about the approval of blue slate and artificial slate on new buildings in the conservation area. The traditional building materials up to 1800 were solely longstraw thatch and collyweston slate. Only in the 19th c pantiles and post the 1850's, welsh and cornish slate were introduced. On this application the proposal is to use artificial blue slate. Artificial slates are entirely unacceptable. For a building of this status and prominence, at the very least Bradstone cotswold stone slates should be required and the parish council notes that in the neighbouring villages of Apethorpe, Nassington and Longthorpe, longstraw thatch has been used for large new dwellings. Therefore, should this application be approved, the parish council strongly recommend that a planning condition is imposed, requiring details of materials to be subsequently approved and making clear that artificial slate or natural blue slate from the uk (or more likely Brazil or China) are unacceptable.

5.2 CCC Highways – No objection subject to conditions 5.3 CCC Archaeology: No objection subject to archaeology condition. 5.4 HDC Environmental Protection Officer: Recommend approve

subject to contamination condition. 6. REPRESENTATIONS None received. 7. SUMMARY OF ISSUES 7.1 The application follows the recent sale of the yard after consent was

granted to demolish metal sheds and planning permission was granted for the formation of two dwellings, entailing the conversion and extension of the two main old buildings into separate dwellings. Rather than implement the permission (1101156FUL) for the conversion of the buildings into 2 dwellings, the new owner has altered the layout of the plots and obtained permission to retain both old buildings on the western plot as one dwelling (1202030FUL) and proposes a new build house on the site the subject of this application.

7.2 The main issues to consider are the principle of the development, the

design/ impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, impact on the setting of any Listed Buildings and other heritage assets, residential amenity, highway safety and impact on biodiversity.

Principle 7.3 The main body of the site lies within the built up area of the village

and a small part of the rear garden, which extends a short distance

onto the field, has previously been approved for use as garden land as part of approved application 1101156FUL.

7.4 Having regard to Policy CS3 of the Core Strategy, the characteristics

of the site and its surroundings and also the previous approval 1101156FUL, the proposal for a residential development is considered to be acceptable in principle, subject to other material considerations which are addressed below.

Design and impact on the character and appearance of the Conservation Area or other heritage assets 7.5 The plot is vacant and although the recent clearance of the

agricultural buildings has resulted in attractive views of the elevated church from Middle Street, it would be unreasonable to resist the obscuring of these views by the new dwelling given the existing permission for a dwelling on the site.

7.6 Although the site is part obscured by surrounding buildings, it is

visible from several points within the Conservation Area including Middle Street, School Lane and the rear of the site. The proposed building is considered to be of acceptable siting, form and scale. The scale and design of the building complements the farmyard character of this site and the scheme will relate satisfactorily to its surroundings including the threshing barn/approved dwelling on the adjoining plot to the west.

7.7 The scheme will ensure the agricultural connections of this village

and diversity of building types are not lost from the character and appearance of the Conservation Area given the following considerations. The slightly lower height of the new building compared to the historic threshing barn helps to reinforce the focus of the grouping on the threshing barn. The arrangement of openings will not appear overly domestic but fitting to the agricultural connotation of the building. The large central opening seeks to mirror the large central opening seen in the adjacent historic threshing barn (which is being converted). The open cart shed to the side is considered to be in keeping with the scheme. The north elevations and east elevations will not be seen in their entirety due to the nature of surrounding level changes and presence of other buildings, however, the simplicity in the roofscape is important and it is considered that this has been achieved.

7.8 The south elevation will be seen from within the Conservation Area

across the open ground/fields to the south and from School Lane (near the school). The proposed width of the south gable end means that it would be visible from these views but on balance no objection is raised to this scale. The design of the rear gable avoids appearing similar to that of a domestic arrangement and so complements the agricultural character of the site.

7.9 The proposed new build would have blue slate roof. The use of this

material on this new building is consistent with the material approved for new build elements under the extant permission. By virtue of this no objection is raised to its use here. An alternative Collyweston like material is viewed to be a desirable roofing material but cannot, in the

view of Officers, be insisted upon given what has previously been approved.

7.10 The existing front boundary wall is to be retained and is only to be

altered via the infilling of an existing staircase to the western end of the wall. This is considered to be acceptable as it ensures that views of the site from the streetscene are preserved.

7.11 The proposal entails the erection of an enclosure between the back

gardens of the two plots. In order to ensure that the proposal would preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area and to enable the manoeuvring area to be provided (as stated below) then additional landscaping details will need to be secured via condition.

7.12 The proposal seeks the erection of a 2m boundary wall between unit

2 and the rear outbuilding. Officers have no objections to this arrangement.

