planning development control committee - 15 december 2009 · 10.6 the three casement windows are...

Planning Development Control Committee - 15 December 2009

Report Item 1

Application No: 09/94508/VAR Variation / Removal of Condition Site: Boldrewood House, Meerut Road, Brockenhurst, SO42 7TD

Proposal: Application to remove condition 10 of Planning Permission 82430

(Plot 2) to retain windows as built with clear glazing

Applicant: Dr R Nurse

Case Officer: Deborah Slade

Parish: BROCKENHURST

1. DISTRICT/BOROUGH: New Forest District Council 2. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Contrary to Parish Council view.

3. DEVELOPMENT PLAN DESIGNATION

Flood Zone Defined New Forest Village Conservation Area

4. PRINCIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

DW-E1 General development criteria (page 57) NF-E1 Control of development (in the New Forest) (page 135)

5. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received

6. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS

Brockenhurst Parish Council: object to the removal of the condition as they feel it should be constructed in accordance with the original conditions of the permission.

7. CONSULTEES

No consultations required 8. REPRESENTATIONS

No representations received.

1

9. RELEVANT HISTORY: 9.1

Retention of re-surfaced driveway (93564) approved without conditions on 31 December 2008

9.2 2 houses; demolition of existing; new access (82430) approved subject to legal agreement on 15 August 2005

10. ASSESSMENT

10.1 This infill dwelling was implemented as the first part of the permission for 2 houses granted in 2005. It lies within the Defined Village of Brockenhurst and the Conservation Area. The permission for the dwelling was granted subject to a planning condition which states: "The first floor windows on the south-east elevation of the approved building on Plot 2 shall at all times be glazed with obscured glass and shall either be a fixed light or hung in such a way as to prevent the effect of obscure glazing being negated by reason of opening". The reason for the condition was “to safeguard the reasonable privacy of the neighbouring property in accordance with Policy DW-E1 of the adopted New Forest District Local Plan”.

10.2 The dwelling has been constructed with four clear-glazed rooflights at first floor level and three square casement windows which are presently covered with obscure film but are fully opening. There is a mezzanine level staircase window but this is not considered to be a first floor window therefore it is not governed by this condition.

10.3 The key issue for consideration is whether the first floor windows cause significant overlooking of the neighbouring properties.

10.4 Do the first floor windows result in significant overlooking? The two houses which are most likely to be potentially affected by the proposal are Old Orchard and Old Oak, two semi-detached houses which are 15m to the rear of the windows.

10.5 When looking out of the rooflights, no direct view of these adjacent properties is obtainable. The rooflights are at head-height (circa 1.7m) and afford views of the sky and rooftops. Even if an attempt is made to view into the windows or private curtilages of the adjacent properties, this is not possible. Therefore it is considered that leaving the glazing of the rooflights unobscured would not result in any detriment to the amenity of the neighbouring properties.

2

10.6 The three casement windows are also at head-height (circa 1.7m). They are small in scale (40cm x 40cm each) and are presently covered with obscure-glazed film. The application is not explicit that this film would remain, therefore the application should be considered on the effects should this film be removed, and should the glazing in the windows be clear. When viewing out of these windows, when they are open, no clear views into the rooms or private curtilages of the neighbouring properties arepossible. The view obtainable of the neighbouring elevations is slightly clearer than through the rooflights, but the windows are not considered to cause significant overlooking for the following reasons:

The windows provide light to the landing of the property, which is not a primary habitable room;

The windows are small and fairly high-level which lessens the potential for direct views out of them;

There are trees and a close boarded fence between the curtilages of the two properties. The fence is approximately 1.8 - 2m high. The trees are protected by Conservation Area status. They are also agreed for retention on the approved landscaping plan for the site. These further obscure views of the neighbouring site.

Most of the windows which are visible on the neighbouring properties do not light habitable rooms. Two are obscurely glazed, one illuminates a staircase, and no clear views into the windows or gardens is obtainable.

10.8 No objections have been received from the inhabitants of these neighbouring properties.

10.9 A clearer view of the neighbouring properties is obtainable from the mezzanine level window, which is permitted. Therefore no enhanced level of overlooking or loss of privacy to the neighbouring properties is considered to occur because of the clear glazing of these first floor windows.

10.10 Overall it is therefore concluded that the windows that are in place do not cause significant overlooking of the neighbouring properties and because of this the condition is not considered to be necessary. There is very little scope to add any further first floor windows to the rear elevation of this dwelling and as such it is not considered that any substitute condition is required.

11. RECOMMENDATION

Condition 10 of planning permission 82430 be deleted.

3

Date: 02:12:09

2009

© Crown copyright. All rights reserved New Forest National Park Authority. Licence no. 1000114703

New Forest National Park AuthoritySouth Efford House, Milford Road, Everton, SO41 0JD

Tel: 01590 646600 Fax: 01590 646666

Item: 1

SCALE: 1:1250

Ref: 09/94508/VAR

Dolphins

The Brambles

The

Cattle

GridCattle

Grids

MEERUT ROAD

44

3Marden

Paddock

Dreva

Courtyard

3

Close

Marden

Lodge

Cattle

Grid

1

Oak Lodge

OrchardOld

Old

Oak

CattleGrid

Tall Trees

Marden

Cottage

Drain

BUTTS PADDOCK

LB

FS

14.3m

2

27

Marden Reeds

Cottage

Thorndon

1

Little

Oaks

Issues

Butts

Cottage

Cottage

Coridon

Highway

CottageCourtyard

Drain

11

15

South Marden

Crill

Cotta

ge

Hera

ld

Wes

tville

El Sub Sta

Te Whari

Dunedin

1

St Andrews

Cott

Hope

The Hurdles

OBER ROAD

Woodside

PoundLittle

Heathview

1

3

Collins Cotts

MeerutCottage

LodgeKnightwood

Wainsway

Casalinda

Knightwood Court

St Anne'sCatholicChurch

4


Report Item 2

Application No: 09/94583/FULL Full Application Site: Copythorne Lodge, Romsey Road, Copythorne, Southampton, SO40

2PB

Proposal: Two storey outbuilding

Applicant: Mr & Mrs Hatch

Case Officer: Paul Hocking

Parish: COPYTHORNE




Conservation Area


DW-E23 New development in Conservation Areas (page 70) NF-H5 Outbuildings in the New Forest (page 145)

5. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received


Copythorne Parish Council: Recommend refusal: The design is considered ostentatious for a garage. The proposal for incidental residential use on the first floor is not in keeping with what is essentially a garage development.

7. CONSULTEES

7.1 Environmental Services - Conservation Area: Recommend permission: The proposed new garage is sensibly positioned to the side of the house near to the old stables, with rendered walls and a natural slate roof - in keeping with the house.

