planning development control committee - 21 june 2011 ...€¦ · compromised. policy cp5 confirms...

Planning Development Control Committee - 21 June 2011 Report Item 1

Application No: 11/96148/FULL Full Application Site: Land Of Home Farm Known As Big Field, Hamptworth Estate, Salisbury, SP5

2DS Proposal: Installation of 5MW ground mounted solar photovoltaic panels; sub station;

transformer/inverters

Applicant: Mr G Anderson

Case Officer: Rob Ainslie

Parish: REDLYNCH

1. DISTRICT/BOROUGH: Salisbury District Council 2. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Major Development Contrary to Parish Council View

3. DEVELOPMENT PLAN DESIGNATION

No specific designation

4. PRINCIPAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN POLICIES

CP1 Nature Conservation Sites of International Importance CP2 The Natural Environment CP3 Green Infrastructure CP4 Climate Change CP5 Renewable Energy CP7 The Built Environment CP17 The Land Based Economy DP1 General Development Principles CP6 Pollution NATIONAL PLANNING POLICIES PPS5 Planning for the Historic Environment PPS7 Sustainable Development in Rural Areas PPS9 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation PPG13 Transport PPS22 Renewable Energy

5. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received

6. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS

6.1 Landford Parish Council: The site is not completely out of public view since a byway passes along one edge of Big Field. It would be a very alien feature in the natural landscape. Will impact on the wider landscape character. Should 1

be used as agricultural land (questionable if the grass growth would be sufficient to support animal grazing). Concern about amount of construction traffic and maintenance needed for arrays. Economic benefit accrues to owner only. Proposal is not small scale and does not accord with Policy CP5.

6.2 Redlynch Parish Council: Happy to accept the decision reached by officers under their delegated powers. Councillors raised concerns over their limited knowledge and the impact of Policy CP5 a & c. At Annual meeting parishioners raised concerns on the route of the main cable and temporary disruption to the community.

6.3 Godshill Parish Council: Object: members feel is inappropriate for the National Park. (support comments made by New Forest Association).

7. CONSULTEES

7.1 Tree Officer: No objection on basis of further information submitted, subject to imposition of conditions

7.2 Ecologist: No objection subject to conditions 7.3 Landscape Officer: Recommends refusal. Intrinsic landscape value of sites will

be harmed even if not visible from public vantage points. The visual impact of the panels, fencing, substation would be unacceptable within the rural landscape. being semi industrial in nature and out of character in the rural and tranquil settings of the two sites. Concerns about lorry movements and impact on tracks and trees. Recent planting appears incongruous and would suggest different planting. If sheep are grazed under the panels it is likely that a short sward of fine leaved, acid grassland will survive rather than restored heathland.

7.4 Countryside Access Officer: No objection subject to conditions relating to byway and cabling.

7.5 Archaeologist: Recommends conditions should application be approved.

7.6 Natural England: No objection raised on basis of further species specific ecological surveys submitted. Concerns relating to the scale of the proposed development within the protected landscape of the National Park. The extent to which solar parks can be accommodated within a protected landscape depends on the extent to which the area’s special qualities and characteristics, and the reasons for which the area is designated, are likely to be affected.

7.7 Rights of Way (WC): No comments received 7.8 Defence Estates(MOD): no objections 7.9 Scottish & Southern Energy plc: No comments 7.10 Bournemouth Airport: No safeguarding objection.

7.11 Health and Safety Executive: No comments received 7.12 Highway Authority (HCC): No objection subject to conditions.

2

7.13 Highway Authority (WC): No objection in principle to this proposal, but requires clarification of cabling route and number type and frequency of vehicles during construction and after completion. Update to be reported orally at the meeting.

7.14 Southampton Airport: No objections.

8. REPRESENTATIONS

8.1 Eight letters of objection and concerns from residents about contradiction in documentation about access for construction detailed within the Construction Traffic Management Plan. Highlight need for further ecological survey as outlined in report. Seeking an assurance that construction work will not take place during the nesting bird season. Concern that applicant informed at public meeting that birds of prey would be employed to protect solar panels from corrosive effects of bird faeces. Potential impact on local bird populations. Concerns about cable route and disruption to local residents.

8.2 One letter of support: In the present national situation re future energy supplies, every potential renewable source must be tapped, and photovoltaics are a simple, if initially costly solution.

8.3 The New Forest Association Object. The objectives of the National Park will be compromised. Loss of woodland and visual intrusion of the scheme detract from the two purposes and the development's nature is such that it makes remarkably little contribution to the associated duty. The NFA support Policy CP5 and encourages the Authority to seek building integrated photovoltaic on new developments and photovoltaic installations at remote sites that eliminate the need for unsightly cables. The NFA contend the installation is not small scale and is therefore contrary to policy. No overriding reasons why an exception should be made. Applicants say development is not visible from any distance and has no adverse impact on qualities of National Park, but this demeans the National Park, the joy of which is its diversity of landscape (Chapter 2 Core Strategy). Each element of landscape needs protection. Landscape value is only one element of National Park value. Habitat protection is another. This development is adjacent to a bridleway through an extensive stretch of woodland. Quiet woodland routes are as equally the essence of the Forest as heathlands and need equal protection.

