type: full wardmygov.elmbridge.gov.uk/documents/s21834/planning application 20182476... · 6....

Application No: 2018/2476 Application Type:

FULL

Case Officer: Jennifer Margetts Ward: Claygate Ward

Expiry Date: 31/10/2018

Location: 6A High Street Claygate Esher Surrey KT10 0JG Proposal: Change of use from Premises in Light Industrial Use (B1c) to Residential

(C3), erection of a 1.5 storey dwellinghouse with single storey rear element which is set down from the existing ground level, cycle and bin store, associated parking and landscaping following demolition of existing buildings.

Applicant: Mr Mark Lawson Agent: Miss Amy Myer

LongView Planning Consultancy 6 Helix Court 7 Swanscombe Road London W11 4SU

Decision Level: If Permit – Sub-Committee If Refuse – Sub-Committee

Recommendation: Permit

Representations: 2 letters of objection were received raising the following summarised concerns:

Impact on the character of the Conservation Area The development should be no larger or higher than the existing buildings on the

site Loss of light Overlooking and Loss of privacy Overbearing/dominant impact Better use should be made of the space on the site as at least half of the available

space has been allocated to a driveway – there are no traffic issues with reversing from the site

The development would attach to the side wall of 1A High Street and would create the appearance of a semi-detached property

Two letters of representation were received from one property requesting the removal of the parapet wall from the proposed single storey rear element due to its visual impact. The applicant amended the proposed development and removed the parapet wall to address this concern. A further letter of representation was received confirming that this satisfied the requirements of the original letter as it removes the wall from the view of their property.

R e p o r t

Description

1. The application site is situated on the north-eastern side of High Street within the settlement area of Claygate. The site is set back from the highway behind the shops and dwellings fronting the highway. It is accessed via a shared access with Sims Cottages.

2. The site comprises a vacant Vehicle Repair Workshop with a single storey building which adjoins an existing two storey Mews House on the neighbouring site. The land to the north of the building is an L-shaped plot which is currently undeveloped and adjoins residential properties on all sides. To the front of the single storey building there is an area of hardstanding which is currently used for parking.

Constraints

3. The application site is situated within the Claygate Conservation Area

Policy

4. In addition to the National Planning Policy Framework and the National Planning Practice Guidance, the following local policies and guidance are relevant to the determination of this application:

Core Strategy 2011 CS2 – Housing Provision, Location and Distribution CS11 – Claygate CS17 – Local Character, Density and Design CS19 – Housing type and size CS21 – Affordable Housing CS23 – Employment Land Provision Development Management Plan 2015 DM1 – Presumption in Favour of Sustainable Development DM2 – Design and Amenity DM6 – Landscape and trees DM7 – Access and Parking DM8 – Refuse, Recycling and External Plant DM10 – Housing DM12 – Heritage Design and Character SPD 2012 Design and Character SPD: Main Document Companion Guide: Claygate Please note the site is situated within the Design and Character Area CLAY01 Historic Village Centre Developer Contributions SPD 2012

5. Relevant Planning History

Reference Description Decision 2018/1761 PD Prior Notification: Change of use from

Premises in Light Industrial Use (B1c) to Residential (C3).

Prior Approval

1994/0558 Detached two storey dwelling following demolition of existing garage

Refused

1993/0878 Two storey 2 bedroom cottage Refused 1988/1339 Projecting sign advertising Rolands Garage Approved 87/1868 Temporary and personal use for a period of

5 years for the repair and maintenance of motor vehicles not owned by applicant without compliance with previous planning conditions

Approved

85/0432 Continued use for repair maintenance of motor vehicles

Approved

81/111 Erection of two storey house and garage following demolition of existing garage

Refused and Appeal Dismissed

81/0432 Erection of a two storey house and garage following demolition of existing garage

Refused and Appeal Dismissed

73/0620 Established Use Certificate for use of land and workshop for sale of second hand cars and repair of cars held for resale

Approved

68/0726 Retention and continued use of lead to storage hut adjacent to existing garage

Approved

68/0488 Retention and continued use of single storey timber hut as sales office in connection with sale of motor cars

Approved

Proposal

6. Planning permission is sought for the change of use from Premises in Light Industrial Use (B1c) to Residential (C3), erection of a 1.5 storey dwellinghouse with single storey rear element which is set down from the existing ground level, cycle and bin store, associated parking and landscaping following demolition of existing buildings.

7. The application was amended to respond to one of the comments from a neighbouring property. The applicant removed the parapet wall from the rear single storey element to reduce its height. Consultations

8. Surrey County Council Highways Authority – has undertaken an assessment in terms of the likely net additional traffic generation, access arrangements and parking provision and are satisfied that the application would not have a material impact on the safety and operation of the adjoining public highway. The County Highway Authority therefore has no highway requirements.

9. Planning Conservation – no objections

10. Planning Trees – no objections

11. Environmental Services (Waste) – commented that arrangements would need to be made for the residents to present their bins within 10m of the stopping point on The Green for collection as the access road is not suitable for collection vehicles. They also comment that the units should have sufficient space in the kitchen to segregate recyclable and non-recyclable waste and store it until it is taken out to the bins.

12. Environmental Health (Contaminated Land) – recommend a planning condition relating to contaminated land.

13. Natural England – no comments

14. Claygate Parish Council – object due to impact on the amenities of the neighbouring properties, in particular, the loss of light and visual impact on properties in Oaken Lane and 1A The Mews. They also comment on the visual impact of the parapet wall which has now been removed from the scheme.