5

8. REPRESENTATIONS 8.1 None received

9. RELEVANT HISTORY: 9.1 Two storey outbuilding (94280) withdrawn on 7 September 2009.

9.2 Demolition of outbuilding (Conservation Area Consent to

Demolish) (94584) currently under determination - item 3 on this agenda.

10. ASSESSMENT

10.1 The application site is approached via a gravel track that rises to a plateau where there is a substantial dwelling and a two-storey outbuilding. The site is lined with trees and is mature in character. There are no immediately adjacent residential properties.

10.2 The proposal relates to a replacement outbuilding. The building would have a length of 10.9 metres and height to ridge of 5.3 metres. The materials would match the existing dwelling.

10.3 The key issues for consideration are to ensure that:

The development would be appropriate to the existing curtilage and incidental to the use of the dwelling; and

The development would preserve the character and appearance of the Forest North-East Conservation Area.

10.4

Would the development be appropriate to the existing curtilage and incidental to the use of the dwelling? It is considered that the location of the outbuilding would be appropriate to the existing dwelling and its curtilage; it would not conflict with surrounding tree cover. It would replace an existing two storey outbuilding and although it would have a slightly larger footprint, the spread of development in itself would not be harmful. The design, scale and siting of the outbuilding follow pre-application advice following the earlier withdrawal. Although it has some domestic characteristics it is still a fairly unassuming building and is not considered to be ostentatious. Through the use of a small counter roof the massing and impact of the building would be reduced. The height to ridge of the building would be 5.3 metres.

10.5 Although when viewed in isolation the proposal reflects quite a large outbuilding with roof lights, given the substantial scale of the main dwelling it would readily appear (and function) as an incidental adjunct - which is the requirement of policy NF-H5. The dwelling itself has not been extended since 1 July 1982 and therefore even if the entire floor space of the outbuilding were

6

calculated as habitable accommodation, the building would remain in compliance with policy NF-H3. However, habitable accommodation is not proposed and therefore the standard outbuildings condition is recommended.

10.6 Would the development preserve the character and appearance of the Forest North-East Conservation Area? The siting of the garage would be considered to result in an appropriate composition (courtyard) of buildings within the site and would not be visible from the road or public vantage points. The development would therefore preserve the character and appearance of the Forest North-East Conservation Area subject to a condition to secure samples of materials.

10.7 Conclusion In conclusion, the proposal complies with policies NF-H5 and DW-E23 and is appropriate to the existing dwelling and its curtilage. The impact of the outbuilding is not harmful and would preserve the character and appearance of the conservation area. The recommendation is therefore to grant planning permission.

11. RECOMMENDATION

Grant Subject to Conditions Condition(s)

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. The building the subject of this permission shall only be used for purposes incidental to the dwelling on the site and shall not form habitable accommodation such as living rooms/bedrooms. Reason: To protect the character and appearance of the countryside in accordance with policies NF-H3 and NF-H5 of the adopted New Forest District Local Plan First Alteration.

3. No development shall take place until samples of the facing and roofing materials have been submitted to and approved in writing by the New Forest National Park Authority. Development shall only take place in accordance with the approved materials.

7

Reason: To ensure an acceptable appearance of the building in accordance with policy DW-E23 of the adopted New Forest District Local Plan First Alteration.

4. Before development commences, details of the means of disposal of surface water from the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the New Forest National Park Authority. Development shall only take place in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In order to ensure that the drainage arrangements are appropriate and in accordance with policy DW-E50 of the adopted New Forest District Local Plan First Alteration.

8

Date: 02:12:09

2009



Tel: 01590 646600 Fax: 01590 646666

Item: 2

SCALE: 1:1250

Ref: 09/94583/FULL

Copythorne Lodge Farm

Memorial

Scammels Farm

Moonacre

Overmoor

Oak House

Brackens

The

VICARAGE LANE

Track

Path (um)

FB

Lodge

Copythorne

St Mary's Church

Hall

9


Report Item 3

Application No: 09/94584/CAC Conservation Area Consent Site: Copythorne Lodge, Romsey Road, Copythorne, Southampton, SO40

2PB

Proposal: Demolition of Outbuilding (Conservation Area Consent to Demolish)

Applicant: Mr & Mrs R Hatch

Case Officer: Paul Hocking

Parish: COPYTHORNE




Conservation Area


DW-E24 Demolition in Conservation Areas (page 71)

5. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received


Copythorne Parish Council: Recommend refusal: The existing structure is a traditional building in keeping with the main property.

7. CONSULTEES

7.1 Environmental Services - Conservation Area: Recommend permission: Copythorne Lodge is a fairly imposing 19th Century house at the end of a drive. Adjacent, there are some remnants of an existing stable on site, in a generally dilapidated state, so it is not considered that its retention should be insisted upon.

8. REPRESENTATIONS 8.1 None received

10

9. RELEVANT HISTORY: 9.1 Two storey outbuilding (94583) currently under determination -

item 2 on this agenda.

10. ASSESSMENT

10.1 The application site is approached via a gravel track that rises to a plateau where there is a substantial dwelling and a two-storey outbuilding. The site is lined with trees and is mature in character. There are no immediately adjacent residential properties.

10.2 Conservation Area Consent is sought to demolish the existing two storey outbuilding. Permission is also currently being sought for its replacement (94583), item 2 on this agenda.

10.3 The key issue for consideration is whether the building makes a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area.

10.4

Does the building make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area? The existing outbuilding likely provided some stabling but has since been left to deteriorate and has been partially demolished (before the designation of the conservation area). The building is not identified as being of local vernacular or cultural interest as part of the Forest North-East Conservation Area character appraisal.

10.5

The remnants of the building, although appearing to be structurally sound, now no longer exhibit any particular New Forest tradition in its design, construction methods or stock materials. The building is therefore not considered to make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area as it is not considered to reflect a form of intrinsic quality or historical connection to warrant its retention. This opinion is also expressed by the Authority's Conservation and Design Officer. There is no objection to its demolition from Environmental Services.

10.6 The recommendation is therefore to issue consent, particularly as a scheme for a replacement outbuilding is also recommended for permission.