8.4 CPRE (Wiltshire): Would support generally any green energy related proposal that does not have any damaging impact on either local ecology or environment. Request that the panels are constructed high enough off the ground to allow access for grazing to actually take place. Grazing resulting in animal rub and damage to the construction will result in grazing being halted. The grass will not be able to be cut and silaged or hayed within such a solar array.

8.5 Supporting information from Applicant: This application will enable applicants farming business to diversify its core business in a new direction and yet have little effect on the core farming business as sheep will still be able to graze under the solar panels. Will enable the farm operation to invest in stock, plant machinery, fixtures and fittings and to continue its stewardship of this part of the forest. Landscape impact on the local population is minimal with a planting regime to ensure any further views are restricted. An area outside of the immediate bounds of the site. Few ecological, archaeological, arboricultural and landscape issues have been identified. Planning application is in accord with national and local aims and policies with respect to renewable energy and agriculture. Does not harm intrinsic quality of the land and maintains agricultural use of the site. 3

9. RELEVANT HISTORY

9.1 Installation of 5MW ground mounted solar photovoltaic panels; transformer/inverters (Cloven Hill, Hamptworth) 96156): Application being considered concurrently (Item 2).

10. ASSESSMENT

10.1 The site is an agricultural field in a remote location surrounded by forest located

within the Hamptworth Estate in the northern part of the National Park. Lyburn Road lies further to the east, with Home Farm being located to the north of site beyond the woodland. Pound Bottom lies further to the south west.

10.2 Whilst the application site is surrounded by forest, a footpath lies to the north of the site and currently offers filtered views into the application site. Recent planting has reduced such views, however glimpses of the field from the footpath are still possible.

10.3 The proposal is for the installation of ground mounted solar photovoltaic arrays across the field together with a sub station, transformer and inverters. The sub station and compound would be located within the northern part of the field close to the existing access into the site. Five small transformer/inverter buildings would be located more centrally within the field.

10.4 The panels would generate a peak output of 5MW of emission free, renewable energy to be fed into the national grid via cabling, the proposed route of which is yet to be confirmed. The frames have been designed to allow access under and around the arrays for livestock to graze the field. The solar arrays would have a finite lifespan and any consent would not run for more than 25 years.

10.5 The proposed works also include associated works including boundary fencing and landscaping. The application has been accompanied by a series of detailed reports such as archaeology, ecology, landscape and visual impact assessment.

10.6 As with the scheme considered at last month’s Planning Committee on the Cadland Estate, the main issues for consideration in this application are as follows:

The extent to which the proposals comply with policies contained within the Core Strategy and National Planning Policy.

The impact of the proposals on the landscape character of the site, the surrounding locality and the intrinsic value of the National Park generally.

The impact of the proposals on ecological interests. The wider socio-economic and environmental benefits that could accrue

from the proposal.

10.7 Policy Considerations Planning Policy Statement 22 gives special consideration to applications for renewable energy projects in National Parks in Paragraph 11 where it confirms that, "...permission for renewable energy projects should only be granted where it can be demonstrated that the objectives of designation of the area will not be compromised by the development, and any significant adverse effects on the qualities for which the area has been designated are clearly outweighed by the environmental, social and economic benefits".

4

Paragraph 12 states that "...small scale development should be permitted within areas such as National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Heritage Coasts provided there is no significant environmental detriment to the area concerned".

10.8 The guidance set out in PPS22 is reflected in the Authority's Core Strategy policy with Paragraph 5.4 confirming that the potential for renewable energy within the park will need to be balanced against the potential adverse visual and amenity impacts and that permission should only be granted where it can be demonstrated that the objectives of National Park designation will not be compromised. Policy CP5 confirms that renewable energy schemes will be permitted where they are small scale, are located to reduce visual impacts and do not have any significant impacts on the special qualities of the park.

10.9 In addition to the above policies it is notable that the English National Park

Authorities Association (ENPAA) has prepared a series of policy position statements which aim to reflect the collective position of National Parks on a number of key issues (it must be noted that these have no formal status as part of the statutory development plan for the National Parks). The ENPAA statement on Renewable Energy re-iterates the guidance in PPS22 supporting small scale schemes that do not damage the special qualities of National Parks. The statement also encourages developers to demonstrate how the schemes would provide long term sustained support to the socio-economic well being of the local community.

10.10 In 2009 the Authority and New Forest District Council commissioned a detailed

assessment of the renewable energy potential of the combined area. The report identified potential of the area for biomass and photovoltiac schemes in particular. The study concluded that the New Forest lends itself to micro-generation rather than large generation plants.

10.11 Bearing the above in mind, it is clear that the emphasis within the policy

framework is generally on supporting small scale community based schemes. Whilst larger scale schemes are not explicitly precluded in policy terms, the key policy requirement is the demonstration that the objectives of National Park designation will not be compromised by the development. Where there are significant adverse effects on the qualities for which the park has been designated, then these would need to be clearly outweighed by environmental, social and economic benefits.

10.12 The potential effects of the scheme on the special qualities of the Park are

addressed elsewhere in the report and whether the scheme accords with policy in this respect however there is also an additional policy which requires further consideration.

10.13 Policy CP17 confirms that land based businesses that help maintain the overall

character and cultural identity of the National Park will be supported by supporting farming that is beneficial to the forest through farm diversification. The scheme forms part of the wider management of the estate and would be considered as an element of diversification which would allow the resources to be re-directed to further support the agricultural/forestry activity which currently takes place within the land under the ownership of the applicant. Therefore, whilst the scheme arguably falls outside the scope of Policy CP5 (by virtue of not being small scale) there are considered to be good reasons that outweigh this consideration with specific regard to Policy CP17 and also the duty of the National Park in pursuing its purposes, to foster economic and social well-being of local communities.

