·

APPENDICES (Maps & Plans)

·

APPENDICES (Planning History)

·

LINK TO PLANNING PORTAL (Full Documentation for the application)

1.

Summary

1.1.

The proposed development is for the construction of a detached B1 office building with cycle storage and landscaping. The building would be accessed from Station Road via an access road that serves several other office buildings in this location near the railway station.

1.2.

The application has been amended following Members consideration of the original proposals at the Planning Committee on 17th June 2009. The amended application is recommended for approval as the revised design of the office building is considered to accord with the general character and appearance of the surrounding area and it would not have an adverse impact on the residential amenities of neighbouring properties or local highway conditions, especially in relation to parking and access.

2.

The Application

2.1.

Members may recall considering this application at the Committee meeting in June 2007 when it was resolved to defer the application for officers to negotiate a reduction in the overall height of the building and in particular, its northerly aspect towards the residential properties in Southbourne Drive in order to overcome concerns expressed by residents, the Parish Council, Local Members and Members of this Committee.

2.2.

The proposal is for the erection of a detached B1 office building with cycle storage and landscaping. The building would be located adjacent to the railway line and to the rear of residential properties in Southbourne Drive.  Access from Station Road passes existing detached office buildings adjoining Bourne End station.

2.3.

A previous application for the construction of an office building on this site was refused by Committee and subsequently allowed on appeal in 2007                            (pp 06/07282/FUL). That permission was for a simple rectangular building with a shallow curved roof. The building the subject of this current application is now the same length and has a roof that consists of two wings that are low in the middle and then rise up towards the west and east elevation. As a result, the highest point of the roof is slightly higher, whilst the lowest part of the roof is slightly lower than that of the building allowed on appeal. The end parts of the roof project slightly beyond the walls. This is the main part where the building is higher than that previously approved.

2.4.

Since the Committee Meeting in June the application has been amended for a second time. The basic design of the building remains the same, but the following changes have been made between the scheme Members considered in June and the current proposals.

2.5.

The pitch of the roofs either side of the central section has been altered so that the centre is 100mm higher and the ends 100mm lower.  

2.6.

For comparison and Members assistance the June proposals are attached at Appendix A.

2.7.

The application is accompanied by:

3.

Relevant Planning History

3.1.

05/07141/FUL – Erection of B1 office building - Withdrawn

3.2.

06/05968/FUL – Erection of B1 office building with landscaping – Refused - Dismissed on appeal.

3.3.

06/07282/FUL – Erection of B1 office building with landscaping – Refused - Allowed on appeal.

4.

Consultations and Notification Responses

·

This building is much worse than that previously allowed on appeal as the plans reduce the height of the building in the centre slightly, but increases the outside wings to a height of 4m. This will have an adverse impact on the residential amenities of the properties on Southbourne Drive. The building is also longer.

·

Once they have planning permission, developers should not be allowed to keep on altering their plans.

·

The painted rendering should be coloured to harmonise with the rural surrounding vegetation.

·

The 2 metre high existing fence has never been maintained as required and is in a dilapidated condition. This requires major refurbishment.

·

The plans show no landscaping.

·

No reduction has been made to the additional length and height of the building. This increased height and length of the building will be in the direct line of sight from the garden and conservatory.

·

Although the amended plans add landscaping, it is still not clear what screening will be used.

·

Following a meeting with the architect for the scheme, it is considered that the amended plans now address the previous concerns about the building and there are now no objections,

·

Reiterate request that the landscaping to the rear of No.31 should be controlled and not allowed to exceed 3 metres in height.  

5.

Issues and Policy Considerations

5.1

This part of Bourne End can be classified as a Scattered Employment Site as there are already other office buildings on the larger overall site. In general, the preferred approach in both existing and emerging policy is to retain these sites for business uses. These business uses should accord with the characteristics of the surrounding area adjoining the railway station and other B1 buildings.  In general, it is considered that B1 offices and residential are two uses that can complement each other.   As such, it is considered that a B1 use on this site is appropriate, subject to compliance with all other relevant policies.

5.2

Furthermore, the previous appeal decision that allowed a scheme for an office building in 2007 (06/07282/FUL) established the principle of office development on this site.