15. Claygate Conservation Area Advisory Committee – no comments received

Positive and Proactive Engagement

16. The National Planning Policy Framework requires local planning authorities to work with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner to resolve problems before the application is submitted and to foster the delivery of sustainable development. This requirement is met within Elmbridge through the availability of pre-application advice.

17. The applicants entered into formal preapplication discussions with the Council prior to the submission of the planning application. Comments made by Officers during this process have been taken into consideration by the applicant in the current submission.

Planning Considerations

18. The main planning considerations in the determination of the application are: The principle of the change of use Housing density, need and affordable housing Planning history Impact on the appearance and character of the area including the Conservation Area The impact on the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties Provision of suitable living conditions Trees and Landscaping Highways and Parking Waste Contaminated Land Financial Contributions

The principle of the change of use

19. The application site is an existing commercial site in the form of a Vehicle Repair Workshop.

Elmbridge Core Strategy Policy CS23 and policy DM11 of the Local Plan state that when considering the loss of non-strategic employment sites, the Council will take into account the wider benefits to the community, as well as the current and future demand for the existing use and the local need for the proposed use, based on an individual assessment. Applicants will be expected to demonstrate that the site has been marketed successfully for employment purposes for an appropriate period of time at a reasonable market rate. The benefit to the community should be proportionate to the loss of the use and the contribution it would make to achieving Core Strategy objectives.

20. The applicant has confirmed that evidence of marketing of the site for employment purposes cannot be provided. The previous owner and mechanic who operated the vehicle repair business vacated the site when it was purchased by the current owner in January 2018. The applicant has provided evidence to demonstrate that the vehicle repair garage, had been failing as a business for 5 years prior to them vacating the site and that it is unviable. Whilst this demonstrates that that business was not viable the applicant has not provided any evidence to demonstrate that the site would not be suitable or viable for other light industrial uses.

21. However, it must be taken into account that the application site now benefits from Prior Approval for a change of use from light industrial B1c use to residential C3 use (application reference 2018/1761). The site is also situated within a predominantly residential area and the existing use of site is not compatible with the surrounding dwellings. On balance it is considered that the change of use of this site is acceptable in the absence of any marketing information as it could be carried out under permitted development and would improve the amenities of the locality in terms it being a non-compatible use with the surrounding properties. Housing density, need and affordable housing

22. The Core Strategy indicates that there is scope for residential development through the redevelopment of existing sites with well-designed schemes that integrate with and enhance the local character. The new development is required to deliver high quality design, which maximises the efficient use of land and which responds to the positive features of individual locations; integrating sensitively with locally distinct townscape while protecting the amenities of those living in the area. Innovative contemporary design that embraces sustainability and improves local character will be supported. The Council promotes development that contributes to an overall housing target of 40 dwellings per hectare and achieves a minimum

of 30 dwellings per hectare (dph). The proposal would represent development density of approximately 35dph on this site (0.027 hectares).

23. The revised NPPF in regard to the making effective use of land, states at para. 117:

‘Planning policies and decisions should promote an effective use of land in meeting the need for homes and other uses, whilst safeguarding and improving the environment and ensuring safe and healthy living conditions’.

24. In regard to achieving appropriate densities, Para. 12 states

‘Where there is an existing or anticipated shortage of land for meeting identified housing needs, it is especially important that planning policies and decisions avoid homes being built at low densities, and ensure that developments make optimal use of the potential of each site’,

25. and this is supported by point C) of Para. 123 which states:

‘local planning authorities should refuse applications which they consider fail to make efficient use of land, taking into account the policies in this Framework. In this context, when considering applications for housing, authorities should take a flexible approach in applying policies or guidance relating to daylight and sunlight, where they would otherwise inhibit making efficient use of a site (as long as the resulting scheme would provide acceptable living standards).’

26. Para 122 in regard to achieving appropriate densities further states that:

‘Planning policies and decisions should support development that makes efficient use of land, taking into account: a) The identified need for different types of housing and other forms of development,

and the availability of land suitable for accommodating it.’

27. The proposal would meet locally adopted density policy (30dph), and so would make the most efficient use of land. As identified above in para. 122a development should meet the identified need for housing, which is identified with the 2016 Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) for Kingston and North Surrey. The SHMA identifies the need within Elmbridge is for smaller 1-3 bedroom units. The proposal under consideration here provides 1 x 3 bed dwelling.

28. The publication of the updated NPPF provides a new policy framework in which the local authority, as the decision maker, must have regard. The proposal would make the most efficient use of land in the urban area and would provide 1 unit to meet the most up to date measure of housing need. The proposed development is therefore considered to comply with the housing density and need requirements set out in Policy CS17. Affordable Housing:

29. Policy CS21: Affordable Housing of the Council’s Core Strategy (2011) requires that

development resulting in the net gain of 1 - 4 residential units should provide 20% of the gross number of dwellings on-site as a financial contribution. It is acknowledged that a revised (July 2018) National Planning Policy Framework has been published and is a material consideration in the determination of all relevant planning applications. However, as set out in Section 38(6) of Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, the starting point for any decision is the Development Plan unless material consideration(s) indicate otherwise. As set out in paragraph 2 of the NPPF, this approach is required by planning law. It is therefore for the decision-maker to determine the weight to be applied.