5

10.14 Impact Considerations The field, despite its remote location, is bounded to the north by a byway open to all traffic (BOAT). This path currently offers limited filtered views into the site. Some landscaping has been undertaken already to reduce such views and further landscaping is proposed to close other existing views.

10.15 It is acknowledged that the location of the site and proposed landscaping scheme will severely limit views into the site and therefore reduce the impact of the arrays and substation on the immediate surrounding locality.

10.16 The Landscape Officer has raised the concern that the landscape value of the field in itself is equally of worth and the fact that the site is largely hidden from view does not reduce the importance of ensuring that the intrinsic character and appearance of the landscape is protected. Natural England in their response also refer to the importance of the protected landscape of the National Park and highlight the need to have regard as to how the proposal would affect the special qualities and character of the area.

10.17 The concerns of the Landscape Officer are valid and there is certainly an argument as to how many schemes the Authority can accommodate before they could be considered to adversely impact the intrinsic landscape quality of the National Park to such an extent that the other material factors would not outweigh this issue. In this particular case, it is considered that a balance needs to be struck against the socio-economic and environmental benefits that could be achieved by the approval of the scheme and the issue of impact on intrinsic landscape character can be accepted (albeit finely balanced). After careful consideration, it is concluded that, whilst there may be some acknowledged impact on the intrinsic value of the Park during the lifetime of the development (25 years) this is outweighed by the benefits from the development which include:

i) Reducing the use of non-renewable resources;

ii) Diversification of the rural economy

iii) Providing a long term revenue to the economy of the business to help continue its stewardship of this part of the New Forest that benefits the local community and visitors alike.

10.18 The concerns about the cabling route are noted, however the details of this

would be considered by the Statutory undertaker within their permitted development rights, and in consultation with necessary bodies.

10.19 Concerns raised about impact on the existing tracks by construction vehicles are noted, however it is also must be acknowledged that large vehicles already use the existing tracks as part of the ongoing forestry and agricultural enterprises within the estate and it is considered that the work associated with this scheme would not impact above and beyond the existing activity to an unreasonable degree.

10.20 Ecology Interests Initially concerns were raised by Natural England about the lack of appropriate reptile and amphibian surveys having been carried out. The applicant has since undertaken such surveys which have been given consideration by Natural

6

England who now no longer raise an objection subject to an appropriate condition (Condition 6).

10.21 Conclusion In summary, it is considered, in combination with the earlier consented scheme at Cadland, that, for now, the capacity for the National Park to absorb this type of development has reached its optimum level at 10MW with the recommendation for approval of this scheme.

11. RECOMMENDATION

Grant Subject to Conditions Condition(s)

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. No development shall take place until details of the photovoltaic collectors, location of CCTV cameras, substation infrastructure buildings, fencing, boundary treatment and access arrangements have been submitted to and approved by the New Forest National Park Authority. Reason: To ensure an acceptable appearance of the building in accordance with Policy DP1 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (DPD) (December 2010).

3. Within 25 years of the date of this permission or on the cessation of the use of the land for the generation of renewable energy, whichever is the sooner, the land shall be restored to a condition which has first been agreed by the New Forest National Park Authority. Reason: To protect the amenities of the area in accordance with Policy DP1 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (DPD) (December 2010).

4. No development shall take place until a scheme of landscaping of the site has been submitted to and approved in writing by the New Forest National Park Authority. This scheme shall include :

(a) the existing trees and shrubs which have been agreed to be retained; (b) a specification for new planting (species, size, spacing and location); (c) areas for hard surfacing and the materials to be used (d) other means of enclosure; (e) location of trench for CCTV cable and depth/width of trench; and (f) a method and programme for its implementation and the means to

provide for its future maintenance. Reason: To ensure that the development takes place in an appropriate way and to comply with Policy DP1 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (DPD) (December 2010).

5. All planting, seeding or turfing comprised in the approved details of landscaping shall be carried out in the first planting and seeding seasons following the

7

occupation of the buildings or the completion of the development, whichever is the sooner. Any trees or plants which within a period of 5 years from the completion of the development die, are removed or become seriously damaged or diseased shall be replaced in the next planting season with others of similar size or species, unless the Local Planning Authority gives written consent to any variation. Reason: To ensure the appearance and setting of the development is satisfactory and to comply with Policy DP1 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (DPD) (December 2010).

6. No development shall take place until a final plan for mitigation and compensation to include the measures set out in the GPM Ecology Report dated 19 April 2011 and the following:

i. Delivery of measures for breeding waders within the quarry restoration to include protection of breeding area by use of ditch and provision of wader shingle nesting feature similarly protected by water (i.e. island or shingle bar)

ii. The area of over-wintering stubbles to be provided to be increased to 12ha

iii. Lifetime of the Conservation Management Plan Ecological Management Committee to cover the duration of the development and involve representation of the Authority at all times, all measures to be subject to the agreement of the Authority.

Development shall only proceed in accordance with these approved details. Reason: To safeguard protected species in accordance with Policies DP1 and CP2 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (DPD) (December 2010).