11. RECOMMENDATION

Grant Subject to Conditions

11

Condition(s)

1. The works hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. To comply with Section 18 of the Town & Country Planning (Listed Buildings & Conservation Areas Act) 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

12

Date: 02:12:09

2009



Tel: 01590 646600 Fax: 01590 646666

Item: 3

SCALE: 1:1250

Ref: 09/94584/CAC

Copythorne Lodge Farm

Memorial

Scammels Farm

Moonacre

Overmoor

Oak House

Brackens

The

VICARAGE LANE

Track

Path (um)

FB

Lodge

Copythorne

St Mary's Church

Hall

13


Report Item 4

Application No: 09/94594/FULL Full Application Site: Woodpeckers Nursing Home, Sway Road, Brockenhurst, SO42 7RX

Proposal: Two-storey front extension

Applicant: Colten Care Limited






Defined New Forest Village


DW-E1 General development criteria (page 57) NF-E1 Control of development (in the New Forest) (page 135) NF-P5 Care homes on the defined New Forest villages (page 174) NF-E5 Design of new development in the New Forest (page 140)

5. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received


Brockenhurst Parish Council: Object as it would have a seriously detrimental impact on the amenity of neighbouring dwellings. Light pollution is already a problem and will increase. The space available for vehicles for turning will be reduced which will cause problems to emergency vehicles. The noise of vehicles is detrimental to neighbouring properties. The proposal would have an overbearing impact on the neighbours as the building would be closer to them. The area in front of the main entrance has flooded in the past.

7. CONSULTEES

7.1 Engineering & Land Drainage: (NFDC): No comments

14

8. REPRESENTATIONS

8.1 Three letters of representation received objecting on the grounds

of:

The development would be inappropriate for a rural village location within the Forest;

The development would add to the dominant presence of the care home in views from neighbouring properties

The massing of the extension is overbearing upon adjacent properties;

It would intensify the use of the site causing additional noise; The extension would cause parking problems and affect

turning circles for emergency vehicles; The extension would cause light pollution; Repeat applications are causing harassment to residents; The proposal would cause loss of privacy to neighbours.

9. RELEVANT HISTORY: 9.1 Three storey front extension (94008) refused on 10 July 2009

9.2 Three storey front extension; lift tower; cycle store (93637) refused

on 4 February 2009 (appeal for three storey front extension dismissed/appeal for lift tower and cycle store allowed 2 July 2009)

9.3 Lift; 2 dormer windows (92046) approved on 21 November 2007

9.4 Lift; second floor extension (91651) refused on 3 August 2007

9.5 Single storey extension at rear (76024) approved on 5 November 2002

10. ASSESSMENT

10.1 Woodpeckers Nursing Home is a substantial detached three storey building positioned within a spacious plot amounting to approximately 0.36 hectacres. The building is characterised by its steeply pitched gabled roofs and small flat roofed dormer windows. The rear (west), south and east (roadside) boundaries are screened by mature trees. Three residential properties adjoin the site, Pastures New and Woodpeckers Cottage to the North and Hunters Lodge to the South. Open fields adjoin the rear boundary.

10.2 This is one of two applications on this agenda to extend the property (see item 5). A number of applications have recently been made to extend the property, the majority of which have been unsuccessful; permission was granted for a modest extension in 2002 (north elevation) and for a cycle store in 2009. The building largely retains its original character, scale and

15

footprint. Two applications have been submitted recently for a three storey front extension. Both applications were refused. One appeal against refusal was submitted, but this was dismissed by the Planning Inspector.

10.3 An application has now been submitted for a two-storey front extension. Its design would be in-keeping with the main building, and in design terms it would not be considered out of keeping with the Area of Special Character within which it is sited. No first floor windows are proposed on the front elevation which addresses the issues of overlooking and loss of privacy to the adjacent dwellings, which was a previous reason for refusal. Rooflights are proposed for the sides of the extension but these would not be considered to directly overlook the adjacent properties, Woodpeckers Cottage and Pastures New.

10.4 The main issue left to consider is whether this extension would be 'overbearing' in the outlook from nearby properties.

10.5 Would the extension be overbearing? The extension would have a height of 10.4m to its highest point. There would be a minimum distance of 11.2m between the extension and the nearest dwelling, Woodpeckers Cottage. This was the same distance as was proposed in the previous twoapplications, though the ridge height of the extension in the current proposal would be 0.4m lower than the previously refused proposal. The Inspector concluded that the previous proposal would add to the dominant presence of the care home in views from the neighbouring properties, and that because of its height and proximity to the northern boundary, it would result in the building appearing unacceptably overbearing in the outlook from these adjacent properties.

10.6 Due to the reduction in height of the proposed extension, the resolution of the issue of overlooking, and the fact that the extension would not cause a direct loss of light to the neighbouring properties, it is considered that the reduced impact on the neighbouring properties would not be sufficient to justify the refusal of the application. The height of the proposed extension would be less than the distance between the extension and neighbouring properties.

10.7 As with previous applications, there is not considered to be any harmful effect on parking, trees or protected species.

10.8 Overall it is considered that the harmful impacts of the previous applications have been overcome to the extent that the overbearing effect alone is no longer significant upon the neighbouring properties.

16

11. RECOMMENDATION Grant Subject to Conditions Condition(s)


2. The external facing materials shall match those used on the existing building. Reason: To ensure an acceptable appearance of the building in accordance with policy DW-E1 of the New Forest District Local Plan First Alteration.

17

Date: 02:12:09

2009



Tel: 01590 646600 Fax: 01590 646666

Item: 4

SCALE: 1:1250

Ref: 09/94594/FULL

House

School

Gre

enaw

ay

B 30

55

EducationCentres

Form

by

Lind

enC

otta

ge

Eden Lodge

6Th

e Bu

ngalo

w

Woodpeckers

Hunters Lodge

Fairlawn

Robin

Cottage

1

Starlings

Colga

Ling

broo

k

19

Win

ters

prin

g

Five Oaks

LadywellStetchworth

Pine

Trees

2

Issues

Sink

s

Sinks

TATTENHAM ROAD

TCB

8

Pastures New

Brookfield

Brackenridge

Perses

Culverley Green

Brockenhurst C of EPrimary School

Foxwood

AcornCottage

Nursery

Surgery

Brookley

OakLittle

Barn

Farmhouse

OaktreeBarn

Barn

Timbercombe

WoodcuttersBarn

Woodpeckers Cottage

Amberlea

Brookwood

Path (um)

LB

18


Report Item 5

Application No: 09/94595/FULL Full Application Site: Woodpeckers Nursing Home, Sway Road, Brockenhurst, SO42 7RX

Proposal: Single-storey rear extension with roof alterations; first floor dormer

alterations; infill courtyard

Applicant: Colten Care Ltd








DW-E1 General development criteria (page 57) NF-E1 Control of development (in the New Forest) (page 135) NF-P5 Care homes on the defined New Forest villages (page 174) NF-E5 Design of new development in the New Forest (page 140) DW-E11 Areas of Special Character (page 63)

5. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received


Brockenhurst Parish Council: Recommend refusal; the plans are confusing (front window alterations should have been included on application 94594); proposed alterations to window will cause light pollution which would be harmful to neighbouring properties; proposed lantern light to the dining room will be intrusive towards the neighbouring property.