5.3

The proposed building is rectangular and has a purpose-built contemporary design consisting of three linked mono-pitched roofs. The roof is lowest in the centre of the building and rises towards the east and west elevation with a small roof overhang. The design of the building is modern and is considered to be an improvement to that previously allowed on appeal, which had a somewhat bland appearance. This proposed building has a number of interesting design features, such as the shape of the roof, the use of glazing and rendered walls to define different elements of the building and full height glazing to the east and west elevations. Overall, it is considered that the design is appropriate for a stand-alone office building in this location.

5.4

One of the main concerns during the consideration of the previous applications was the potential impact of the building on the residential amenities of neighbouring properties in Southbourne Drive. In order to minimise the impact of the development on these properties, the previously permitted building had a low barrel roof with an overall height of 3m over the full length of the building. In this latest application, the architect has made some variations in the height of the roof, which results in a more varied design. The centre section is shown with a mono-pitched roof rising from an eaves height of 2.9 metres to a height of 3.8m metres on the railway side of the building.  Either side of this centre section, the roof splits into two wings, gradually rising up to a maximum height of 3.8m. The highest parts of these wings slightly overhang the external end walls.

5.5

Even though some sections of the building will be higher than that previously approved, having regard to the separation distance of some 20 metres and as the boundary between the site and the rear of properties in Southbourne Drive is mainly in the form of a 1.8 metre fencing supplemented by a row of higher conifers, it is considered that the revised design would not have a material impact on the neighbouring houses in Southbourne Drive.

5.6

It should be noted that no objections have been received in respect of the current plans and one neighbour has written to say that the revisions overcome his previously expressed concerns.

5.7

In view of the boundary screening, the separation distance and the form and scale of the previously permitted scheme, it is considered that this current proposal would be no more dominating or overbearing in relation to the properties in Southbourne Drive.  The proposal is therefore considered to have an acceptable impact on the residential amenities of the neighbouring properties.

5.8

The proposed development would use the same access from Station Road as previously approved, being shared with other office buildings. The County Highway Authority does not object to the scheme, and as such it is considered not to have a detrimental impact on highway safety.

5.9

The office building will be served by eight parking spaces, one of which will be a disabled parking space. The previous scheme that was allowed on appeal also included eight parking spaces. As such, this number was accepted for an office building of this size in this location. Parking standards have not changed since the date of the appeal decision in 2007 and as such this number is considered to be acceptable.

5.10

There is provision for cycle storage to the rear of the building. Space for four bikes is shown, but this figure can easily be increased as there is sufficient space in this area to store more bikes.

5.11

The application is recommended for approval as it is considered to be of an appropriate form and design for its location and would not have an adverse impact on the residential amenities of neighbouring properties or local highway conditions.

Reason.

To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (As amended).

Reason 

For the sake of clarity, and to ensure a more satisfactory development of the site.  

Reason 

To secure a satisfactory external appearance.  

Reason

In the interests of amenity and to ensure a satisfactory standard of landscaping.

Reason

In the interests of amenity and to ensure a satisfactory standard of landscaping.

Reason

Reason

Reason

In the interest of visual amenity and/or highway safety.

Reason

To ensure a satisfactory appearance and in the interests of the amenities of the occupiers and adjoining residents.

10

No development shall take place until details of facilities to be provided for the storage of bicycles within the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. No part of the development shall be occupied until the facilities have been provided in accordance with the approved details and thereafter the facilities shall be permanently retained.

Reason

To ensure a satisfactory appearance and in the interests of the amenities of the occupiers and adjoining residents.

It is in compliance with the requirements of planning policies G3 (General Design Policy), G8 (Detailed Design Guidance and Local Amenity), E4 (Scattered Employment Sites) and T2 (On-Site Parking and Servicing) of the Wycombe District Local Plan (adopted 2004, saved and extended 2007, and partly replaced 2008) and policies CS11 (Land for Business), CS19 (Raising the Quality of Place-Shaping and Design) and CS20 (Transport and Infrastructure) of the Wycombe Development Framework Core Strategy (adopted 2008) and policy A3 (Scattered Business Sites) of the Preferred Options Site Allocations DPD.

This information is only intended as a summary of the reasons for grant of permission/ consent. For further detail on this decision, please see the planning report which is available to view on our website: www.wycombe.gov.uk or at Planning Help Desk during normal office hours.