7. No external lighting shall be installed on the site before details of such proposals have first been submitted to and approved by the New Forest National Park Authority. Reason: To protect the amenities of the area in accordance with Policies DP1 and CP6 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (DPD) (December 2010).

8. No development shall take place until a written scheme for a programme of archaeological investigation and/or recording has been submitted to and approved by the local planning authority in writing. The written scheme shall include:

i. site investigation in accordance with the agreed scheme and programme.

ii. proposals for post-investigation assessment and analysis of the results.

iii. proposals for post-investigation analysis, submission of a publication report, preparation of site archive and deposition at a museum store approved by the Planning Authority.

8

Reason: The development is located in an area of archaeological significance where the recording of archaeological remains should be carried out prior to the development taking place in accordance with Policy DP1 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (DPD) (December 2010) and PPS5 ‘Planning for the Historic Environment’.

9. The development hereby approved shall not take place until the arrangements to be taken for the protection of the trees and hedges on the site, in accordance with the submitted report by Wessex Woodland Management Limited March 2011, have been implemented. Reason: To safeguard trees and natural features which are important to the visual amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies DP1 and CP2 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (DPD) (December 2010).

10. Forestry operations within compartments BF2, BF3 and BF4 of the submitted plans and report (Wessex Woodland Management Limited March 2011) shall be carried out in accordance with management plans to be agreed by the National Park Authority until the site is decommissioned. Reason: To ensure retention of adequate stocking density and to provide an effective visual screen to the site which is important to the visual amenities of the area, in accordance with Policies DP1 and CP2 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (DPD) (December 2010).

9

New Forest National Park AuthoritySouth Efford House, Milford Road, Everton, SO41 0JD

Tel: 01590 646600 Fax: 01590 646666 Date: 02/06/2011

SCALE: 1:10000

Ref: 11/96148/FULL

© Crown Copyright and Database Right 2011 Ordnance Survey 1000114703

00m18

42

21 24 27 30

00m33

42

421800m

21 24 27 30

423300m

00m7911

82

85

88

91

94

00m9711

117900m

82

85

88

91

94

119700m

10

ann.wood

Text Box

Item 1


Application No: 11/96156/FULL Full Application Site: Cloven Hill Solar, Lyburn Road, Hamptworth, Salisbury, SP5 2PX Proposal: Installation of 5MW ground mounted solar photovoltaic panels; transformer/inverters

Applicant: Mr G Anderson

Case Officer: Rob Ainslie

Parish: REDLYNCH

1. DISTRICT/BOROUGH: Salisbury District Council 2. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Major Development




CP1 Nature Conservation Sites of International Importance CP2 The Natural Environment DP1 General Development Principles CP4 Climate Change CP5 Renewable Energy CP3 Green Infrastructure CP6 Pollution CP7 The Built Environment CP17 The Land Based Economy NATIONAL PLANNING POLICIES PPS5 Planning for the Historic Environment PPS7 Sustainable Development in Rural Areas PPS9 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation PPG13 Transport PPS22 Renewable Energy

5. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received

6. PARISH COUNCIL COMMENTS 6.1 Landford Parish Council: Object. The suggested ecological mitigation is the

felling along the southern, western and eastern sides to allow large areas of heathland to develop. It is also stated that the commercial woodland has now reached maturity hence significant felling over the next few years would not be 11

unexpected. There is concern that the clearing could enable significant views into the site from footpaths. It would be a very alien feature in the natural landscape. Proposal is not small scale and does not accord with Policy CP5, could impact on the wider landscape character and its economic benefits will accrue only to the landowner.

6.2 Redlynch Parish Council: Happy to accept the decision reached by officers under their delegated powers. Councillors raised their concerns over their limited knowledge and the impact of Policy CP5 a & c. At Annual meeting parishioners raised concerns on the route of the main cable and disruption to the community although temporary.

6.3 Godshill Parish Council: Object to the application which members feel are inappropriate for the National Park (wholeheartedly support the letters submitted by the New Forest Association)

7. CONSULTEES

7.1 Tree Officer: No objection subject to conditions (on basis of further information submitted by applicant)

7.2 Ecologist: No objection, based on further survey work, subject to conditions

7.3 Landscape Officer: Recommends refusal Intrinsic landscape value of sites will

be harmed even if not visible from public vantage points. The visual impact of the panels, fencing, substation would be unacceptable within the rural landscape, being semi industrial in nature and out of character in the rural and tranquil settings of the two sites. Concerns about lorry movements and impact on tracks and trees. Recent planting appears incongruous and would suggest different planting. If sheep are grazed under the panels it is likely that a short sward of fine leaved, acid grassland will survive rather than restored heathland (the latter which was preferred at the site visit by the applicant).

7.4 Countryside Access Officer: The existence of the proposed panels and buildings

would not affect the public’s enjoyment of the National Park through the use of publicly accessible paths and land, subject to conditions relating to Byway and cabling.

7.5 Archaeologist: Recommends conditions should permission be granted.

7.6 Natural England: No objection, following further species specific ecological surveys having been undertaken. Concerns relating to the scale of the proposed development within the protected landscape of the National Park.

7.7 Rights of Way (WC): Please No objection subject to condition. 7.8 Defence Estates (MOD): No objections to this proposal. 7.9 Bournemouth Airport: No objections to this proposal 7.10 Scottish & Southern Energy plc: No comment. 7.11 Health and Safety Executive:

12

7.12 Highway Authority (HCC): No objections subject to conditions.

7.13 Highway Authority (WC): No objection in principle to this proposal, but requires clarification of cabling route and number type and frequency of vehicles during construction and after completion. Update to be reported orally at the meeting.