7. CONSULTEES

No consultations required

19

8. REPRESENTATIONS

8.1 Three letters of objection received from neighbouring residential properties raise the following concerns:

The site has already been overdeveloped as a result of previous applications.

The proposal is out of keeping with the existing property. Harmful impact towards neighbouring residential properties

(disturbance, noise and light pollution). Previous applications to extend the premises have been turned

down. Intensification of use of site will cause greater parking

problems

9. RELEVANT HISTORY: 9.1 Three storey front extension (94008) refused on 10 July 2009

9.2 Three storey front extension; lift tower; cycle store (93637)

refused on 4 February 2009 (appeal for three storey front extension dismissed/appeal for lift tower and cycle store allowed 2 July 2009)

9.3 Lift; 2 dormer windows (92046) approved on 21 November 2007

9.4 Lift; second floor extension (91651) refused on 3 August 2007

9.5 Single storey extension at rear (76024) approved on 5 November 2002

10. ASSESSMENT

10.1 As noted in the previous report, Woodpeckers Nursing Home is a substantial detached three storey building positioned within a spacious plot amounting to approximately 0.36 hectacres. The building is characterised by its steeply pitched gabled roofs and small flat roofed dormer windows. The rear (west), south and east (roadside) boundaries are screened by mature trees. Three residential properties adjoin the site, Pastures New and Woodpeckers Cottage to the North and Hunters Lodge to the South. Open fields adjoin the rear boundary.

10.2 A number of applications have recently been made to extend the property, the majority of which have been unsuccessful; permission was granted for a modest extension in 2002 (north elevation) and for a cycle store in 2009. The building largely retains its original character, scale and footprint.

10.3 This application seeks consent to add an infill extension to a small existing courtyard that is surrounded by the existing building, and a single storey rear extension. The existing flat roofed dormer to

20

the left of the north elevation would also be enlarged.

10.4 The courtyard to be infilled is 6m x 4.2m in area. The single storey rear extension would have a maximum height of 5.3m (2.3m to eaves) and a footprint of 8m x 2m. The height and width of the dormer window would remain the same, but it would project forward by an additional 0.7m (from 0.8m to 1.5m).

10.5 The key issues for consideration are:

The impact upon the character of the area (in the context of the Area of Special Character).

The impact upon the amenities of neighbouring residents.

10.5 Impact upon the character of the area

The modest footprint of the proposed extensions in relation to the existing property (which has not been significantly extended in recent years), their simple form and also the materials and detailing would ensure the extensions would appear appropriate and subservient to the existing building. The extensions would relate closely to the footprint of the existing building and would not significantly encroach towards the boundary with the neighbouring properties or any trees of significant amenity value. Taking account of the size of the plot, distance from the highway and the extent of boundary screening, it is considered that the proposed development would not be harmful to the spacious layout of the Area of Special Character and that there would be no conflict with the requirements of Policies NF-E5, NF-P5, DW-E1 and DW-E11 of the adopted New Forest District Local Plan.

10.6 Impact upon the amenities of neighbouring residents

Whilst concerns raised by the Parish Council and neighbouring residential properties are noted, it is considered that the proposed extensions would not lead to any increased loss of amenity through disturbance, light pollution or noise; there would be a distance of over 10 metres towards the closest neighbouring property (which is no closer than existing parts of the building). The dormer to be enlarged would not lead to any increased impact taking account of its distance (over 13 metres) from the boundary with the neighbour and the existence of similar windows elsewhere on the north elevation.

10.7 The proposed works would not lead to any significant increase in light pollution taking account of the extent of fenestration which already exists on the building. The proposal would not significantly increase the overall capacity of the premises or lead to any material increase in levels of activity or noise pollution. The site lies within the defined settlement boundary of Brockenhurst and Policy NF-P5 allows for the extension of care homes in principle.

21

11. RECOMMENDATION Grant Subject to Conditions Condition(s)


2. The external facing materials shall match those used on the existing building. Reason: To ensure an acceptable appearance of the building in accordance with policy DW-E1 of the New Forest District Local Plan First Alteration.

22

Date: 02:12:09

2009



Tel: 01590 646600 Fax: 01590 646666

Item: 5

SCALE: 1:1250

Ref: 09/94595/FULL

House

School

Gre

enaw

ay

B 30

55

EducationCentres

Form

by

Lind

enC

otta

ge

Eden Lodge

6Th

e Bu

ngalo

w

Woodpeckers

Hunters Lodge

Fairlawn

Robin

Cottage

1

Starlings

Colga

Ling

broo

k

19

Win

ters

prin

g

Five Oaks

LadywellStetchworth

Pine

Trees

2

Issues

Sink

s

Sinks

TATTENHAM ROAD

TCB

8

Pastures New

Brookfield

Brackenridge

Perses

Culverley Green

Brockenhurst C of EPrimary School

Foxwood

AcornCottage

Nursery

Surgery

Brookley

OakLittle

Barn

Farmhouse

OaktreeBarn

Barn

Timbercombe

WoodcuttersBarn

Woodpeckers Cottage

Amberlea

Brookwood

Path (um)

LB

23


Report Item 6

Application No: 09/94627/FULL Full Application Site: 1 The Paddock, Brockenhurst, SO42 7QU

Proposal: Two storey side extension; single storey rear extension with roof

terrace.

Applicant: Mr Finlay






Conservation Area Defined New Forest Village


DW-E1 General development criteria (page 57) NF-E1 Control of development (in the New Forest) (page 135) DW-E23 New development in Conservation Areas (page 70) NF-H3 Extensions to dwellings in the New Forest (page 144) NF-E5 Design of new development in the New Forest (page 140) DW-E8 Trees (page 60)

5. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received


Brockenhurst Parish Council: support the application in principle but object to the solar panels which will be visually intrusive in the Conservation Area,being visible from Brookley Road.

7. CONSULTEES

7.1 Environmental Services - Conservation Area: Whilst the design of this proposal is modern, the impact to the principal

24

elevation to Brookley Road is relatively modest especially in the context to the trees and the use of timber boarding, particularly given the character of the existing building. There are concerns with the extent of the proposal particularly when viewed from the west ie. the length of this blank flat roofed element along the property boundary.

7.2 Tree Officer::No objection subject to the submission of a plan

which clearly shows the installation of Heras protective fencing to prevent construction operations damaging the roots of the trees.

8. REPRESENTATIONS

8.1 Two letters received from neighbouring residents objecting on the

grounds that: the high balcony would infringe upon the privacy of the rest of

the residents of The Paddock; the development is out of character with the surrounding area,

in terms of design and materials.

