Report

R08/1737/PLN at 32 Beech Drive, Rugby for the erection of 3 detached dwellings and an access road.

Authorised Use

Residential.

Relevant decisions

Demolition of the existing dwelling and erection of 5 No. dwellingsRefused10/01/2007

Fell oak tree to ground level and grind stump, due to heat radiation Refused23/04/2007

damage caused by an arson attack

Erection of 4no residential units (Resubmission of R06/1768/PLN).Refused12/11/2007

Erection of 3no residential units.Refused13/11/2007

Technical Consultations

Severn Trent Water -No objections subject to a condition.

Highway Authority -No objections subject to conditions.

Ecology -No objections subject to conditions.

WCC Fire & Rescue Team -No comments received.

Environmental Health -No objections and request informatives.

Highway Agency -No objections.

WCC Museums -No comments received.

Third Party Consultations

3 neighbour observations asking whether an area of land will be included in one of the proposed gardens; requesting a fence be continued to the rear of 32 Beech Drive; and the private lane is not used by construction traffic.

3 neighbour objections on the grounds of overlooking; loss of privacy; works going to impact on TPO tree roots; proximity of 2 of the proposed dwellings to the site boundary; need for 3 detached dwellings; and why houses and not bungalows.

Other relevant information

The application site lies at the north-western end of Beech Drive. The site is adjoined by predominately residential properties and a public footpath runs along the north and south western boundaries. The site rises from the footpath by approximately two metres up to the north-eastern edge. A row of leylandii trees flank the footpath and original driveway. The site also contains 2 mature trees subject to a Tree Preservation Order together with a further tree to the front of No. 30, which overhangs the site. The Cedar tree on site is not protected.

The proposal is for the erection of three 4-bedroom two-storey properties grouped around a private drive leading off Beech Drive. It is understood that the site did contain a detached ‘chalet’ style bungalow, however, the site has been cleared and only the concrete base and driveway remain. The site is 0.123 hectares in size, which equates to just over 24 dwellings per hectare.

Planning Policy Guidance

RBLP Policy S1 -Complies -Urban Development Priorities.

RBLP Policy S4 -Complies -Windfall Developments.

RBLP Policy GP1 -Complies -Design & Appearance.

RBLP Policy GP2 -Complies -Landscaping.

RBLP Policy GP3 -Complies -Protection Of Amenities.

RBLP Policy E5 -Complies -Landscape & Settlement Character.

RBLP Policy E9 -Complies -Development Affecting Trees, Woodlands & Hedgerows.

RBLP Policy T3 -Complies -Access & Highway Layout.

RBLP Policy T5 -Complies -Parking Facilities.

RBLP Policy H2 -Complies -Housing Density.

Determining Considerations

Amended plans have been received.

The key issues relating to this proposal are the impact on the protected trees, residential amenities of adjacent properties, design and appearance of the properties and highways.

The site lies within the Rugby Urban Area as defined in the local plan and would constitute previously developed land. Therefore, the site would be classified as a 1st Priority site under Policy S1. The site is less than 0.2ha and could not readily accommodate more than 6 dwellings on the site, owing to the protected trees. On this basis, the proposal would accord with Policies S1 & S4. The proposal would equate to approximately 24 dwellings per hectare. Policy H2 states the net density of residential development should be at least 30 dwellings per hectare and not shall. PPS3 states more intensify development is not always appropriate and that densities below this minimum may be acceptable provided they are justified. On the basis of the presence of the mature trees that are protected by TPOs, a relaxation in the minimum density is considered acceptable in this instance and owing to the wording of H2 would not actually conflict with it.

Within the area there are a variety of different house designs and styles but all are of brick and either detached or semi-detached with those in the immediate area on Beech Drive having pitched roofs with gables facing front and back. In terms of the dwellings proposed in this application, they are of a design, appearance and scale in-keeping with the area and will not raise any adverse or detrimental impacts. The proportions of them give each a balanced character whilst the proposed height is also considered respectful of their location. Although no details with regards to materials have been given this can be dealt with by way of condition. In the last application the second refusal reason related to the orientation and siting of plot 3 resulting in it being detrimental to the character and appearance of the area as a result of its flank wall facing Beech Drive. This has been overcome by the rotation of the dwelling through 90 degrees so its front faces onto Beech Drive that provides an attractive appearance to the area. Overall therefore the proposal complies with the requirements of policies GP1 and E5.

A number of trees are located on the site with 3 being covered by Tree Protection Orders (TPO’s). There have been 3 previous applications for the erection of dwellings on the site all of which have been refused and one reason on each refusal on each related to adverse impacts on the tree’s that have TPO’s in place. Following this application being submitted a topographical site survey and an arboriculture report were provided and as a result of these, an amended plan was submitted with regards to the siting of the proposed dwellings. These have been assessed by the Ecology and Tree officer who has commented by stating that the grounds for refusal in the previous application has been overcome but that a number of conditions should be attached to any approval. Although no specific details pertaining to landscaping have been provided conditions can be attached requiring details be submitted for approval and then implemented in accordance with the agreed details. On this basis the proposal complies with the requirements of policies GP2 and E9 of the local plan.

On the previously refused application for 5 houses, Plots 1 and 2 were sited close to the boundary with the rear gardens of Nos 43 to 47 Plexfield Road, approximately 4.6 metres away at the closest point. On the last revised application for 3 dwellings this distance had been increased to approximately 5.4 metres at the closest point which has been used in this current application. Whilst this increase is only marginal, when assessed against the overall distance of the garden lengths of the properties on Plexfield Road a habitable room window to window distance of approximately 25 metres would be achieved. The proposed houses would undoubtedly result in a large element of built form to the rear of those properties on Plexfield Road and whilst the relationship between the existing houses on Beech Drive and those on Plexfield Road results in a rear window to window distance of approximately 40 metres, the proposed distances between Plots 1 and 2 and Plexfield Road, as detailed above, are not now at such a distance that would form such an adverse impact on the residential amenity of the existing occupants to warrant refusal on these grounds. In addition, the two-storey element of Plot 1 has been moved off the boundary with No. 30 Beech Drive to a distance of approximately 4.5 metres away. The single garage serving this property has now been placed between it and the boundary with No. 30. This relationship, which was part of the previous reason for refusal is now acceptable. The relationship with those properties on Nelson Way is also deemed acceptable. Therefore, the proposal is not considered to conflict with Policy GP3.

The garden depths of the proposed dwellings shown on the original drawings submitted were not the most generous with the changes to the General Permitted Development Rights allowing for potentially increased amounts of work capable of being done under these rights. However the amended plans show the dwellings on plots 2 and 3 brought forward from their original position increasing their rear gardens whilst not impacting on the TPO’d trees. Despite this it is considered appropriate to remove PD rights in the interests of amenity of properties to the rear.

Appendix 3 of the Local Plan states the maximum car-parking standard for 4-bed units is 3 spaces, however, developments for several houses should on average be 1.5 spaces per dwelling. Based on these guidelines, 2 spaces per house are considered acceptable in this instance. The Highway Authority raises no objection to the access and driveway subject to conditions and notes, particularly in relation to the driveway’s width. Therefore, the proposal would not conflict with Policies T3 & T5.

Recommendations

Recommend approval subject to conditions.

Prepared by:Richard Redford5th January 2009 (amended March 09)

Checked by:GSV 19.03.09

Report Sheet