7.13 The adjoining buildings on the yard are not listed but are attractive

heritage assets under the provisions of the NPPF given that they are considered to have a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions, because of historic interest. Due to their design and materials the buildings make a positive contribution to the character of the Conservation Area and reinforce the rural locality of the village.

7.14 The Parish Council objections to the scheme are noted but the

proposed dwelling is considered to fit in well with the adjoining buildings and to complement the farmyard character. It is agreed that the subdivision of the central courtyard would be out of keeping and so conditions can be imposed to secure the retention of this space without enclosures. It is acknowledged that the private amenity space would be relatively small but it is considered that the garden is adequate and, given the lack of any uniformity in garden sizes within the vicinity, that it would be unreasonable to refuse the application on this basis.

7.15 The applicant refers to blue slate not an artificial slate and a condition

can be imposed to secure a suitable appearance. The conservation officer has no objections to the use of natural slate on this building.

7.16 The development is therefore considered to have special regard to

the setting of the nearby listed buildings by preserving their settings and the proposal preserves the character of the farmyard and the Conservation Area. The most important features of the yard are retained and the proposed design is considered to be of an acceptable standard.

Residential amenity 7.17 The proposal will offer adequate amenities for the occupiers of the

new unit. The shared access and proximity to the activity of the converted buildings are not considered to be unduly harmful.

7.18 The building will be bulky and cause some shadowing of the

courtyard and threshing barn unit but the overshadowing impact is not

considered to be unduly harmful and the proposal is not therefore considered to be unduly overbearing on the occupiers of the threshing barn unit.

7.19 The scheme has been designed with limited first floor windows and

therefore the proposal is not considered to result in any adverse overlooking such that it would compromise the amenity of nearby occupants.

7.20 The proposal has been designed to limit height and bulk near the

back of Potters Cottage and therefore the proposal is not considered to be unduly overbearing nor would it result in significant overshadowing of that property.

7.21 The site and therefore the building will be at a lower level than

Mulberry House. Therefore the proposal will not be unduly overbearing nor would it result in significant overshadowing of that property, subject to precise level details which can be confirmed by condition.

7.22 It is concluded that this proposal will not have a significant detrimental

impact on residential amenity by reason of overlooking, overshadowing or being overbearing.

Impact on highway safety and parking 7.23 The proposal would use an existing access from a C class road. This

access has historically been used by agricultural vehicles. The access is below the required standard in terms of the width and pedestrian visibility but is acceptable in view of the former use and previous permission for two dwellings.

7.24 There is a broad footway between the entrance and the road, which

means that pedestrians are likely to be walking away from the wall and hence will be more visible from the entrance. Pedestrian activity is likely to be low, as will vehicular movements in and out of the site, so the widening of the existing access would be unjustified. The retention of the walls either side of the access contributes to the character and appearance of the area.

7.25 There is plenty of vehicle parking and manoeuvring space so cars

can enter and leave in forward gear although the amended landscaping details (which are suggested above to be secured by condition) must be altered to enable the turning shown on the tracking details to be undertaken.

7.26 The previous permission included a condition to ensure that any gate

to the highway shall open inwards and not outwards. It is considered that this need not be repeated as the applicant advises that no gates are proposed and also a condition can remove permitted development rights within the meaning of The Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 for enclosures and address all new boundary details for visual reasons.

7.27 The proposed development is considered to be acceptable in

highway safety and parking terms.

Biodiversity 7.28 An ecology report which particularly considered bats in the old

buildings was submitted with the applications relating to the conversion of the existing buildings but is considered to not be required with this new-build application.

7.29 The proposed development is considered to have no adverse impact

on protected species and provides an opportunity to enhance biodiversity for example with indigenous rear boundary landscaping and this can be secured by condition.

Other matters 7.30 Potential contamination -the site may be contaminated and so it is

reasonable to apply a condition which can ensure that the potential contamination of the site is satisfactorily addressed.

7.31 Section 106 Obligations – a completed Unilateral Undertaking for bins

is awaited. 7.32 Archaeology - Cambridgeshire County Council seek a programme of

archaeological investigation, as their records indicate that the site lies in an area of high archaeological potential being within the historic core of Elton, north of the medieval All Saints' Church (HER No. MCB195), and east of the earthworks of Abbot of Ramsey's Manor (HER No. DCB203) and it is likely that important archaeological remains survive on the site and that these would be severely damaged or destroyed by the proposed development. However, it is considered that would be unreasonable to include such a condition now because the current proposal is similar to the scheme approved in 2011 as both entail a substantial new building, but no such condition was imposed in 2011

7.33 Water butts- the scheme does not include provision for water butts

but as this was not sought in 2011, it would be unreasonable to insist on this now.