9. RELEVANT HISTORY: 9.1

Single storey additions, extensions and alterations (65899) approved on 10 May 1999

9.2 Single storey additions, extensions and alterations (61756) approved on 29 October 1997

10. ASSESSMENT

10.1 1 The Paddock is a 1970s detached house with a gable to the front. It is set on a corner plot fronting onto Brookley Road, the main street through Brockenhurst. At the side of the dwelling runs The Paddock, a cul-de-sac consisting of three other similar detached houses as a backland development. The streetscene of Brookley Road comprises shop units to one side of 1 The Paddock, and traditional Victorian semi-detached houses to the other side. There is mature vegetation and trees to the boundaries of the site. The site is within the recently extended Brockenhurst Conservation Area.

10.2 The application follows pre-application advice and seeks consent for contemporary designed extensions and alterations to 1 The Paddock, to the front, side and rear of the dwelling. The site is within the Defined Village of Brockenhurst and as such there is no floorspace restriction.


impact upon the character and appearance of the conservation area;

25

impact upon neighbouring amenity; other considerations

10.4 Impact upon the character and appearance of the area

The main issue to consider is the impact upon the Conservation

Area. The existing house is not of traditional character, unlike much of the surrounding architecture. Its form is suburban, though its Oak boarding and simple design give to a degree a rural character to the building. It is set back within the streetscene and is less prominent than the more traditional, surrounding properties.

10.5 10.6

Whilst the design of this proposal is modern, the impact to the principal elevation to Brookley Road is relatively modest especially in the context to the trees and the use of timber boarding, particularly given the character of the existing building. The Conservation Officer has raised concerns with the extent of the proposal particularly when viewed from the west ie. the length of this blank flat roofed element along the property boundary. However this does not impact significantly on the appearance of the building in the conservation area and is considered acceptable in terms of neighbour impact

10.7 The Parish Council have no concerns with the design overall, but object due to the proposed solar panels. These would be visible from the front of the property and would need planning permission due to the angle at which they would be sited. They are considered to be set back sufficient to not be of concern in terms of visual impact and would contribute to the use of renewable energy for the dwelling in line with PPS1. For this reason the solar panels would not cause visual intrusion within the context of the modern dwelling upon which they would be sited. They could not be practicably re-orientated as they would need to face south to benefit from maximum solar gain.

10.8 Impact upon neighbouring amenity

In terms of neighbouring amenity, the proposed first floor side windows would illuminate a stairwell and a bathroom, and as such the privacy of the neighbouring property 78 Brookley Road would be upheld. The extension on the western elevation of the dwelling would extend close to the boundary of the site, but would not spread over any greater footprint than the existing dwelling. The extension would be separated from the neighbouring property by a distance of 4.7m which is considered sufficient distance to prevent there from being an overbearing impact.

10.9 There are already first floor windows on the rear elevation of the property, and whilst the proposed first floor window and roof terrace on the north elevation would be marginally closer to the

26

other houses in The Paddock to the rear, there would still be a distance of over 25m between the closest part of the extension and the frontage of these dwellings. Therefore no significant overlooking or loss of privacy would result from the proposal. Two neighbouring residents have concerns about the proposed balcony on the back of the house, but this would not overlook any private amenity space of neighbouring properties, rather it would afford views of their public frontages from a distance of over 25m away.

10.10 Extending in such close proximity to the existing Cypress tree in the front garden would not normally be recommended, but the proposed extension would not encroach any closer upon this tree than the existing extension, and therefore it would be difficult to refuse consent for the proposals due to proximity to trees. The applicants have indicated the retention of most of the trees on the site, and in order to achieve this there must be some protective fencing installed, especially to ensure that storage of equipment does not cause damage to the roots of the trees in the front garden.

10.11 Other considerations

Access and parking would remain unaffected as the garage and access would stay in a similar location to the existing.

10.12 Conclusion

It is considered that the development would not be harmful to and would preserve the character and appearance of the Conservation Area, and that the development would not be harmful to the amenity of neighbouring properties.

11. RECOMMENDATION



2. Unless otherwise submitted to and agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the external facing materials shall match those stated on the approved plans and application forms. Reason: To ensure an acceptable appearance of the building in accordance with policies DW-E1 and DW-E23 of the New Forest

27

District Local Plan First Alteration.

3. The development hereby approved shall not take place until the arrangements to be taken for the protection of the trees and hedges on the site (as identified for protection in the approved plans) have been submitted to and approved in writing by the New Forest National Park Authority, and unless the details thus approved have been implemented. Reason: To safeguard trees and natural features which are important to the visual amenities of the area, in accordance with policy DW-E8 of the New Forest District Local Plan First Alteration.

28

Date: 02:12:09

2009



Tel: 01590 646600 Fax: 01590 646666

Item: 6

SCALE: 1:1250

Ref: 09/94627/FULL

74

Drain

Ford

THE

BROOKLEYROAD

RISE

GP

FB

14.0m

Cottage

The

Hotel

Park

Car

SWAY

RO

AD

FS

15.8m

Brookley

Club

LittleLow Hatch

Kia-

Ivyholme

Court

Stand

Borrowfield

Hayters

ESS

1 to 9

DigbyBrock

Ora

6

LodgeBrookley

Elmleigh

1 to 5

House

CornerSyds

Court

Sandpiper

FIBBARD

SR

OAD

2

Samphire

1 to

4

Cottage

Hall

Pavilion

PC

Surgery

Meerut

Green

Bowling

Car Park

Issues

PADDOCK

THE

FB

Forest Oaks

Blandford

1

New House

Anton

Lodge

3

(Old People's Home)

Cattle

Grid

swimming pool

1

3

76

2

49

1

Courtyard Mews

Surgery

Kinabalu

CG

53

51

Kilimani

Ross

4

59

57

78

The

Watersplash

Hotel

61

Silver

Howe

Riverside

Overbrook

Epsilon M

u

Lodge

Richmond

Brocket Green

GridCattle

GridCattle

Sks

Cottage

Woodlands

Brook

Cat

tle

HouseCulverly

Brock Place

Hous

e

Grove

Hous

eOakCops

e

Wat

ers

Runn

ing

Badg

ers

Brook Ho

House

Field

Watersplash

63a 63

Hammer

Westbrook

Prestolee

65

Blue Cedar

84

Grid

Grid

Cattle

FB

8 to

15

1 to

7

5423a

56

25

ElSub Sta

27

64

3

33

PO

1

31

WIDE LANE CLOSE

TCB

FB

14.6m

29


Report Item 7

Application No: 09/94632/FULL Full Application Site: The Willows, 72 Lyndhurst Road, Ashurst, Southampton, SO40 7BE

Proposal: Change of Use of Ground Floor as Dental Surgery and Holistic

Therapy; Use of First Floor as Residential

Applicant: Dr F Faizi

Case Officer: Liz Young

Parish: ASHURST AND COLBURY






DW-E1 General development criteria (page 57) DW-T8 Access, safety and traffic management requirements (page 100) NF-P4 Health and social service facilities in the New Forest (page 174)

5. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received


Ashurst and Colbury Parish Council: Recommend permission; access (which is near a bus stop) should be checked, along with the level of disabled access.

