ROYAL BOROUGH OF WINDSOR & MAIDENHEAD PLANNING COMMITTEE MAIDENHEAD DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PANEL 23 October 2013 Item: 5 Application 13/02419/FULL No.: Location: 69 All Saints Avenue Maidenhead SL6 6LY Proposal: Construction of a pair of semi-detached houses following demolition of existing dwelling Applicant: Limetree Ventures Ltd Agent: Mr Graham Wells Parish/Ward: Belmont Ward If you have a question about this report, please contact: Peter Carey on 01628 796771 or at peter.carey@rbwm.gov.uk 1. SUMMARY 1.1 Planning permissions have previously been granted for a pair of semi-detached houses with both hipped or gable ended roofs. The present application, as amended, is for a pair of threebedroom semi-detached houses with hipped roofs and is to all intents and purposes is the same as the originally approved application for a pair of hipped roofed semi-detached houses on this site. Subject to completion of a Unilateral Undertaking to fund the necessary related infrastructure improvements, the proposal meets all relevant policy criteria and is recommended for approval. It is recommended the Panel authorises the Head of Planning & Property Services: 1. To grant planning permission on the satisfactory completion of an undertaking to secure the infrastructure in Section 7 of this report and with the conditions listed in Section 10 of this report. 2. To refuse planning permission if an undertaking to secure the infrastructure in Section 7 of this report has not been satisfactorily completed by 6 November 2013 for the reason that the proposed development would not be accompanied by associated infrastructure improvements. 2. REASON FOR PANEL DETERMINATION At the request of Councillor P Love in the public interest. 3. DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND ITS SURROUNDINGS 3.1 The property is on the west side of All Saints Avenue, opposite the junction with Cromwell Road. The existing building on the plot is a bungalow. The neighbouring properties are mainly early 20 th century semi-detached houses. All Saints Avenue has a wide carriageway with deep pavements and grassed verges forward of most of the houses and a good number of mature trees within the wider street scene. There is a recently planted street tree in the grassed verge in front of the application site. There is an extensive cemetery garden to the north of the site [beyond No.77], running up to the junction with Courthouse Road; and the well-established Maidenhead tennis club to the rear of the site.
4. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL AND ANY RELEVANT PLANNING HISTORY 08/01236 Construction of a pair of semi-detached dwellings following demolition of existing 09/01489 Demolition of detached dwelling and erection of 2 No. semi-detached dwellings A 31.10.2008 A 16.09.2009 4.1 When submitted the application was for a pair of four-bedroom semi-detached houses with gable ended roofs. Following public consultation, it has been amended to a pair of three-bedroom houses with hipped roofs. The elevational style matches that of the adjacent pair at 65-67 All Saints Avenue and the building would be the same height as that pair. The houses would be positioned 1 metre from each side boundary. 5 MAIN RELEVANT STRATEGIES AND POLICIES RELEVANT TO THE DECISION Local Area Agreement 5.1 The recommendation would contribute to the achievement of these selected priorities of the Council and its partners: Improve life chances for all children and young people Create cleaner, greener and safer public spaces Promote healthy lifestyles Maintaining a vibrant economy More information on these priorities can be found at: http://www.rbwm.gov.uk/web/partnerships_laa.htm Royal Borough Local Plan 5.2 The main strategic planning considerations applying to the site and the associated policies are: Local Plan Within settlement area DG1, H10, H11, P4, R3, IMP1 5.3 Supplementary planning documents adopted by the Council relevant to the proposal are: Planning Obligations and Developer Contributions Sustainable Design and Construction Interpretation of Policies R2 to R6 Public Open Space provision More information on these documents can be found at: http://www.rbwm.gov.uk/web/pp_supplementary_planning.htm Other Local Strategies or Publications 5.4 Other Strategies or publications relevant to the proposal are: RBWM Parking Strategy view using link at paragraph 5.3 RBWM Strategic Flood Risk Assessment view using link at paragraph 5.3
6. EXPLANATION OF RECOMMENDATION 6.1 The key issues for consideration are: i ii iii Impact on the character and appearance of the area Impact on neighbours amenities Traffic and Parking Impact on the character and appearance of the area 6.2 The replacement of the present lofted bungalow at 69 All Saints Avenue with a pair of 4-bed semi-detached houses in a style which replicates the turn of the century properties along this central section of the road is considered to have a positive impact on the street scene and the character of the area. Both the density and design of the proposal are considered to be acceptable in relation to the tests of Policy H10 and Policy H11 of the Local Plan. Plot width and depth for each of the new houses would be comparable with other paired houses on the west side of All Saints Avenue. 