7.14 Southampton Airport: No objections.

8. REPRESENTATIONS

8.1 Eight Letters of objection and concern from residents about contradiction in documentation about access for construction detailed within the Construction Traffic Management Plan. Highlight need for further ecological survey as outlined in report. Seeking an assurance that construction work will not take place during the nesting bird season. Concern that applicant informed at public meeting that birds of prey would be employed to protect solar panels from corrosive effects of bird faeces. Potential impact on local bird populations. Concerns about cable route and disruption to local residents.

8.2 One letter of support: In the present national situation re future energy supplies, every potential renewable source must be tapped, and photovoltaics are a simple, if initially costly solution.

8.3 The New Forest Association: Object. The objectives of the National Park will be compromised. Loss of woodland and visual intrusion of the scheme detract from the two purposes and the development's nature is such that it makes remarkably little contribution to the associated duty. The NFA support Policy CP5 and encourages the Authority to seek building integrated photovoltaic on new developments and photovoltaic installations at remote sites that eliminate the need for unsightly cables. The NFA contend the installation is not small scale and is therefore contrary to policy. No overriding reasons why an exception should be made. Applicants say development is not visible from any distance and has no adverse impact on qualities of National Park, but this demeans the National Park, the joy of which is its diversity of landscape (Chapter 2 Core Strategy). Each element of landscape needs protection. Landscape value is only one element of National Park value. Habitat protection is another. This development is adjacent to a bridleway through an extensive stretch of woodland. Quiet woodland routes are as equally the essence of the Forest as heathlands and need equal protection.

8.4 CPRE (Wiltshire) Would support generally any green energy related proposal

that does not have any damaging impact on either local ecology or environment. Request that the panels are constructed high enough off the ground to allow access for grazing to actually take place. Grazing resulting in animal rub and damage to the construction will result in grazing being halted. The grass will not be able to be cut and silaged or hayed within such a solar array.

8.5 Supporting information from Applicant: The site is in a block of second generation commercial natural regeneration conifer woodland. There is a significant environmental benefit in converting the woodland to an area of ecological enhancement. The landscape impact on local people is minimal as the site is heavily screened on all sides. Enables the forestry business to continue its stewardship of this part of the New Forest. Will help support and create jobs. Will enable the applicant to continue to invest in its business to bring the business to a modern standard that is fit for purpose. Few archaeological, ecological, arboricultural and landscape issues have been identified. Is in accord with

13

policies, does not harm intrinsic quality of the land. Will create a green corridor to aid and assist the breeding, movement and feeding of birds, animals, reptiles and insects. Will help restore within the site boundary a significant area of heathland a greater ecological benefit that commercial woodland.

9. RELEVANT HISTORY

9.1 Installation of 5MW ground mounted solar photovoltaic panels; transformer/inverters (Big Field) (96148) Application being considered concurrently. (Item 1)

10. ASSESSMENT

10.1 The site is wooded area in a remote location surrounded by forest to the south east and west within the Hamptworth Estate in the northern part of the National Park. Big Field, the subject of another application lies further to the north, with Pound Bottom Landfill site located further to the west. To the immediate north of the site lie power lines running in an east/west direction. The land is typified by a number of trees, predominantly conifer, and undulating levels.

10.2 There are limited footpaths in the locality with none offering views into the application site.

10.3 The proposal comprises the felling of the majority of the woodland within the site and the installation of ground mounted solar photovoltaic arrays across the field. The panels would generate a peak output of 5MW of emission free, renewable energy to be fed into the national grid via cabling, The proposed route of which is yet to be confirmed. The solar arrays would have a finite lifespan and any consent would not run for more than 25 years. .

10.4 The proposed works also include associated works including boundary fencing and landscaping. The application has been accompanied by a series of detailed reports such as archaeology, ecology, landscape and visual impact assessment.

10.5 As with the scheme considered at last months Planning Committee on the Cadland Estate, the main issues for consideration in this application are as follows:

The extent to which the proposals comply with policies contained within the Core Strategy and National Planning Policy.

The impact of the proposals on the landscape character of the site, the surrounding locality and the intrinsic value of the National Park generally.

The impact of the proposals on ecological interests. The extent to which the scheme for Hamptworth would comply with policy

cumulatively with the scheme at Big Field and the impact approval of both would have on the intrinsic quality of the landscape character of the area.

10.6 Policy Considerations

Planning Policy Statement 22 gives special consideration to applications for renewable energy projects in National Parks in Paragraph 11 where it confirms that, "...permission for renewable energy projects should only be granted where it can be demonstrated that the objectives of designation of the area will not be compromised by the development, and any significant adverse effects on the

14

qualities for which the area has been designated are clearly outweighed by the environmental, social and economic benefits".

10.7 Paragraph 12 states that "...small scale development should be permitted within areas such as National Parks, Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty and Heritage Coasts provided there is no significant environmental detriment to the area concerned". The guidance set out in PPS22 is reflected in the Authority's Core Strategy policy with Paragraph 5.4 confirming that the potential for renewable energy within the park will need to be balanced against the potential adverse visual and amenity impacts and that permission should only be granted where it can be demonstrated that the objectives of National Park designation will not be compromised. Policy CP5 confirms that renewable energy schemes’ will be permitted where they are small scale, are located to reduce visual impacts and do not have any significant impacts on the special qualities of the park.