7. CONSULTEES

7.1 Highway Authority (HCC): Recommend refusal for the following reasons: Inadequate parking provision; the proposal would therefore

encourage parking of vehicles on the adjacent highway, which would add to the hazards of road users.

30

Inadequate provision of cycle parking. Use of the vehicular access would potentially cause undue

interference with the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway.

7.2 Environmental Protection (NFDC):: Recommend that the following

information should be obtained in order to assess potential loss of amenity to neighbouring residents (and future occupants of first floor accommodation):

Details of equipment to be used in each room and the likely noise generation.

Assessment of noise emanating from the premises (report should be carried out in accordance with BS412:1997)

Details of noise levels transmitted internally between the Dental / Holistic Therapy area to the residential accommodation above.

8. REPRESENTATIONS

8.1 One letter of objection received from the occupant of 74 Lyndhurst

Road raises the following concerns:

Increased noise levels generated by dentist surgery would be harmful to the amenity of the occupants of the adjoining property.

Increased numbers of traffic movements would be detrimental to the area.

Would need to clarify whether the applicant would seek to occupy the premises or whether it would be let out separately.

8.2 One letter received from New Forest Access For All;

Access should be flat and level without raised thresholds to

allow easy access for wheelchairs and scooters. Doorways should be wide enough and space provided for

turning circles.

9. RELEVANT HISTORY: 9.1 Change of use of ground floor as dental surgery and holistic

therapy; use of first floor as residential (94427) withdrawn 7 October 2009

9.2 Lawful Development Certificate (existing) for use as bed and breakfast establishment (60182) granted 28 January 1998

10. ASSESSMENT

10.1 72 Lyndhurst Road is a substantial detached two storey dwelling positioned within a rectangular plot amounting to approximately 1000 square metres. The property lies on flat ground in built-up

31

surroundings in the defined settlement boundary of Ashurst. The plot fronts onto Lyndhurst Road (an "A" classified highway) and currently benefits from four formalised parking spaces associated with the existing bed and breakfast use (which has been formalised as a result of a previous certificate of lawful use, reference 60182). The relevant certificate enables the existing property to let up to three rooms for bed and breakfast at any one time. A large detached garage with annexe lies immediately north east of the dwelling. The site is adjoined on three sides by residential development and lies in close proximity to a bus stop, train station and a local shop.

10.2 Consent is sought to change the use of the existing ground floor of the property to a dentist surgery. The first floor would continue to be occupied as residential accommodation. No changes are proposed to the layout of the site or the exterior of the building (with the exception of de-lineating an existing parking space for disabled use and the removal of a garden pond). The ground floor as proposed would consist of two treatment rooms, a waiting room, kitchen areas, sun lounge, hallway, WC and sterilising room. The garage / annexe would remain unaltered. The opening hours would be between 8 am and 7 pm on Mondays to Fridays and between 8 am and 1 pm on Saturdays. One full time employee and one part time employee would be associated with the proposed use.

10.3 This application remains identical to the earlier submission (reference 94427) which was ultimately withdrawn following concerns relating to the sale of the property (the applicant being the prospective purchaser).


The extent to which the proposal would satisfy the requirements of Policy NFL-Pa of the adopted New Forest District Local Plan.

The impact of the change of use upon the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway.

The impact the use (and associated vehicle movements) would have upon the amenity of neighbouring residential properties.

10.5 Accessibility and community benefit

Policy NF-P4 permits the introduction of new health facilities

within defined villages (such as Ashurst) as long as it can be demonstrated that they are sited in order to maximise opportunities for access by public transport. The proposed use should also be of clear and direct benefit to the community where the development is proposed. There is no existing dentist surgery within Ashurst (the nearest being in Totton which is at full capacity) and the proposal would evidently benefit residents in the immediate vicinity. Furthermore the site lies immediately adjacent

32

to a bus stop and within approximately 600 metres of the train station. The proposal would therefore satisfy the requirements of Policy NF-P4 of the adopted New Forest District Local Plan, First Alteration.

10.6 Highway, parking and access considerations

As noted by the Highways Officer, there are two concerns which relate to the impact of the proposal upon the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway. The most fundamental of these concerns is the potential for the increased use of the vehicular access to lead to increased risk of road accidents, particularly when taking account of the existing visibility splays. Secondly, it is noted that the level of parking provision (which is considered to be low in relation to the level of the proposed use) would encourage parking on the adjacent highway. This would interrupt the free flow of traffic, impacting upon highway safety. The Highway Officer also notes that no provision is made for the parking of cycles within the site. The proposal would therefore be in direct conflict with the requirements of Policies DW-T8 and DW-T9 of the adopted New Forest District Local Plan, First Alteration.

10.7 Any subsequent efforts to seek to address these concerns by providing a total of eight parking spaces and widening the access could potentially lead to a harmful impact upon the overall character and appearance of the site and would be at odds with the wider street scene. For this reason alone, the application is recommended for refusal.

10.8 The amenity of neighbouring residential properties

Whilst it is acknowledged that the nature of the proposed usewould lead to a degree of increased activity at the site, it is considered that the layout of the proposed ground floor along with its relationship with neighbouring properties would ensure that any associated impacts would not be harmful to the amenities of neighbouring residents; most of the building which faces the boundary with Number 74 Lyndhurst Road would be occupied by the waiting room and kitchen (the treatment room would be towards the front of the property).

10.9 Any potential harm towards Number 78 Lyndhurst Road would be mitigated by the distance between the properties and the existing garage between them. Furthermore, the location of the site in relation to the busy main road and nearby commercial premises would suggest that the increase in activity on the site would not be harmful. Although there might be scope to establish the nature of dentistry equipment to be installed in the premises (as suggested by Environmental Health), it would not be reasonably enforceable to restrict any subsequent change or upgrade. It is therefore considered that there would be no conflict with the requirements

33

of Policy DW-E1 of the adopted New Forest District Local Plan.

10.10 Taking account of the existing use of the premises for bed and breakfast accommodation along with the location of the site within the defined settlement boundary it would not be reasonable or necessary to impose any form of restriction upon the occupancy of the remaining residential accommodation; there would be no conflict with local planning policy if it were occupied independently of the dentist use, particularly as no additional residential unit is proposed. On the issue of disabled access, this is a matter which is covered by Building Regulations and is not a planning policy requirement.

10.11 Conclusion The proposal would be harmful to highway safety and interfere with the free flow of traffic, due to inadequate on-site parking facilities and the increased use of the existing vehicular access. Also there would be inadequate provision made for cycle parking within the site.