6.3 Although the houses on either, side like most of the houses in the vicinity have hipped roofs, there are a number of comparably styled and sited gable-ended houses in the vicinity on both sides of the road. These would appear to be contemporary with the majority of houses in the road and in terms of impact on street scene the addition of a gable-ended pair of semis on the application site should not be seen as being out of context with the character of development along the avenue. It was on this basis that permission was previously granted for a pair of gable-ended houses. However, the applicant has chosen to amend the application to a three bedroom hipped roof design, and the application needs to be assessed on that basis. Given the presence of other gable-ended properties in the vicinity and the previous approval of a gableended scheme on the application site, it is not considered withdrawal of permitted development rights would be reasonable. Impact on neighbours amenities 6.4 In terms of impact on neighbouring properties, No.71, the house to the north of the site would be unaffected as the only window in its south-facing side wall is that to a small utility room. The house to the south, No.67, has north-facing windows in its main flank wall at ground and first floor levels. The ground floor window provides a secondary source of daylight for the through lounge of the house, with the east-facing front bay window and west-facing rear window being the principal light sources. At first floor level, the window is to a bathroom. As the windows in both adjacent properties are either to non-habitable rooms or secondary to a habitable room, there would be no justification for refusing permission on grounds of loss of light. A Daylight and Sunlight report submitted with the application confirms that loss of light would be small. To the rear, the configuration of the new houses has been arranged in such a way as to ensure that the 45 and 60 degree light angles are not breached to either side of the site. Traffic and Parking 6.5 On parking and access grounds, there is no objection to the proposal from the Highway Authority, as two spaces per dwelling conforms with the requirements of the Council s parking standards for dwellings with up to three bedrooms.. However, a final layout for the in-curtilage parking spaces needs to be agreed, and a condition is proposed to ensure this. Two spaces side by side would still leave some space to the front of both properties for soft landscaping and the retention or repositioning of the highway verge tree, and loss of grass verge could be minimised by careful design of the crossover.
7. ASSOCIATED INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS 7.1 This development would place additional pressure on local services and infrastructure. The Council requires local services and infrastructure to be improved alongside development and to be funded by the developer in accordance with its Supplementary Planning Documents setting out the relevant costs (see paragraph 5.3). In this case these improvements can be secured through an undertaking under S106 of the 1990 Planning Act completed before planning permission is granted. Details of the funding and projects are shown below. Service Area Education Youth and Community facilities Library services Public open space Indoor Sport and Leisure Highways / Public Transport Biodiversity Amount ( ) 608.00 Allotments 60.00 Waste Disposal / Recycling Public Art and Related Projects Projects identified in accordance with the published SPD for the local primary and secondary schools and SEN provision listed below. Where appropriate, monies may also be directed towards the provision of an entirely new school to serve this area or, on rare occasions, to expanding schools in neighbouring localities that will then serve this area: St Mary's Catholic Primary School 498.52 The North West Maidenhead Subarea Primary Schools* 4,486.65 Altwood Church of England School 1,423.46 Cox Green School 1,423.46 Furze Platt Senior School 1,423.46 Newlands Girls' School 1,423.46 SEN Provision, including Manor Green School 683.23 *The 'South West Maidenhead Subarea' schools listed above are All Saints CE Junior School, Boyne Hill CE Infant and Nursery School, Larchfield Primary School, Lowbrook Primary School, Wessex Primary School and Woodlands Park Primary School. Related community and youth projects including but not limited to facilities at Pinkneys Green Youth and Community Centre. Some or all of the following appropriate, related projects: 702.70 Boyn Grove proposed additional library: new static library, furniture & fittings, additional stock for new library, RFID. Appropriate, related public open space projects including but not limited to Maidenhead area / northern parishes - land purchase or lease for formal use 8,069.00 Maidenhead area / northern parishes - improvements to formal sports provision Oaken Grove Park - Landscape / Teenscene / Play improvements Related indoor sport and leisure projects including but not limited 1,675.00 to Magnet Leisure Centre pool and hall improvements. Related highways and public transport projects including but not limited to LTP A4 Bath Road traffic and road safety 4,465.00 improvements Maidenhead and LTP Courthouse Road and St Marks Road traffic and road safety improvements. 38.00 Appropriate, related local biodiversity initiatives. Appropriate, related allotments projects including but not limited to Maidenhead area allotment provision 125.00 Provision of refuse bins and recycling boxes 1,120.00 Appropriate, related public art and heritage projects including but not limited to Maidenhead Heritage Centre; Norden Farm Arts