30. Paragraph 63 of the NPPF states that ‘provision of affordable housing should not be sought

for residential developments that are not major developments, other than in designated rural

areas (where policies may set out a lower threshold of 5 units or fewer)’. Elmbridge Borough is not a designated rural area and major development sites are defined in the NPPF as development of 10 or more homes, or the site has an area of 0.5 hectares of more. Nevertheless, as set out in paragraph 3 of the NPPF, the Framework should be read as a whole (including its footnotes and annexes). In this context the following NPPF policies are also relevant in regard to the Council’s continuation to apply policy CS21.

31. Paragraph 59 of the NPPF state that within the context of significantly boosting the supply of

homes ‘… that the needs of groups with specific housing requirements are addressed’. Paragraph 61 states ‘… the size, type and tenure of housing needed for different groups in the community should be assessed and reflected in planning policies (including, but not limited to, those who require affordable housing…’ Finally, paragraph 62 states:

‘Where a need for affordable housing is identified, planning policies should specify the type of affordable housing required, and expect it to be on-site unless: a) off-site provision or an appropriate financial contribution in lieu can be robustly

justified…’

32. Paragraph 63 of the NPPF is a clear continuation of the approach to developer contributions on small sites as set out in Government’s Written Ministerial Statement (WMS) (28 November 2014) and subsequent changes to Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) dated 19 May 2016. In response to this policy change, the Council set out in its Statement on the WMS (Update – February 2017), that its position was to continue to consider on a case by case basis whether local circumstances with regard to affordable housing and the nature of the development sites in the Borough were sufficient to warrant the application of policy CS21, or whether greater weight should be attached to the WMS and changes to PPG.

33. The Council’s approach has been repeatedly upheld by Appeal Inspectors recognising that

policy CS21 was consistent with other policies of the NPPF (paragraphs 47 and 50 (NPPF, 2012)) which required local planning authorities to meet the full, objectively assessed needs for market and affordable housing and where they have identified that affordable housing is needed, set policies for meeting this need on site, unless off-site provision or a financial contribution of broadly equivalent value can be robustly justified. Furthermore, several Appeal Inspectors noted that whilst the WMS was a material consideration of considerable importance and weight, the intention of the WMS is to ensure that financial contributions do not become a disproportionate burden for small scale developers and thus frustrate housing supply. Appeal Inspectors have continuously addressed the Council’s Statement on the WMS (referenced above) and the significant difficulty in the delivery of affordable housing in the least affordable authority in England outside of London, noting that small sites make a significant contribution towards the delivery of affordable housing in the Borough.

34. Appeal Inspectors have also stated that there has been no substantive evidence to

demonstrate that the requirements of policy CS21 are placing an unreasonable or disproportionate burden on developers. As a consequence, it has been found that whilst the WMS carried considerable weight, Inspectors do not consider it to outweigh the development plan given the acute and substantial need for affordable housing in the Borough (as evidenced by the Kingston & North-East Surrey Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA)) (2016) and the importance of delivery through small sites towards this.

35. On the basis of the above and the evidence in relation to local housing need, affordability and

housing land supply (as summarised in the Council’s Statement (Update – February 2017)), the Council will continue with its approach to apply Policy CS21 in the decision-making process where relevant. The Council has provided clear evidence of the acute need for affordable housing whereas, little evidence has been submitted by applicants suggesting that policy CS21 is having a disproportionate affect on small schemes.

36. The applicant has submitted an acceptable signed Unilateral Undertaking which would secure

the payment of the Affordable Housing contribution for this development. Planning history

37. The application site has a history of planning applications for two storey dwellings on the site as a replacement to the existing single storey building. All of these applications have been refused permission and subsequent appeals have been dismissed.

38. The Inspector dealing with the 1993 proposal (93/0878) concluded that the main issue of the case was the effect of the mass of the proposed building on the living conditions of the residents of No. 1-4 Sims Cottages by reason of its dominance.

39. In the appeal decision the Inspector states, “In my opinion the appearance of the scheme from all four dwellings would be that of a dominating mass intruding significantly into the view. I have no doubt that it would create a powerful feeling of oppression and over-dominance…I conclude that the proposed building would seriously harm the living conditions of the residents of numbers 1 to 4 Sims Cottages by reason of it having an unduly overbearing appearance.”

40. The 1994 proposal (1994/0558) was altered in an attempt to take these matters into account, the house had been sunk into the ground by approximately 0.3m, the eaves height had been reduced from 3.65m to 3.1m and the height of the ridge of the roof reduced from 7.1m to 5.6m.

41. As in the 93/0858 scheme the proposed house would have only retained a distance of between 7.5m and 11m between the rear wall of no. 3 Simms Cottages. This conflicted with the advice given in the Residential Guide for New Development which stated that a minimum distance of 15m should be retained. It was concluded that the proposed dwelling would appear overbearing.

42. The 1994 proposal was still two storey but smaller than the previous scheme. However, it was again refused for the following reasons:

i. The proposed two storey house would injure the amenities of the adjoining

residents by appearing overbearing and over dominant contrary to policies H13 and H14 of the Elmbridge Borough Local Plan (January 1993) and the advice given in the Residential Design Guide for New Development.

ii. The design of the house would fail to harmonise with the surrounding

buildings and would not make a positive contribution to the character and appearance of the Conservation Area contrary to Policy EN21 of the Elmbridge Local Plan (January 1993).

43. The proposal considered in the 1993 (93/0878) and 1994 (1994/0558) application were for 2

storey dwellings which were much larger in mass and scale than the current proposal. The design of the proposed dwelling has also been amended to address the second reason for refusal in the 1994 decision.