10.8 In addition to the above policies it is notable that the English National Park Authorities Association (ENPAA) has prepared a series of policy position statements which aim to reflect the collective position of National Parks on a number of key issues (it must be noted that these have no formal status as part of the statutory development plan for the National Parks). The ENPAA statement on Renewable Energy re-iterates the guidance in PPS22 supporting small scale schemes that do not damage the special qualities of National Parks. The statement also encourages developers to demonstrate how the schemes would provide long term sustained support to the socio-economic well being of the local community.

10.9 In 2009 the Authority and New Forest District Council commissioned a detailed assessment of the renewable energy potential of the combined area. The report identified potential of the area for biomass and photovoltaic schemes in particular. The study concluded that the New Forest lends itself to micro-generation rather than large generation plants.

10.10 Bearing the above in mind, it is clear that the emphasis within the policy framework is generally on supporting small scale community based schemes. While larger scale schemes are not explicitly precluded in policy terms, the key policy requirement is the demonstration that the objectives of National Park designation will not be compromised by the development. Even if there are significant adverse effects on the qualities for which the park has been designated these would need to be clearly outweighed by environmental, social and economic benefits. In this respect, even singularly, the two schemes (whilst under separate ownership) could not be considered to be small scale. Taken cumulatively it is clear that the proposals are significant. Notwithstanding this there needs to be a consideration as to whether, given that the schemes are not small scale, whether there are policy reasons which would outweigh the presumption in Policy CP5 against larger scale schemes.

10.11 The potential effects of the scheme on the special qualities of the Park are addressed elsewhere in the report and whether the scheme accords with policy in this respect however there is also an additional policy which requires further consideration.

10.12 Policy CP17 confirms that land based businesses that help maintain the overall character and cultural identity of the National Park will be supported by supporting farming that is beneficial to the forest through farm diversification. In this respect it is important to note that this application site is not in the same ownership (or submitted by the same applicant) as the application for Big Field.

15

The forestry areas, including the application site, are owned by the applicant and the business undertaken is principally the planting, growing and felling of timber. The woodlands are managed as a commercial crop employing one person full time and external contractors are brought in to manage the woodland work. The business requires significant investment to bring it up to modern standard. The applicant suggests that the proposal will enable him to continue to invest in his business to bring it up to a modern standard and continue its stewardship of this part of the National Park. Therefore, whilst the scheme arguably falls outside the scope of Policy CP5 (by virtue of not being small scale) there are considered to be good reasons that outweigh this consideration with specific regard to Policy CP17 and also the duty of the National Park in pursuing its purposes, to foster economic and social well-being of local communities. Notwithstanding this there are also issues concerning impact on the landscape which are considered below.

Impact Considerations

10.13 It is acknowledged that the location of the site and proposed landscaping scheme will severely limit views into the site and therefore reduce the impact of the arrays on the immediate surrounding locality. Notwithstanding this, the Landscape Officer has raised the concern that it is necessary to understand that the landscape value of the site in itself is equally of worth, irrespective of the fact that the site could be largely hidden from view and does not reduce the importance of ensuring that the intrinsic character and appearance of the landscape is protected'.

10.14 The Landscape Officer raises the concern that the character of the area will change from that of woodland to a semi-industrial installation, together with security fencing and associated infrastructure. These concerns are noted and are a valid material consideration. In particular, one would normally expect the felling of such a large amount of forest to be balanced by replanting in the same location, thus retaining the character of the area. In this respect the proposal will create a wholesale change to the character of this particular area. Even given the benefits of the proposed heathland restoration of part of the area, which is acknowledged as a benefit, and the benefits in terms of renewable energy it is considered that the proposal would have an impact on the existing landscape character. In particular it must be acknowledged that there is only a finite extent to which the National Park can accommodate such installations without having an irreconcilable impact on the intrinsic quality of the National Park. Whilst it is the balanced view that the approval of the scheme for Big Field can be accommodated with the inherent benefits, an additional scheme, of such a scale (also being in such close proximity to the Big Field scheme) would clearly exceed what could be considered to be reasonable in terms of the impact on the intrinsic quality of the park. In addition, it is considered that this scheme differs from the Big Field scheme in that requires a wholesale and irrevocable change in the existing landscape character of the site, whereas the Big Field scheme predominantly would revert to an agricultural field after 25 years (and could be partially retained for such use in the meantime in any event).

10.15 Concerns raised about impact on the existing tracks by construction vehicles are noted, however it is also must be acknowledged that large vehicles already use the existing tracks as part of the ongoing forestry and agricultural enterprises within the estate and it is considered that the work associated with this scheme would not impact above and beyond the existing activity to an unreasonable degree.

16

10.16 Ecology Interests On the basis of further surveys undertaken by the applicant is not considered that a refusal could be sustained on ecological grounds.

10.17 Cabling Works Concern has been raised in relation to the potential cabling route for the proposal. The applicants have suggested an alternative route across Pound Bottom to Forest Road. The issue of cabling would appear to fall under permitted development rights by the relevant electricity company as the statutory undertaker. Any route suggested by the applicant would need to be given consideration by the electricity company and require consultation with appropriate bodies were it to involve works within designated sites. A refusal could not therefore be sustained on this issue.