Heritage S106 Monitoring 354.00 Fee Total 28,578.94 Centre ( 30k); Desborough Suite; York Stream Environmental Enhancement Phase 1. To be collected upon implementation of a planning permission, for the administration costs over the lifetime of the planning obligation (including any necessary compliance and enforcement work 8. CONSULTATIONS CARRIED OUT Comments from interested parties 8.1 5 occupiers were notified directly of the application. The planning officer posted a statutory notice advertising the application at the site on 17 September 8.2 6 letters, including one from the Maidenhead Civic Society, were received objecting to the application, summarised as: Comment 1. Extra roof space creates a building that is too large and out of keeping with the style and character of the road and adjacent properties. 2. Parking arrangements mean car door cannot be opened within the site boundary 3 Double width vehicle crossover would result in loss of excessive sections of grass verge 4. Gable ended roof out of character with the predominant style in the avenue and so contrary to Policy DG1 5. Loss of light to downstairs habitable room 6.4 6. Concern at accuracy of plans 4.1 7 Note that although roof amended to hipped and number of bedrooms reduced, permitted development rights would allow subsequent change to gable ended roof Where in the report this is considered 4.1 6.5 6.5 4.1 4.1, 6.3 Statutory consultees Consultee Highways Comment Visibility splays acceptable. No objection subject to the provision of two in-curtilage parking spaces for each of the dwellings. Given the depth of the verge on this side of All Saints Avenue [ASA] there would be potential for a third space in tandem with one of these two, and some neighbouring properties do make use of the verge in this way, but the HA cannot promote or condone this. Note presence of newly planted tree in the grass verge which would be affected by the proposed crossover. Conditions and informatives supplied Where in the report this is considered 6.5
This recommendation is made following careful consideration of all the issues raised through the application process and thorough discussion with the applicants. The Case Officer has sought solutions to these issues where possible to secure a development that improves the economic, social and environmental conditions of the area, in accordance with NPFF. 9. APPENDICES TO THIS REPORT Appendix A - Site location plan Appendix B Block plan Appendix C Front elevation Appendix D Side Elevation Appendix E Rear Elevation Appendix F - Floor Plan 10. CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED FOR INCLUSION IF PERMISSION IS GRANTED R; 1 The development hereby permitted shall be commenced within three years from the date of this permission. Reason: To accord with the provisions of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. 2 No development shall take place until samples of the materials to be used on external surfaces of the development(s) hereby permitted and details of brick bond, lintels and string courses have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development(s) shall be carried out and maintained thereafter in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of the visual amenities and character of the area. Relevant Policies - Local Plan DG1. 3 Details of the siting and design of all walls, fencing and/or other methods of enclosure (including any retaining walls) shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before any work is commenced on site. Such walls or fencing as may be approved shall be erected before first occupation of the development unless the prior written approval of the Local Planning Authority to any variation has been obtained. Irrespective of the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any order revoking and re-enacting that Order with or without modification) no other fence, gate, wall or other means of enclosure shall be erected on the site frontage without planning permission having first been obtained from the Local Planning Authority. Reason: To ensure any gate or other means of enclosure does not impede vehicular access to and from the site and prevent any consequent obstruction to the highway. Relevant Policies - Local Plan DG1, P4 T5. 4 Prior to the commencement of any works of demolition or construction a management plan showing how demolition and construction traffic, (including cranes), materials storage, facilities for operatives and vehicle parking and manoeuvring will be accommodated during the works period shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The plan shall be implemented as approved and maintained for the duration of the works or as may be agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and the free flow of traffic. Relevant Policies - Local Plan T5. 5 No part of the development hereby permitted shall be occupied until 2 in-curtilage parking spaces for each dwelling have been provided in accordance with layout, planting and constructional details which shall first have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall be at a scale of no less than 1:100 and shall show the construction of the access and parking to be of permeable and bonded materials and forming part of a sustainable drainage system. Reason: To ensure that the development is provided with adequate parking facilities in order to reduce the likelihood of roadside parking which could be detrimental to the free flow of traffic and to highway safety, to minimise impact on the highway verge and to avoid spillage of loose material on to the carriageway which could adversely affect conditions of highway safety.