11. RECOMMENDATION

Refuse Reason(s)

1. Inadequate provision is made on the site for the parking of vehicles and the proposed development is therefore likely to result in the parking of vehicles on the adjacent highway, which would interrupt the free flow of traffic and thereby add to the hazards of road users at this point. This would conflict with Policy DW-T9 of the adopted New Forest District Local Plan, First Alteration.

2. Inadequate provision is made within the site for the provision of parking facilities for bicycles and the proposal would therefore fail to meet the minimum standards set out within Appendix G7 (New Forest District Local Plan). The proposal would therefore fail to encourage travel to the site by sustainable transport and would be in direct conflict with Policy DW-T9 of the adopted New Forest District Local Plan, First Alteration.

3. The increased use of the existing vehicular access which would result from use of the property as a dentist surgery would cause undue interference with the safety and convenience of users of the adjoining highway. The proposal would therefore be contrary to Policy DW-E8 of the adopted New Forest District Local Plan, First Alteration.

34

Date: 02:12:09

2009



Tel: 01590 646600 Fax: 01590 646666

Item: 7

SCALE: 1:1250

Ref: 09/94632/FULL

17

15

18

6

NEW RO

AD

13

113

4

2

5

1

82

84

A 35

A 35

WO

OD RO

AD

TCB

LB

El Sub Sta

16

17 KNIGHTW

OO

D CLOSE

19.2m

24

13

20

12

14

1512

CLOSE

WO

OD RO

AD

KNIGHTW

OO

D

74

68

1a

1

8

6b6a

2

17

62

14

1715

916

1210

11

8

18

56

47

13

BOAKES

2

PLACE

35


Report Item 8

Application No: 09/94640/FULL Full Application Site: Paultons Park, Ower, Romsey, SO51 6AL

Proposal: Retention of Cobra Ride; Retention of Control Building, Catering

Kiosk and Photograph Booth.

Applicant: Mr R Mancey

Case Officer: Laura Harry

Parish: COPYTHORNE


Previous Committee consideration.


No specific designation


PP-1 Paultons Park (page 184) DW-E1 General development criteria (page 57) DW-E43 Control of pollution (page 85) DW-E15 Access for impaired or restricted mobility (page 64) DW-E49 River and coastal flooding (page 89) DW-E50 Drainage (page 90) DW-E36 Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and Ramsar sites (page 79) NF-E4 Landscape character of the New Forest (page 139) DW-E37 Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) (page 79) NF-TM10 Visitor attractions in the New Forest (page 159)

5. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received


Copythorne Parish Council: Recommend permission - contributees to the local economy and employment.

36

7. CONSULTEES

7.1 Environmental Protection (NFDC)::- No objection - no issues with noise. Should the Committee decide to approve the application, conditions are recommended: 1) The Cobra ride may only operate between 10.00 and 19.00 hours; 2) Remove permitted development rights.

7.2 Environment Agency: No objection 7.3 New Forest District Council Tourism Officer (NFDC):: No objection

- Paultons Park is an integral and essential component of the local visitor economy.

7.4 Natural England: No comments. 7.5 Highway Authority (HCC):: No objection - the introduction of new

rides is not anticipated to increase visitor numbers and vehicle parking is to be retained at the current level. There are subsequently no grounds to substantiate an objection based on an increase in vehicular traffic.

7.6 Landscape Officer:: No objection - the existing mature trees

visually screen the Cobra ride and its associated buildings, thus the visual impact of the Cobra ride is not harmful to the surrounding area.

8. REPRESENTATIONS

8.1 23 Letters of support have been received for the following

reasons:

noise is not intrusive and has not increased (less noticeable than the motorway)

rides are not visually offensive and are surrounded by trees no significant increase in traffic visitor numbers have not increased no adverse impact on surrounding area limited opening hours important local employer boost the local economy

8.2 One letter of objection received for the following reason:

impact on amenities of local residents

8.3 One comment received which does not relate to the planning

merits of the case.

9. RELEVANT HISTORY: 9.1 Proposed Change of Use to Amusement Park; retention of Cobra

37

and Edge rides; retention of control buildings; catering kiosk andphotograph booth (94285) refused 23 October 2009.

9.2

Application for a Certificate of Lawful Development for existing use of land as amusement park (94287) granted 20 October 2009.

10. ASSESSMENT

10.1 Site and background

Paultons Park is located at Ower, north west of Southampton and south west of Romsey. To the north of Paultons Park is Paultons Golf Club and to the east of the site are the villages of Wigley and Ower. Paultons Park is within a rural area, surrounded by woodland and bounded to the west by Cadnam River and to the north and east by a lake. Beyond the lake to the south east, and at a distance of 100m, are located several houses, including a Victorian terrace. Woodland and agricultural land to the south separates Paultons Park from the M27 motorway. The application site consists of an area of 0.45 hectares and its northern boundary abuts the existing amusement park (Lawful Development Certificate issued on the 20/10/2009 for the existing use of land as an amusement park - reference 09/94287).

10.2 This application follows a previous application to retain the Cobra and Edge rides (reference 09/94285) which was refused by the Committee on 20 October 2009 for a number of reasons. The Committee were told that following the introduction of the Edge ride early this year local residents had complained about noise from screams of children.

10.3 Consent is now sought to retain the Cobra ride and associated buildings. The application is neither seeking to retain the adjacent Edge ride, nor to obtain consent for a general ‘amusement park’ use. The application site (outlined in red) has been drawn tightly around the Cobra ride, catering kiosk, control building and photograph kiosk. The Cobra ride, catering kiosk, control building and photograph kiosk. The Cobra opened in 2006 and has a maximum height of 18 metres. The ride is constructed entirely of painted steel. The Cobra control building has a length of 29.6 metres, width of 10.3 metres and height of 6 metres. The Snake Pit (catering kiosk) has a length of 7.4 metres, width of 7.2 metres and height of 3.5 metres. The photograph kiosk has a length of 5.3 metres, width of 5.6 metres and height of 3.5 metres. The buildings are faced in timber painted blue and roofed with profile metal sheeting (appearance of tiles).

10.4 The key issues for consideration are: is the proposal acceptable in principle design, scale, layout and appearance

38

impact on residential amenities, in particular noise vehicular traffic visual impact impact on the natural environment accessibility flood risk other material planning considerations

10.5

Is the proposal acceptable in principle?