Impact on the appearance and character of the area including the Conservation Area

44. The proposed development is for a 1.5 storey, 3-bedroom residential dwelling. The proposed

building would have a gable end with a catslide roof clad in slate tiles with grey brick elevations at lower level and dark stained timber cladding at the upper level. To the rear of the property the design includes a single storey rear element which would have a flat roof. The proposal includes an area of hardstanding to the front of the property providing two car parking spaces, refuse and cycle store. To the rear of the property there would be a terrace area and an L-shaped rear garden with soft landscaping.

45. The proposal would see the creation of 1 new residential dwelling in a predominantly residential area. It would be attached to the neighbouring property as is the situation with the existing building. Concern has been raised that this will create the appearance of a semi-detached dwelling, however there are a range of property types in the locality and this is not considered to have a harmful impact on the character of the area. The front of the proposed dwelling would not project past the building line of the property to which it adjoins, and scale is considered appropriate for the locality.

46. The issue of building rights with regards to the construction of the dwelling and its attachment

to the neighbouring building is a private civil matter for consideration between the applicants and the owners of that property and cannot be taken into consideration in the determination of this application.

47. The proposed dwelling would maintain a separation distance of approximately 1.1m to the eastern boundary when measured at the front of the site. To the rear of the site there would be a single storey element that adjoins the boundary, however this would be set back 8.7m from the front elevation and would not be highly visible from outside of the application site due to its reduced height.

48. The existing building on the site is of little architectural merit and is currently in a poor

condition. Its removal could provide an improvement to the appearance of the conservation area. The proposed new house would be of modern design and materials but incorporate a slate tile catslide roof to help integrate it into its surroundings. The proposed dwelling is not considered to cause harm to the character of the area and could contribute to enhancing the character of the Conservation Area.

49. To the front of the site there is a large area of hardstanding and a submitted letter of representation commented that this area could be reduced. However, it would not be highly visible from outside of the application site and therefore is not considered harmful to the character of the area.

50. It is therefore considered the proposal would have an acceptable impact upon the character of

the area. The impact on the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties

51. The proposed development would be situated adjacent to the rear boundary of the neighbouring properties to the east, Simms Cottages. As detailed above, planning permission was previously refused on the site under applications 1993/0878 and 1994/0558 due to the impact on these properties. The current proposal has significantly reduced the height of the proposed dwelling when compared to the previously refused schemes.

52. A number of the dwellings in Simms Cottages have benefited from single storey rear extensions which have shortened the rear gardens. At the nearest point the separation distance between the proposed dwelling and the rear of 3 Simms Cottage would be approximately 8m. The Elmbridge design guide recommends that a useful tool to assess the effect of new development on neighbours' amenity and to influence the siting of new buildings is to apply the '45 degree rule'. It sets out that an acceptable relationship between building is that new single storey development should be positioned further than 8 metres from an existing dwelling and 15 the two storey element further than 15 metres when located within a 90 degree arc from the edges of the main windows to habitable rooms.

53. The proposed dwelling would be inset from the boundary with Simms Cottages by

approximately 1.1m when measured at the front of the dwelling. The roof would have an eaves height of 3m and a roof height of 5.39m. The eaves of the proposed building would be 0.78-0.86m higher than the existing boundary treatment which varies in height. Given the low nature of the development an 8m separation distance at the nearest point is considered to be acceptable. The proposed development is not considered to have a significantly dominant or overbearing impact on those properties.

54. The applicant has submitted drawings within their Design and Access Statement which demonstrate that the proposed building would not impinge on a 25 degree rising plane from the rear windows of Simms Cottages. This indicates that the proposed development would not result in a significant loss of light to the rear facing windows of those properties.

55. The proposed design includes ground floor side facing windows and a door, however these would be screened by the boundary treatment. There would be no roof lights or windows in

the roof of the proposed dwelling and therefore it would not result in a loss of privacy to Simms Cottages.

56. With regards to the impact of the proposed development on the neighbouring property to the west, 1A The Mews. The proposed 1.5 storey element would be set behind to existing building at 1A and at the point at which it project past that building it has been reduced to single storey in height. The application was amended to remove the parapet wall from the rear single storey element which has reduced its height to approximately 2.3m. The proposed single storey rear element would project approximately 3.4m past the building at 1A. There are no windows in the north elevation of 1A and therefore the proposed dwelling is not considered to result in a significantly dominant or overbearing impact on that property.

57. The proposal includes first floor windows in the front and rear elevation, however these would be situated a sufficient distance from neighbouring residential properties that they would not result in a loss of privacy.

58. Do to the constrained nature of the site it would be considered appropriate to remove permitted development rights from Class A, B, C, D and E householder permitted development to protect the amenities of the neighbouring properties.

59. The proposed development is therefore not considered to cause harm to the reasonable privacy or amenities of the neighbouring properties. Provision of suitable living accommodation

60. The proposed dwelling is considered to be of an adequate size with sufficient windows that future occupiers of the proposed property would experience satisfactory living conditions.

61. The proposed dwelling would have an 83 sqm rear garden which is considered to provide

sufficient amenity space for the occupants of those properties.

62. There would be sufficient space within the curtilage of the properties for the storage of waste bins and bicycles.

Trees and Landscaping

63. There are no trees on or near the site which are subject to Tree Preservation Orders. There is one tree near the site in the rear garden of 1 Sims Cottages. The Tree Officer has assessed the application and has not raised any objections. Highways and parking

64. The proposal includes sufficient space for the parking and turning of two cars on the application site. The proposed development is therefore considered to accord with Elmbridge Parking Standards and the development is not considered to result in an increased requirement for on-street parking in the locality.