Relevant Policies - Local Plan DG1, T5, P4. 6 The first floor bathroom and en-suite windows in the south-facing main flank elevation of the new dwelling adjacent to 67 All Saints Avenue shall be fixed shut and fitted with obscure glass which shall thereafter be permanently maintained as such. Reason: To prevent overlooking and loss of privacy, in the interests of the residential amenities of the neighbouring property. Relevant Policies - Local Plan H14. 7 No further windows shall be inserted at first floor level in the south-facing return elevation of the new dwelling adjacent to 67 All Saints Avenue without first obtaining the prior approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority on an application made for that purpose. Reason: To prevent overlooking and loss of privacy in the interests of the residential amenities of the neighbouring property. Relevant Policies - Local Plan H14. 8 No dwelling shall be occupied until details of the location of a water butt of at least 120L internal capacity to be installed to intercept rainwater draining from the roof of each dwelling has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and subsequently provided at each dwelling. The approved facilities shall be retained. Reason: To reduce the risk of flooding and demand for water, increase the level of sustainability of the development and to comply with Requirement 4 of the Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead Sustainable Design & Construction Supplementary Planning Document. 9 Within 3 months of the completion of the development a Building Research Establishment (BRE) issued Final Code Certificate confirming that both residential units have achieved a Code for Sustainable Homes rating of Code Level 3/4 shall be submitted to the Local Planning Authority. Reason: The Code Assessor can only confirm that the site wide works are satisfactory when the whole of the development is complete. The Assessor will then write a report and submit it to the BRE. The BRE can only then verify the submission and issue Final Code Certificate. This could realistically take 3 months to achieve. 10 No development shall take place until details meeting the requirements of the Council s Supplementary Planning Document on Planning for an Ageing Population have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. These details shall demonstrate how the development would incorporate the relevant Lifetime Home, Secured by Design, Building for Life and Lifetime Neighbourhoods standards. The development shall be carried out and subsequently retained and maintained in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure that the development meets the needs of an ageing resident population in compliance with the adopted Royal Borough of Windsor & Maidenhead Supplementary Planning Document Planning for an Ageing Population. Informatives 1 The attention of the applicant is drawn to the Berkshire Act 1986, Part II, Clause 9, which enables the Highway Authority to recover the costs of repairing damage to the footway or grass verge arising during building operations. 2 The attention of the applicant is drawn to Section 59 of the Highways Act 1980 which enables the Highway Authority to recover expenses due to extraordinary traffic. 3 No builders materials, plant or vehicles related to the implementation of the development should be parked/stored on the public highway so as to cause an obstruction at any time. 4 The granting of planning permission does not give the applicant/developer consent to carry out works on the public highway (verge, footway or carriageway). To gain consent from the Highway Authority, not less than twenty eight days notice shall be given to the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead - Streetcare Section, (tel 01628 683804) before any work is carried out, this shall include for materials and skips which are stored within the highway extents, hoarding etc. A charge will be made for the carrying out of inspections and the issue of permits. 5 This permission should be read in conjunction with the Unilateral Obligation committed to by the applicant and dated October 2013, concerning a range of financial contributions for infrastructure and amenity improvements in the locality.