·

APPENDICES (Maps & Plans)

·

LINK TO PLANNING PORTAL (Full Documentation for the application)

1.

Summary

1.1.

Full planning permission is sought for the construction of a two storey extension to the rear of 90 Hughenden Road in connection with the conversion of the dwelling to provide 2 x 2 bed flats together with a refuse and cycle store.

1.2.

The proposal is considered to respect the character and appearance of the area whilst providing a satisfactory living environment for future occupiers. The proposal would not have a detrimental impact on the residential amenities of either the neighbouring properties or highway safety.  An adequate level of parking is considered to have been provided.  As such, the proposal is in accordance with Development Plan policy and is recommended for approval subject to appropriate conditions.

2.

The Application

2.1.

The existing dwelling would be extended to the rear by an additional 2.8 metres at ground floor level and 6 metres at first floor level.  The proposed extension would be set entirely to the rear of the existing dwelling and 1.3 metres below the ridge line. The proposal would enable the conversion of the dwelling to provide a 2 bed flat at ground and first floor level. Both flats would be accessed by separate entrances situated to the side of the building.

2.2.

No 90 Hughenden Road is a two storey semi detached property finished in brick and render and set under a part hipped part gabled roof with a small rear extension adjoining the neighbouring dwelling at no.88. The site is within a mainly residential area surrounded by properties of similar style and design albeit having been extended in a variety of manners.

2.3.

Planning permission was recently granted for the construction of a two storey rear extension to no. 88 Hughenden Road.

2.4.

There is a TPO'd tree in the front garden area on the boundary with no.88 within a raised planter.

2.5.

The application is accompanied by a Design and Access Statement.

3.

Relevant Planning History

4.

Consultations and Notification Responses

5

Issues and Policy Considerations

4.1

The proposed extension to the rear will not be readily visible within the wider streetscene as it is confined to the rear of the dwelling.  The extension would be set down from the existing ridge line of the dwelling and set 0.5 metres in from the existing side building line and therefore it is considered that the extension integrates well with the existing dwelling and would not appear dominant or out of character.

4.2

In terms of the principle of the conversion of the dwelling into 2 x 2 bed flats, there are a number of dwellings that have been extended and converted in a similar fashion along this part of Hughenden Road.  Therefore, it is considered that the introduction of flats, and the resulting intensity of use, would not be out of keeping or detrimental to the character of the surrounding area.

4.3

The site frontage would comprise a mixture of hard and soft landscaping as is presently the case.  The land between the parking area and the building, which is elevated above street level is proposed to be set over to soft landscaping.

4.4

A discrepancy in the plans, which shows the parking area in part encroaching into the existing planter which contains a TPO'd tree, has been noted.  However, it is considered that a condition can be imposed on any permission granted ensuring that the planter is not touched and there is no impact on the root zone of the TPO'd tree.  It is acknowledged that this would have an impact on the ability to provide bin storage within the parking area.  However, given that most dwellings within the street store their refuse bins at the side of the buildings and to the rear of the dwellings, it is not considered that the developer could be required to provide refuse at street level as part of this proposal.  A condition can be imposed on any permission granted requiring a revised bin storage layout.  The Council's Waste and Cleansing department accord with this view.  As a consequence of the above the existing parking space and parking area layout would be retained.

4.5

The subdivision of the existing unit (a 3 bedroom semi-detached dwelling) to provide two flats is not considered to result in such an intensification of use that it would give rise to a detrimental impact on the amenities of the neighbouring properties.  

4.6

The proposal would extend to the rear of the first floor element of no.88 and no.92.  No.88 has no habitable room windows facing the application site.  No.92 has a number of habitable room windows facing the application site and there is an existing mutual relationship of overlooking and impact on light between the two properties side facing windows.

4.7

In terms of the rear extension and other external alterations to the property, having regard to the existing mutual relationship between the application site and no.92's side facing windows, which is a common feature with Victorian properties of this nature, it is considered that the development would not give rise to an unacceptable additional overbearing impact or undue loss of light/outlook to no.92s side or rear facing habitable room windows.  The proposed rear extension, given its size, rearward projection and relationship to the neighbouring dwellings, is not considered to appear overbearing.  In view of the above it is considered that the impact on the neighbouring dwellings is acceptable.