10.18 Conclusion In summary, it is considered, in combination with the earlier consented scheme at Cadland, and the scheme recommended for approval at Item 1 (Big Field) that, for now, the capacity for the National Park to absorb this type of development has reached its optimum level at 10MW and this application is therefore considered to have an unacceptable impact of the intrinsic landscape quality of the National Park and refusal is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION Refusal Reasons 1. The proposed development is not considered to be small scale and in combination with

the two 5MW schemes already consented in the National Park would have an unacceptable impact on the intrinsic landscape quality of the National Park. It is not considered that the suggested benefits as part of a diversification scheme which together with the benefits of renewable energy would outweigh the fundamental Policy presumption against such development on grounds of scale, given its close proximity to the scheme at Big Field, and intrinsic landscape impact in this location. In addition, it is considered that the permanent change in the character of the site from a wooded area would impact on the intrinsic landscape character of the National Park to its detriment. The proposal is therefore contrary to Policies DP1 and DP5 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD (December 2010) PPS7 (Sustainable Development in Rural Areas) and PPS22 (Renewable Energy).

17


Tel: 01590 646600 Fax: 01590 646666 Date: 08/06/2011

Item: 2

SCALE: 1:12500

Ref: 11/96156/FULL


50m17

42

21 24 28 31

00m35

42

421750m

21 24 28 31

423500m

00m7611

79

83

86

90

93

00m9711

117600m

79

83

86

90

93

119700m


Application No: 11/96155/FULL Full Application Site: Pine Lodge, Forest Road, Hale, Fordingbridge, SP6 2NP Proposal: Single storey extension; sewage treatment plant

Applicant: Mr S Ogg

Case Officer: Liz Young

Parish: HALE

1. DISTRICT/BOROUGH: New Forest District Council 2. REASON FOR COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION

Previous Committee consideration.




DP1 General Development Principles DP11 Extensions to Dwellings

5. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received


Hale Parish Council: Will accept a delegated decision on the understanding that the workshop is no longer proposed (no further comments based upon these amendments).

7. CONSULTEES

7.1 Environmental Protection NFDC: No objection in principle but recommend that planning permission should only be granted if the standard contaminated land condition would be imposed (establishing potential for contamination and setting out remediation where necessary).

7.2 Highway Authority (HCC): No comments received. 7.3 Tree Officer: No objections raised; the proposed extension would not impact

upon trees.

8. REPRESENTATIONS

8.1 Additional information submitted by the applicant indicates the following:

19

The proposed workshop is solely for the use of Mr Ogg as his repair centre for Landrovers and similar vehicles and the existing building is tenanted by "Forest Classics" who service and repair motorcycles. The fore court has a separate tenant and is used for car sales.

The new workshop is essential for Mr Ogg to relocate his business from rented premises in Whiteparish and re-establish it following a period of ill health.

Currently two people are employed on the site with four more employed part time.

The existing workshop is subject to a long term tenancy and is not available for his use.

9. RELEVANT HISTORY:

Change garage forecourt to residential use (two vehicular access points to remain); single storey side extension to Pine Lodge; double garage (to replace garage / office) (95375) refused on 2 September 2010

10. ASSESSMENT

10.1 Members will recall that this application was deferred at the committee meeting in May to allow officers to review the application in light of the further information which had been submitted about the original proposals which also included a proposal for a new workshop building to accommodate a new business use within the site. This further information was in response to a request by officers for clarification on the existing nature of the use of the site and that being proposed. Following this it became evident that the proposed workshop would conflict with the requirements of planning policy and the agent consequently withdrew this aspect of the proposals. Amended plans were subsequently received on 2 June 2011. The application now solely consists of the single storey extension and the sewage treatment plant.

10.2 This site comprises a car sales enterprise to the front, a motorcycle workshop to the rear and a residential property (a log cabin) towards the centre of the plot. Another, larger residential property lies to the rear of the site. The north and east boundaries are adjoined by natural woodland. The dwelling lies between the two elements of the business (car sales to the front and workshop to the rear).

10.3 A previous application in 2010 (reference 95375) included proposals to extend the dwelling and incorporate the garage forecourt into residential use. This was refused on the grounds that the proposal would involve the loss of over 0.05 hectares of land in employment use and because it would involve the encroachment of domestic curtilage towards the boundary with the highway, which would be at odds with the layout of residential development in the immediate locality. This earlier submission was assessed against the requirements of the policies of the former New Forest District Local Plan, which has now been superseded by the New Forest National Park Core Strategy.

10.4 This current proposal does not seek to extend the residential curtilage at the expense of losing the garage forecourt business and, following the receipt of amended plans, no longer seeks to introduce a new workshop building. The existing car sales use would be retained at the front of the site and the residential curtilage associated with Pine Lodge would remain unaltered. In addition to this a sewage treatment plant is propose on the north west 20

boundary of the site. The residential outbuilding is no longer proposed and the design of the extension proposed on Pine Lodge remains unchanged from the previous submission. The development now proposed would not result in any loss of employment.

10.5 The main issues under consideration would be: Potential impact upon the amenities of neighbouring properties along with

any highway safety considerations. The extent of floorspace increase proposed onto Pine Lodge (based on the

property as it existed on 1 July 1982).

