Agenda item

Reserved matters (landscaping, layout, scale and appearance) in compliance with Condition 1 of Inspector's Decision Letter dated 01/02/2021, Appeal Ref: APP/R5510/W/20/3253781 (LPA Ref: 30837/APP/2019/3096) (Erection of 3 x 4-bed dwellings with associated parking and amenity space and installation of vehicular crossover)

Recommendation: Approval

RESOLVED: That the application be approved, as per the officer’s recommendation.

Reserved matters (landscaping, layout, scale and appearance) in compliance with Condition 1 of Inspector's Decision Letter dated 01/02/2021, Appeal Reference: APP/R5510/W/20/3253781 (LPA Ref: 30837/APP/2019/3096) (Erection of 3 x 4-bed dwellings with associated parking and amenity space and installation of vehicular crossover)

Officers introduced the application and delivered a presentation to the Committee. It was highlighted that the principle of development had already been established at appeal by the Secretary of State and therefore the matters in front of the Committee for consideration were those of layout, scale, appearance and landscaping. Following negotiations between the applicant and officers, revised drawings of the proposals had been submitted to address concerns raised by the Council’s Conservation Officer and Landscape Officer associated with the front protrusion of the dwellings, the bulk of the crown roof profiles on plots 2 and 3, alterations to the front elevations of plots 2 and 3, a reduction to the front projection of plot 1, the removal of proposed Tuscan porches, and changes to the external finishes on plots 1 and 3. Officers were satisfied that the proposed amendments had satisfactorily addressed the points raised by the Inspector in the appeal decision. Officers recommended that the application be approved subject to the proposed conditions within the officer’s report. Members’ attention was also drawn to the addendum which clarified that the planning obligations had been secured as part of the Unilateral Undertaking secured as part of the outline consent.

It was noted that the dwelling on plot 1 would be accessed of Firs Walk and the dwellings on plots 2 and 3 would be accessed from Foxdell. Officers highlighted that the proposed access matters could not be reconsidered as part of this reserved matters application due to these being improved and determined by the Inspector at appeal.

It was also highlighted that the Dene Road Area of Special Local Character (ASLC) was situated to the north of the site and the application site itself did not come under the ASLC. The site was not covered by a Tree Protection Order although it was noted that the rear boundaries of No.6 and No.5 adjoined TPO 260 and TPO 481 respectively. An arboricultural impact assessment, method statement, tree constraints plan and tree plan had been submitted with the application with the Council’s Landscape Officer raising no objections. 15 new trees would be planted which would help to soften and integrate the site into the surrounding context.

Officers noted that, in light of the amendments made to the scheme, the overall layout, appearance and landscaping of the development would be of a high quality and would not cause harm to the character and appearance of the local area. The proposals were therefore deemed to be in accordance with policies DMHB1, DMHB 5, DMHB 11 and DMHB 12 of the Local Plan, and policies D1, D3, D4 and HC1 of the London Plan.

In terms of impact on neighbouring properties, it was noted that there would a separation distance of approximately 7 metres between No. 4 Firs Walk and the nearest proposed dwelling on plot 1. It was acknowledged that the rear building line on the proposed plot 3, would project beyond it’s nearest dwelling, No 13 Foxdell, by approximately 1 metre; however, there would be a separation distance of approximately 4.7 metres and it was deemed that the 45 degree ‘line of sight’ rule would not be breached by this.

A petition had been received objecting to the application. By way of written submission, the petitioners highlighted a number of concerns, including:

• That their statement had the support of the Dene Road Residents Association and the Northwood Residents Association.
• The Dene Road area had been recognised as an Area of Outstanding Local Character and multiple applications in recent years had resulted in an over-crowded street scene on Foxdell.
• The proposals had significantly more bulk than existing buildings on the street due to the shape of the proposed roofs; this was a detriment to the visual amenity, character and appearance of the area.
• The rear elevations of plots 2 and 3 protruded beyond the established building line of the rear of the houses on the south side of Firs Walk and Foxdell causing light issues, particularly for No. 13 Foxdell.
• Concerns were raised as to the potential for environmental damage to trees following the felling of three trees shortly before an associated 2018 planning application was submitted.
• The application history for the development had previously seen the Council refuse similar iterations of the scheme and petitioners were shocked to see that this application had been recommended for approval.
• The highway status of Foxdell was raised as an issue associated with the proposed development in that, the public highway status of Foxdell was subject to a dispute. If the section of road was deemed not to be public highway, there would be no public right of way access to the proposed development.

The agent for the application was present at the meeting and addressed the Committee in response to the petitioners’ remarks. Key points of their address included:

• The site benefited from already having obtained outline planning permission awarded by the Planning Inspectorate under appeal; this permission included details surrounding highways access.
• The scheme had been revised to account for officers, and the Inspector’s, comments. The revisions included a flush front build line with neighbouring properties on Foxdell and Firs Walk, reduced bulk and scale of the dwellings, changed roof materials to keep in context with local character, and a greater amount of soft landscaping to the front.
• The provision of 3 family-sized houses would contribute to meeting an identified need for 3 or more-bedroom houses in the Borough.
• Amenity space would be well in excess of requirements.

Officers reiterated that the principle of the development, and the access arrangements, had been approved by the Planning Inspectorate and were not matters that the Committee could consider as part of this reserved matters application. By way of clarification, the Chairman highlighted that the Committee had previously refused an associated outline planning permission application for this development; that decision had subsequently been overturned by the Secretary of State effectively giving permission for the development to go ahead.

Members thanked officers for the report and presentation and were encouraged by the revisions made to the scheme in reducing its bulk and impact on the street scene. Concerns remained around the impact of sunlight issues on neighbouring properties; officers noted that there would be an impact on the evening sunlight levels of neighbouring occupiers but it was deemed to be a minor and acceptable impact by both officers and the Inspector.

It was highlighted that a number of conditions had been proposed within the officer’s report including the submission of a construction management plan which would include measures to be taken by the developer to minimise pollution and disturbance during constriction. Regarding landscaping, officers also confirmed that a planting schedule had been submitted and secured as part of the approved drawings. A further condition proposed within the report was the removal of permitted development rights ensuring any changes to the properties in future would require explicit planning permission. The Committee agreed that the proposed conditions were robust.

The officer’s recommendation was moved, seconded, and when put to a vote, unanimously agreed.

RESOLVED: That the application be approved, as per the officer’s recommendation.