65. SCC Highways Authority have assessed the application and are raising no objections on highway safety or capacity grounds. Waste

66. The applicants have demonstrated that there is sufficient space within the application site for the storage of bins. Joint Waste Solutions commented on the application and stated that the bins could not be collected directly from the site and provisions should be made for them to be placed by the collection point on The Green on the day of collection. The applicant has supplied additional information in the form of a Waste Statement to demonstrate that there is sufficient space on the access road to Simms Cottages and the application property to store the additional bin as well as those associated with the existing properties.

Contaminated Land

67. The application site has been identified as potential contaminated land due to its previous use as a car repair workshop. The applicants have submitted a Desk Study with their application. Environmental Health have reviewed the application and requested a pre-commencement planning condition relating to the issue of contaminated land for which the applicant has given their agreement. Financial Contributions

68. Section 70 subsection 2 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) states that any local financial considerations are a matter to which local planning authorities must have regard to in determining planning applications; as far as they are material for the application. The weight to be attached to these considerations is a matter for the Council. New Homes Bonus:

69. The New Homes Bonus is a grant paid by central government to local councils for increasing the number of homes and their use. The New Homes Bonus is paid each year for 4 years. It is based on the amount of extra Council Tax revenue raised for new-build homes, conversions and long-term empty homes brought back into use. There is also an extra payment for providing affordable homes. The New Homes Bonus Scheme Grant Determination for 2018/19 is £1.1 million.

70. Local financial considerations are defined as grants from Government or sums payable to the

authority under the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL). This means that the New Homes Bonus is capable of being a material consideration where relevant. In the current case, the approval of the application would mean that the New Homes Bonus would be payable for the net increase in dwellings from this development.

Affordable Housing:

71. Policy CS21: Affordable Housing of the Council’s Core Strategy (2011) requires that

development resulting in the net gain of 1 - 4 residential units should provide 20% of the gross number of dwellings on-site as a financial contribution. Further details of the affordable housing contribution can be found in the paragraph 22-29 above. Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)

72. The proposed development is liable for CIL. The applicant has provided the relevant forms in

accordance with the relevant regulations. Matters raised in Representations

73. The matters raised in letters of representation have been considered within the remit of the above report.

Conclusion

74. On the basis of the above, and in light of any other material considerations, the proposal is

considered to be in accordance with the development plan. Accordingly, the recommendation is to grant permission.

The proposed development does require a CIL payment

Recommendation: Grant Planning Permission

Conditions/Reasons 1 TIME LIMIT (FULL APPLICATION)

The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission.

Reason: To comply with Section 51 of Part 4 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2 LIST OF APPROVED PLANS

The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in strict accordance with the following list of approved plans: 1246-PL-3- 001 Rev A, 1246-PL-3-002 Rev H, 1246-PL-3-003 Rev G, 1246-PL-3-004 Rev G, 1246-PL-3-005 Rev K, 1246-PL-3-006 Rev K and 1246-PL-3-007 Rev A received on 15 November 2018.

Reason: To ensure that the development is carried out in a satisfactory manner.

3 MATERIALS - APPROVED

The development shall not be erected other than in the following materials : grey masonry brickwork and dark stained timber cladding for the walls and grey slate tiles for the main roof or such other materials as have been approved in writing by the borough council.

Reason: To ensure that a satisfactory external appearance is achieved of the development in accordance with Policy DM2 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

4 PD LIMITATION

Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town & Country Planning General Permitted Development Order 2015 (or any Order revoking or re-enacting that Order) no development falling within Part 1 Class(es) A,B,C,D and E of Schedule 2 to the said Order shall be carried out within the curtilage of the dwellinghouse, unless planning permission is first granted by the Borough Council.

Reason: To safeguard the character and amenities of the premises and adjoining properties and to comply with Policy DM2 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

5 PARKING AND TURNING

The development hereby approved shall not be first occupied unless and until space has been laid out within the site in accordance with the approved plans for vehicles to be parked and for vehicles to turn so that they may enter and leave the site in forward gear. Thereafter the parking and turning area(s) shall be retained and maintained for their designated purpose(s).

Reason: In order that the development should not prejudice highway safety, the free flow of traffic nor cause inconvenience to other highway users in accordance with Policy DM7 of the Elmbridge Development Management Plan 2015.

6 POTENTIAL LAND CONTAMINATION

To ensure the potential for contamination has been investigated and the necessary action taken to make the development site suitable for its proposed use, the following steps must be completed to the satisfaction of the Council. No demolition or construction shall be commenced until step (a) has been completed by a competent person and approved. Furthermore there shall be no occupation of any part of the site by any end user prior to meeting the terms of this condition in full.

a) Site Investigation, Method Statement and Remediation

(i) A written site specific investigation plan using the information obtained from the preliminary investigation, providing details of the investigation for soil, gas and controlled waters where appropriate, shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Council.

(ii) The site investigation shall be undertaken in accordance with the scheme agreed by the Borough Council. The results of the site investigation, a refined conceptual model and a risk assessment of any contamination found shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Council.