This proposal is to retain the Cobra ride and associated buildings. The site is set against the backdrop of an existing amusement park. The development would not impinge on the New Forest or surrounding countryside, the woodlands, lake or river. The development of the ride and associated buildings at Paultons Park are considered appropriate to its use as an amusement park (leisure park), complying with policy PP-1. Policy C1 of the Regional Spatial Strategy (South East Plan) gives high priority to conserving and enhancing land and its specific character within the New Forest National Park. The policy states “Proposals which support the economies … of the Park … will be encouraged provided that they do not conflict with the purposes for which the Park has been designated.” Policy TSR4 in The South East Plan also gives priority to "improving the quality of all existing attractions to meet changing consumer demands and high environmental standards in terms of design and access", supporting this comparatively small scale development at Paultons Park.

10.6

Design, scale, layout and appearance

The ride and buildings are considered to be sited appropriately, having a close physical and visual relationship with the existing amusement park. They are appropriate in scale and appearance to the amusement park. The size and shape of the site is dictated by the size and shape of the ride and its associated buildings. However, the control building is sited on the northern boundary of the site to be grouped with existing buildings. The materials, simple rectangular form and size of the buildings are typical of others within the amusement park, complying with policy DW-E1.

10.7

Impact on residential amenities

Atkins Ambient Noise Level Surveys, August Bank Holiday Weekend, 2009 assessed the significance of any noise directly related to the Edge and Cobra rides by closing the rides for periods to assess the noise effects of the Park without the rides in operation. The bank holiday weekend represented one of the likely busier periods of use and the prevailing wind direction requirement was satisfied throughout the majority of the three days. The survey concluded that "... noise associated with the operation of rides at Paultons Park, including Edge and Cobra, is

39

sporadically audible from near the southern boundary of Home Farm" (page, 3-1, para. 3.1). Crucially the report concludes that "... there is no measurable difference in noise level, or in duration of audible screams, whether or not these two rides are in use" (page, 3-1, para. 3.1). Fewer people ride the Cobra, with only four people per carriage and between two to three carriages on the track at any one time (maximum of 12 people), compared with a maximum of 40 people on the Edge. It can therefore be assumed that without the Edge the noise impact would be significantly less. Unlike the previous application no contrary information regarding noise has been submitted during the planning process and Environmental Protection do not object to the application stating that there are "no issues with noise".

10.8

Vehicular traffic

Visitor numbers have fluctuated between 2004 and 2008 (lowest attendance 448000 – highest 471000). The Cobra ride opened in the 2006 season and there was no discernible upturn in visitor numbers for that year. The retention of this ride is not anticipated to increase visitor numbers but, rather, to maintain the current levels. Having regard to visitor numbers and the fact that there is to be no increase in car parking capacity, the Highway Authority has commented there are no grounds to substantiate an objection based on an increase in vehicle movements. Subsequently there is no evidence to suggest that there would be an increase in air or noise pollution (as a result of traffic) which would cause an unacceptable loss of amenity, complying with policy DW-E43.

10.9

Visual impact

The top of the gantries of the Cobra ride can be seen above the tree tops when viewed from a distance, and in particular from the top of Bricky Lake Lane; the thick belt of trees visually screens the rest of the rides' structure. The visual impact of the Cobra ride from Bricky Lake Lane and elsewhere is not considered to be sufficiently intrusive to warrant a refusal. The development abuts the existing amusement park and would not adversely affect the distinctive landscape character of the New Forest, complying with policy NF-E4.

10.10

Impact on the natural environment

The development would not either alone or in combination with other plans or projects be likely to have a significant effect on the interest features of the New Forest Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Special Protection Area (SPA), Ramsar site, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), complying with policy DW-E36 and DW-E37.

40

10.11 Accessibility

The car parks are on generally level ground and include spaces for disabled people. Level access is available from the car park into the amusement park. Hard surfaced paths are provided on the application site providing level access to the ride, photograph booth and catering kiosks. Ramped access is available for disabled visitors allowing them access to the ride and Park employees are available at the ride to assist, complying with policy DW-E15.

10.12

Flood risk

The north west corner of the application site falls within Flood Zone 2. The Environment Agency have no objection to the proposal which would not cause or exacerbate flooding, complying with policy DW-E50.

10.13

Other material planning considerations

It is important to consider the type of development which could be constructed within the Amusement Park without planning permission under the General Permitted Development Order (GPDO) 1995. The GPDO, Part 28, Class A, A.1 (ii) would allow rides to be erected providing they would not exceed 25 metres in height, which the Cobra ride does not exceed. Accordingly the Cobra ride could be relocated to a site within the Amusement Park as defined by the boundary in the Lawful Development Certificate (reference 09/94287) without planning permission.

10.14

Comments on representations

Unlike the previous application to retain the Cobra and Edge rides; the majority (23 of 25) of letters received support the application to retain the Cobra ride and associated buildings. One letter of objection was received and relates to the impact on residential amenity and this issue has been addressed in the report. Whilst the earlier refusal is a material consideration, many of the previous objections were in relation to the impacts associated with the Edge rather than the Cobra.

10.15

Conclusion

The Cobra ride and associated buildings do not impinge on the New Forest or surrounding countryside, complying with policy PP-1. The ride and buildings are appropriate in terms of siting, scale, design and materials to Paultons Park and the surrounding area, complying with policy DW-E1. The development would not cause a nuisance or unacceptable loss of amenity in the surrounding area in terms of air or noise pollution, complying with policy DW-E43. The ride and buildings abut the existing Amusement Park and do not adversely affect the distinctive landscape character of

41

the New Forest, complying with policy NF-E4. The ride and buildings do not have a significant effect on SACs, SPAs or SSSIs, complying with policies DW-E36 and DW-E37. Consideration has been given to the needs of people with impaired mobility to access the rides, complying with policy DW-E15. The ride and buildings do not cause or exacerbate flooding, complying with policy DW-E50. For these reasons planning permission is recommended.

11. RECOMMENDATION


1. The development or any future development on this site shall not open on the site in connection with the approved use other than between the hours of 10 am and 6 pm. Reason: To safeguard the amenities of residential properties in the surrounding area in accordance with policy DW-E1 of the New Forest District Local Plan First Alteration.

2. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any re-enactment of that Order) no booths or stalls or plant or machinery otherwise approved by Class A of Part 28 of Schedule 2 to the Order shall be erected, installed or carried out without express planning permission first having been granted. Reason: To ensure that any future development would not have a detrimental impact to the amenities of nearby residential properties and the peaceful enjoyment of the wider area to comply with policies DW-E43 and DW-E1 of the New Forest District Local Plan First Alteration

42

Date: 03:12:09

2009



Tel: 01590 646600 Fax: 01590 646666

Item: 8

SCALE: 1:2000

Ref: 09/94640/FULL

Cadnam RiverGolf Course

Paultons Park

ETL

Play Area

Pond

Fn

16.5m

17.0m

15.5m

16.5m

Pond

Pond

Fn

Fn

PC

Path (um)

17.4m

43

planning development control committee - 15 december 2009 · 10.6 the three casement windows are...

Documents