Conclusion 7.34 Subject to the receipt of a completed Unilateral Undertaking relating

to refuse bins, the proposed development is considered to comply with the relevant national and local policy as: * the principle of the development is acceptable, * the proposal is of acceptable design and preserves the character of the farmyard and Conservation Area and has special regard to the setting of the nearby Listed Buildings and heritage assets, * the proposal is acceptable in terms of the impact on residential amenity. * the development is acceptable in highway safety and parking terms, * the development provides an opportunity to enhance biodiversity and * a condition can ensure that the potential contamination of the site is satisfactorily addressed.

7.35 In approving the application, the relevant guidance and policies were

identified as H31 En2 En5 En6, En8 En9 En20 En22 and En25 of the

Huntingdonshire Local Plan 1995, HL5 of the Local Plan Alterations 2002, CS1 CS3 CS10 of the Adopted Core Strategy, and LP1 LP2 LP3 LP10 LP12 LP14 LP15 LP17 LP18 LP28 LP31 of the Draft Huntingdonshire Local Plan to 2036: Stage 3 (2013) and the guidance of the National Planning Policy Framework 2012 and Huntingdonshire Design Guide Supplementary Planning Document 2007, Huntingdonshire Landscape and Townscape Assessment (2007).

7.36 Taking national and local planning policies into account, and having

regard for all relevant material considerations, it is recommended that planning permission be granted subject to the receipt of a completed Unilateral Undertaking relating to refuse bins and to conditions to include the following.

7.37 Recommendation – Grant Permission subject to the receipt of a

completed Unilateral Undertaking relating to refuse bins and to conditions

8. RECOMMENDATION - APPROVAL subject to the receipt of a

completed Unilateral Undertaking relating to refuse bins and to conditions including:

02003 Time Limit (3yrs) Nonstand Contamination Nonstand Parking and turning Nonstand Sample stone panel Nonstand Details of slate, joinery, dormer windows, rainwater

goods, roof lights, flue and timber garage doors Nonstand Boundary treatments and landscaping Nonstand Landscape programme Nonstand Limit permitted development If you would like a translation of this document, a large text version or an audio version, please contact us on 01480 388388 and we will try to accommodate your needs. CONTACT OFFICER: Enquiries about this report to Sheila Lindsay Development Management Officer 01480 388247

To: DevelopmentControl[/O=HUNTS DISTRICT COUNCIL/OU=HDC/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=DEVELOPMENTCONTROL]; Subject: RE APPLICATION 120203FUL Sent: Mon 4/29/2013 9:49:31 PMFrom: Wendy GrayImportance: High

With reference to the above application would you please pass the Parish Councils to the relevant Planning Officer. Proposed erection of detached dwelling following demolition of steel barn, 3 Middle Street.The parish council wish to object to this application and make the following comments. 1. Approval was granted for 2 dwellings utilising the original historic stone buildings on the site. Now all the stone buildings are being amalgamated into a single very large dwelling and further consent sought for an additional very large dwelling on the site. The effect of this is to compromise the historic form of the traditional farmyard by sub-dividing it in a manner which detracts from the historic building form and arrangement and thus the character and appearance of the conservation area. 2. THe size of the proposed dwelling on a limited site means there is a very small garden in relation to the size of the dwelling and no space to turn vehicles entering and leaving the site. Given the area of historic famyard available this is not acceptable. 3. The parish council have, in previous applications, raised concerns about the approval of blue slate and artificial slate on new buildings in the conservation area. The traditional building materials up to 1800 were solely lonstraw thatch and collyweston slate. Only in the 19th c pantiles and post the 1850's, welsh and cornish slate were introduced. On this application the proposal is to use ARTIFICIAL BLUE SLATE. Artificial slates are entirely unacceptable. For a building of this status and prominence, at the very least Bradstone cotswold stone slates should be required and the parish council notes that inthe neighbouring villages of Apethorpe, Nassington and Longthorpe, longstraw thatch has been used for large new dwellings. THerefore, should this application be approved, the parish council strongly recommend that a planning condition is imposed, requiring details of materials to be subsequently approved and making clear that artifical slate or natural blue slate from the uk (or more likely Brazil or China) are unacceptable. Wendy GrayParish Clerk - Elton

Development Management Panelo © Crown copyright and database rights 2013 Ordnance Survey HDC 1000223221:2,500Scale = Date Created: 21/05/2013

LegendThe SiteConservation AreaListed Buildings

Application ref:1300505FULLocation: Elton

GREEN PAPERS FOLLOW

DEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT PANEL 17 JUNE 20131300505FUL1.pdfDEVELOPMENT MANAGEMENT PANEL 17 JUNE 2013