(iii) A written Method Statement detailing any remediation requirements shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Council.

b) Development in accordance with the Method Statement The development of the site shall be carried out in accordance with the approved Method Statement, and any addenda submitted by the developer, and agreed in writing by the Borough Council. Any post remediation monitoring identified in the Method statement, shall be installed by the developer within the timescales identified in the Method Statement and maintained and operated for as long as identified by the Method Statement. c) Unsuspected Contamination If, during development, contamination not previously identified is found to be present at the site then no further development shall be carried out until the developer has submitted, and had approved by the Council, a written addendum to the Method Statement detailing how the unsuspected contamination should be dealt with. d) Piling Development approved by this permission shall not commence unless a Foundation Works Risk Assessment for piling foundations (if piling is to be used on site) has been submitted to, and agreed in writing, by the Borough Council. The piling shall be undertaken only in accordance with the method outlined in the approved Foundation Works Assessment. e) Imported material Clean uncontaminated rock, soil, brick rubble, crushed concrete or ceramic only shall be permitted as infill material. The developer shall not import any material until a sampling program, including appropriate import criteria for the proposed end use and frequency of sampling, has been submitted in writing and approved, by the Council. The Developer shall carry out the approved sampling program to check that all imported materials conforms to the agreed criteria. Where the permitted end use is residential, the sampling program shall also include samples taken from the imported material after final placement. Written confirmation of the suitability of all imported materials shall be provided to the Council as part of step (g). This shall include both the results of the sampling program and also details of the origin, transport, final deposition and any temporary stockpiling of the imported materials. f) Completion of Remediation and Verification Report Verification by an independent, competent person must be carried out prior to occupation of any part of the site by any end user. Upon completion of the remediation detailed in the Method Statement, and before occupation of any part of the site by any end user, a written Verification Report shall be submitted to, and agreed in writing by, the Council providing verification that the required works regarding decontamination and installation of post remediation monitoring, have been carried out in accordance with the agreed Method Statement and any addenda thereto. The verification shall be carried out and reported by an independent, competent person, stating that the remediation was carried out in accordance with the approved remediation scheme and that the site is suitable for the permitted end use. Reason: To avoid adverse effects from pollution on the environment, harm to human health or general amenity, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

Informatives 1 BIN COLLECTION POINT

The site plan shows that the bins for the development are to be stored down the access road off Simms Cottages. Arrangements would need to be made for the residents to present their bins within 10m of the stopping point on The Green for collection as the access road is not suitable for collection vehicles.

2 ADVICE TO DEVELOPERS REGARDING CONTAMINATION ASSESSMENTS

To ensure the potential for contamination has been investigated and the necessary action taken to make the development site suitable for its proposed use, the following steps must be completed to the satisfaction of the Council. No demolition or construction shall be commenced until step (a) has been completed by a competent person and approved. Furthermore there shall be no occupation of any part of the site by any end user prior to meeting the terms of this condition in full.

45°

45°

1100

rwp

rwp

NEW RETAINING WALL

2 SIMS COTTAGE GARDEN WALL LEVEL 11.272 3 SIMS COTTAGE GARDEN

WALL LEVEL 11.196

9651

2616

(SUV)

180lRecycle180l

Landfillwaste

food w

aste

rwp

BIKES

SMALL CARe.g MINI/GOLF

8700

5247

5329

6256

10622

3423

N

ACO D

RAIN

PARKING BAY

0 1000

Milimeters (mm)

2000 3000 4000

Scale Bar

5000

EV CHARGE POINT 2(OAKEN LANE -REAR GARDEN)

4(OAKEN LANE -REAR GARDEN)

6(OAKEN LANE - REAR

GARDEN)

5(HIGH STREET-

REAR OPEN AREA)

6A(HIGH STREET)

AVERNARESTAURANT

(GRD FLR REAR YARD)

6A HIGH STREET(GARDEN)

(GARDEN)

1 & 2SIM'S COTTAGES

4 SIM'SCOTTAGES 5 SIM'S

COTTAGES

1A THE MEWS, HIGH STREET,CLAYGATE

6A HIGHSTREET

(GARAGE

45 DEGREE RULE IN LINE WITH ELMBRIDGE SPD

3 SIM'SCOTTAGES

ACCESS ROAD OFFSIMS COTTAGES

REF: PreApp70169742OUTLINE OF GROUND FLOOR REAR WALL

1 SIMS COTTAGEGARDEN WALL LEVEL 11.433

4 SIMS COTTAGEGARDEN FENCE 1.8m

DRIVEWAY AND SIDE PASSAGE RAMP DOWN @ LESS THAN 1:12 GRADIENT(TO ACHIEVE A SHALLOWER FALL)

LOCK IMRI(GARAGE)

100% OF GROUND FLOOR GIA ACHIEVES A MINIMUM FLOOR TO CEILING HEIGHT OF 2.5m

KEY

3BED 4 PERSON- DWELLING HOUSE

GARDEN

PERMEABLE PAVERS

HALLWAY10sq m

3B 4PHOUSE(Grd & 1st flr)

102sq m

STORE1sq m

OPEN PLANLIVING/DINING/

KITCHEN31sq m

ENSUITEBATHROOM

WC2sq m

BEDROOM 118sq m

W/B

(GARDEN)

RAM

P D

OW

N

TERRACE(12sq m)

GARDEN(83sq m)DRIVEWAY

(86sq m)

DEVELOPEMENT SITE

OTHER LAND OWNED BY APPLICANT

STORE 2sq m

TOTAL OF 20mGARDENLENGTH

(GARDEN)

NEW 2.3m CLOSE BOARDED FENCE

VEHICLE ACCESS/PARKING NOTE:(REFER TO VEHICLE TRACKING

DRAWINGS BY CANEPAROASSOCIATES)

RAMP

PARKING BAY

1394

All dimensions are to be checked on site before commencement of works.