4.8

In the event that no.88 implements their planning permission for a rear extension the relationship between the two properties is considered to remain acceptable.

4.9

With regard to the Juliette balcony, it is accepted that it could give rise to a degree of overlooking of the neighbours rear gardens.  However, it is considered that this relationship is similar to a conventional window and a degree of overlooking is unavoidable in any built-up urban area.  As such, the relationship is considered to be acceptable.

4.10

The proposed roof lights, given their siting on the roof slope, is considered to offer limited opportunities for overlooking and therefore is not considered to have an unacceptable impact on the amenities of adjoining occupiers.

4.11

There is considered to be adequate provision for cycle storage on the site.  A condition can be imposed on any permission granted to secure precise details of the provision made.  A lockable secure shed is envisaged.

4.12

It is considered that there is adequate scope on site for the storage of waste.  Details of bin storage can be secured via condition.

4.13

The ground floor flat would be served by a private patio area immediately to the rear, adjoining the communal rear garden to be used by the occupants of both flats. This amenity space exceeds the minimum amount required and is considered to provide an acceptable level of private amenity space.

4.14

The absence of private external amenity space for the top floor flat, given its proximity to the communal amenity area, is considered to be acceptable.

4.15

The internal living spaces of both flats which comprise an area of approximately 55 sq. metres, exceeds the Council's minimum requirements for a residential conversion and therefore is considered to be acceptable.

4.16

The proposed parking situation is similar to that which currently exists at no. 89 Hughenden Road which received planning permission in 2007 (reference 07/05765/FUL).  This application permitted an extension and conversion of the dwelling to provide 2 x 2 bed flats with no off-street parking.  There are clear similarities between the current proposal and the nearby development, albeit that the current proposal proposes 1 off street parking space.

4.17

A two bedroom flat in Accessibility Zone 2 can provide a maximum of 1.5 parking spaces (1 for the dwelling and 0.5 for visitors).  Therefore a maximum of 3 parking spaces could be provided for this development, if required.  The current development proposes 1 parking space at the front of the site and therefore falls below the maximum level of parking that could be provided.  However, giving due weight to: the Council's decision at no.89; the site's proximity to shops, jobs and services (including 3 major supermarkets); the provision of cycle storage; and, the site's proximity to a bus route, the bus station and train station, it is considered that 1 parking space would be adequate to meet the needs of the development and a reason for refusal on this basis could not be sustained.

4.18

Furthermore, the County Highway Authority has not raised an objection in relation to the impact on highway safety.  Therefore, in view of the above, it is considered that the development would not result in a detrimental impact on the local highway conditions through the level of off-street parking being provided.

Reason.

To comply with the requirements of Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (As amended).

Reason 

For the sake of clarity, and to ensure a more satisfactory development of the site.  

Reason

Reason

To ensure a satisfactory appearance and in the interests of the amenities of the occupiers and adjoining residents.

Reason

In the interests of the amenities and privacy of the occupiers of adjoining properties, and the occupiers of the properties the subject of this permission.

Reason

To protect the occupants of the new development from noise disturbance.

Reason

In order to ensure the continued availability of external amenity space for residents of the development, in the interests of their amenity and the character of the area.

Reason:

To ensure a satisfactory development

10

Notwithstanding any indication which may have been given in the plans hereby permitted, the planter containing the TPO'd tree at the front of the site shall not be altered as part of this development.

Reason

It is in compliance with the requirements of the following planning policies:

Adopted Wycombe District Local Plan to 2011 (as saved, extended and partially replaced): Policies G3 (General Design Policy), G8 (Detailed Design), H7 (Design of New Residential Development), H18 (Conversions), H19 (Residents’ Amenity Space and Gardens), T2 (On-site Parking and Servicing) and Appendix 1 (Residential Design Guidance)

Core Strategy DPD (Adopted July 2008): Policies CS 16 (Transport), CS 19 (Raising the Quality of Place-Shaping and Design) and CS 20 (Transport and Infrastructure).

This information is only intended as a summary of the reasons for grant of permission/consent.  For further detail on this decision please see the planning report which is available to view on our web site www.wycombe.gov.uk or at Planning Help Desk during normal office hours.