All sizes and dimensions to any structural elements are indicative only. See structural engineer's drawings for actual sizes/dimensions.

Sizes of and dimensions to any service elements are indicative only.See service engineer's drawings for actual sizes/dimensions.

This drawing to be read in conjunction with all relevant Architect's drawings, specifications and other consultants' information.

DO NOT SCALE FROM THIS DRAWING






PLANNING APPLICATION

Scale: 1:100

15 H O O P E R S Y A R DL O N D O NN W 6 7 E J

t : 0 2 0 7 3 2 8 2 5 7 6f : 0 2 0 7 6 2 4 7 8 1 1

Email: [email protected] Date:

Rev. Date. Description. Initial.

May 2018DWG:Revision:

1246 - PL3 - 002

Project: Rear of 6A High Street, Claygate Drawing: Proposed Ground Floor Plan

PROPOSED GROUND FLOOR PLAN- SCALE 1:100

H

1246 - PL3 - 002

F 05/09/18 NORTH POINT AMENDED NANG 12/11/18 ISSUED FOR INFORMATION NANH 14/11/18 ISSUED FOR PLANNING NAN

KEY

PORCH

4926

ROOFLIGHT

PARAPET FLAT ROOF

W/B

W/B

PARAPET ROOF REMOVED TO SHOW FLAT ROOF LAID TO FALLSAND FINISHED WITH ROOFING FELT

N


3.3m Height line

rwp

0 1000

Milimeters (mm)

2000 3000 4000

Scale Bar

5000

2(OAKEN LANE - REAR

GARDEN)4

(OAKEN LANE - REARGARDEN)

5(HIGH STREET-

REAR OPENAREA)

LOCK IMRI(GARAGE)

AVERNARESTAURANT

(GRD FLR REARYARD)

(GARDEN) (GARDEN)(GARDEN)

1A THE MEWS, HIGHSTREET, CLAYGATE6A

(HIGHSTREET)

6A HIGHSTREET

(GARDEN)

6A HIGHSTREET

(GARAGE)

1 & 2SIM'S COTTAGES

4 SIM'SCOTTAGES

3 SIM'SCOTTAGES

ACCESS ROAD

OFF SIM

S COTTAG

ES


5 SIM'SCOTTAGES

3BED 4 PERSON- DWELLING HOUSE

OUTLINE OF PORCH OVERHANG

BEDROOM 315sq m

PASSAGE2sq m

1.3m Height line

BEDROOM 217sq m

EN-SUITESHOWERROOM 2

EN-SUITESHOWERROOM 3

rwp

SLATE ROOF

SLATE ROOF












Scale: 1:100


t : 0 2 0 7 3 2 8 2 5 7 6f : 0 2 0 7 6 2 4 7 8 1 1




1246 - PL3- 003

Project: Rear of 6A High Street, Claygate Drawing: Proposed First Floor Plan

PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN- SCALE 1:100

G

E 05/09/18 NORTH POINT AMENDED. NANF 12/11/18 ISSUED FOR INFORMATION. NANG 12/11/18 PARAPET REMOVED AS PER PLANNING OFFICER'S

COMMENTSNAN

KEY

4926

SLATE MONO-PITCHED ROOF

rwp

ROOFLIGHT

PORCH2(OAKEN LANE - REAR

GARDEN)4

(OAKEN LANE - REARGARDEN)


5(HIGH STREET-

REAR OPENAREA)

LOCK IMRI(GARAGE)

AVERNARESTAURANT

(GRD FLR REARYARD)

ACCESS ROAD

OFF SIM

S COTTAG

ES

6A(HIGH

STREET)

6A HIGHSTREET

(GARDEN)

6A HIGHSTREET

(GARAGE)

1 & 2SIM'S COTTAGES

4 SIM'SCOTTAGES

3 SIM'SCOTTAGES

rwp

PARAPET FLAT ROOF

FALLS

FALLS

FALLS

'CAT-SLIDE' SLATE ROOF

N

PARAPET ROOF REMOVED TO SHOW FLAT ROOF LAID TO FALLSAND FINISHED WITH ROOFING FELT

DEVELOPEMENT SITE

OTHER LAND OWNED BY APPLICANT

rwp

(GARDEN) (GARDEN)(GARDEN)

0 1000

Milimeters (mm)

2000 3000 4000

Scale Bar

5000

5 SIM'SCOTTAGES

1A THE MEWS, HIGHSTREET, CLAYGATE













Scale: 1:100


t : 0 2 0 7 3 2 8 2 5 7 6f : 0 2 0 7 6 2 4 7 8 1 1




1246 - PL3- 004

Project: Rear of 6A High Street, Claygate Drawing: Proposed Roof Plan

PROPOSED ROOF PLAN- SCALE 1:100

E 05/09/18 ISSUED FOR INFORMATION. NAN

G

F 12/11/18 ISSUED FOR INFORMATION. NANG 12/11/18 PARAPET REMOVED AS PER PLANNING OFFICER'S

COMMENTS.NAN

18

WINDOW

1 - 4 SIMS COTTAGES

REAR GARDEN1 - 4 SIMS COTTAGES

NEW 1.5 STOREY HOUSE1A THE MEWS,

HIGH STREET CLAYGATE REAR GARDEN

BOU

ND

ARY

LINE

BOU

ND

ARY

LINE

0 1000

Milimeters (mm)

2000 3000 4000

Scale Bar

5000

1800

1955

EXTERNAL GRD FLR FFL 9.000

1ST FLR FFL 10.900

CAT-SLIDE ROOFRIDGE LL 14.388

GRD FLR FFL 8.000

(DATUM)

1000

25° 1.5 STOREY

DEVELOPMENT BELOW BRE DAYLIGHT ASSESSMENT & ELMBRIDGE SPD GUIDE

OUTLINE OF DUAL PITCHED ROOF IN PreApp1487056OUTLINE OF MONO -PITCH ROOF AS SHOWN IN PreApp70169742

LEGEND

1- OUTLINE OF RETAINING WALL.

2- RAMP AT 1:12

3- No. 2 SIMS COTTAGE, GARDEN FENCE

4- OUTLINE OF No.4 SIMS COTTAGE BOUNDARY FENCE IN THE BACKGROUND.

5- SPLAYED WALL BEHIND NEW TIMBER FENCE.

6- BIN & BIKE STORE.

ROOF LEVEL 1- 11.075

FENCE LEVEL 11.272

2

BOU

ND

ARY

LINE

BOU

ND

ARY

LINE

1ST FLR FFL 10.900

GRD FLR FFL 8.000

GARDEN LL 7.828

CAT SLIDE ROOF RIDGE LL 14.388


5

NEW FLAT ROOF HIDDEN BEHIND NEW BOUNDARY FENCE (NO LONGER VISIBLE FROM NO.2 AND 4 OAKEN LANE).

(CURRENT PLANNING APP. 2018/2479)OUTLINE OF PARAPET REMOVED.

No.2 SIMS COTTAGE BOUNDARY WALL LL 11.272

N

NEW 1.5 STOREY HOUSE

4

1

3

4

BIN & BIKE STORE

6

KEY SOU

TH

NO

RT

H







t : 0 2 0 7 3 2 8 2 5 7 6f : 0 2 0 7 6 2 4 7 8 1 1

Email: [email protected]


SOUTH (FRONT) ELEVATION- SCALE 1:100


Scale: 1:100

Date:

Initial.


1246 - PL3 - 005

K

Project: Rear of 6A High Street, Claygate Drawing: Proposed Elevations

NORTH (REAR) ELEVATION- SCALE 1:100

G 05/09/18 ISSUED FOR INFORMATION NANH 12/11/18 ISSUED FOR INFORMATION NANJ 12/11/18 ISSUED FOR INFORMATION NANK 13/11/18 PARAPET REMOVED AS PER PLANNING OFFICER'S

COMMENTSNAN

0 1000

Milimeters (mm)

2000 3000 4000

Scale Bar

5000

BOU

ND

ARY

LINE

ss

JAN-082BEAUTIFUL

BRITISH COLUMBIA

1A THE MEWS, HIGH STREET CLAYGATE

EXISTING 1 STOREY BUILDINGEXISTING TIMBER FENCE

APPROX. POSITION OF WINDOWS

8.000

8.000

EXTERNAL GRD FLR LL 9.000

(DATUM)

(DATUM)

0 1000

Milimeters (mm)

2000 3000 4000

Scale Bar

5000

OPAGUE GLASS

OPEN PLANLIVING/DINING/

KITCHEN


KEY

WEST

EAST

LEGEND

1- DRIVEWAY AND SIDE PASSAGE RAMP DOWN @ LESS THAN 1:12 GRADIENT(TO ACHIEVE A SHALLOWER FALL).

2- OUTLINE OF EXISTING GROUND LEVEL.

3- OUTLINE OF NEW CHANGE TO GROUND LEVEL.

4- NEW 2.3m HIGH CLOSE BOARDED TIMBER FENCE, FROM THE EXISTING GROUND LEVEL AT THE REAR OF 6A HIGH STREET CLAYGATE.

5- BIN & BIKE STORE.

1ST FLR FFL 10.900

OUTLINE OF DUAL PITCHED ROOF IN PreApp1487056OUTLINE OF MONO -PITCH ROOF AS SHOWN IN PreApp70169742

4

CAT SLIDE ROOFRIDGE LL 14.388

ROOF RIDGE OF 1A THE MEWS, HIGH STREET CLAYGATE (BEHIND)

BOU

ND

ARY

LINE

K

G 05/09/18 ISSUED FOR INFORMATION. NAN

Revision:

15

H 12/11/18 NAN

3

2



J 12/11/18 NANK 13/11/18 NAN

ISSUED FOR INFORMATIONISSUED FOR INFORMATIONPARAPET REMOVED AS PER PLANNING OFFICER'S COMMENTS.







t : 0 2 0 7 3 2 8 2 5 7 6f : 0 2 0 7 6 2 4 7 8 1 1

Email: [email protected]


EAST (SIDE) SECTIONAL ELEVATION- SCALE 1:100


Scale: 1:100

Date:

Initial.

May 2018DWG: 1246 - PL3- 006

Project: Rear of 6A High Street, Claygate Drawing: Proposed Elevations

WEST (SIDE) ELEVATION- SCALE 1:100

N

MIN. FLOOR TO CEILING HEIGHT OF 2.6m AT GROUND FLOOR (MEETS NATIONAL HOUSING STANDARD)

2600

NEW FLAT ROOF HIDDEN BEHIND NEW BOUNDARY FENCE (NO LONGER VISIBLE FROM NO.2 AND 4 OAKEN LANE).

type: full wardmygov.elmbridge.gov.uk/documents/s21834/planning application 20182476... · 6....

Documents