10.6 The proposed extension would not encroach towards the boundary with the neighbouring property and it would not be visible from the property to the rear. The proposal would therefore not lead to a significant loss of amenity to neighbouring residential properties and would be in accordance with the requirements of Policy DP1 of the adopted New Forest National Park Core Strategy.

10.7 As noted at the time of the previous planning application, the existing log cabin is an established and permanent dwelling and has a gross internal floorspace of 95 square metres. The proposed extension would amount to 29 square metres resulting in an increase of 30%. The extension would be sufficiently low key and would respect the scale and form of the existing building and would therefore be in accordance with the requirements of Policy CP14 of the adopted New Forest National Park Core Strategy. Permission is therefore recommended.

11. RECOMMENDATION

Grant Subject to Conditions Condition(s)

1. The development hereby permitted shall be begun before the expiration of three years from the date of this permission. Reason: To comply with Section 91 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as amended by Section 51 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 (or any re-enactment of that Order) no extension (or alterations) otherwise approved by Classes A, C or D of Part 1 of Schedule 2 to the Order, shall be erected or carried out without express planning permission first having been granted. Reason: To ensure the dwelling remains of a size which is appropriate to its location within the countryside and to comply with Policies DP10 and DP11 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (DPD) (December 2010).

3. The external facing materials shall match those used on the existing building. Reason: To ensure an acceptable appearance of the building in accordance with Policy DP1 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (DPD) (December 2010). 21

4. Before development is first commenced, a scheme to deal with any

contamination of the site shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the New Forest National Park Authority. This scheme shall include: (i) an investigation of the site carried out in accordance with BS10175:

2001. (ii) a risk assessment using the Contaminated Land Exposure Assessment

(CLEA) model whenever this is appropriate, and (iii) a detailed scheme for the remedial works to be carried out. If any other previously undiscovered contamination is found during the development of the site, this shall be notified to the New Forest National Park Authority immediately, along with a suitable risk assessment and where necessary, a remediation scheme. The remediation scheme shall be approved in writing by the New Forest National Park Authority. Development shall only take place in accordance with the scheme which has been approved. Reason: To ensure that any contaminated land on the site is identified and properly treated in the interests of the well-being of nearby residents and the environment in general in accordance with Policies DP1 and CP6 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (DPD) (December 2010).

Informative(s): 1. Please be aware that the area incorporated within the red line (the application site) is considered to be mixed residential and commercial use and is not considered to be indicative of the domestic curtilage associated with Pine Lodge. 2. Please be aware that this decision relates to amended plans received on 2 June 2011.

22


Tel: 01590 646600 Fax: 01590 646666 Date: 02/06/2011

SCALE: 1:5000

Ref: 11/96155/FULL


00m04

42

06 08

00m10

42

420400m

06 08

421000m

00m8211

84

86

88

90

00m9211

118200m

84

86

88

90

119200m

23

ann.wood

Text Box

Item 3


Application No: 11/96244/FULL Full Application Site: Joycol, Well Lane, Godshill, Fordingbridge, SP6 2LQ

Proposal: Replacement dwelling; outbuilding

Applicant: Mr & Mrs Vickers

Case Officer: Deborah Slade

Parish: GODSHILL


Contrary to Parish Council view.


Conservation Area


CP2 The Natural Environment CP7 The Built Environment CP8 Local Distinctiveness DP1 General Development Principles DP6 Design Principles DP10 Replacement Dwellings DP11 Extensions to Dwellings NATIONAL PLANNING POLICIES PPS5 Planning for the Historic Environment

5. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received


Godshill Parish Council: Recommends permission. The property is of reasonable size, has a sympathetic design and would enhance the area.

7. CONSULTEES

7.1 Environmental Services - Conservation Area: No objection subject to conditions.

7.2 Tree Officer: No objections subject to conditions. 24

7.3 Ecologist: No objection subject to conditions. 7.4 Countryside Access Officer: No objections. 7.5 Archaeologist: No objection subject to condition. 7.6 NFDC Engineering & Land Drainage: No objection subject to conditions. 8. REPRESENTATIONS

8.1 One letter of support was received from a neighbouring property on the

grounds that the design and layout have been sympathetically designed, and requiring consideration of a condition on hours of working.


9.1 Replacement dwelling; outbuilding (95864) refused on 7 January 2011 9.2 Demolition of existing dwelling (application for Conservation Area Consent to

demolish) (95865) approved on 7 January 2011

10. ASSESSMENT

10.1

Site The existing house, 'Joycol', is an unusual asbestos structure which may have its origins during the Second World War. It became legally established as a dwelling via planning permission in 1955. It is accessed via an unmade track, 'Well Lane' which steeply declines to the property from Southampton Road, the main road through Godshill. It is within the Western Escarpment Conservation Area, and is situated on the lower slope of the hillside. There is a large badger sett beneath the existing dwelling which spreads around the curtilage. The land in residential use is considered to be accurately denoted on the location plan; whilst once smaller, it appears to have been this extensive since at least 1999/2000.

10.2

Proposal Permission is sought for a 2-storey replacement dwelling with attic space. The dwelling would have a ridge height of 9.3 metres. Due to the topography, the ground would need to be levelled to accommodate the dwelling, and the house would have to be cut into the hillside by up to 1 metre at certain points. The house would be 11.5 metres wide in the main, and would be constructed of oak feather-edged cladding with a clay plain tile roof. Glazing would be mostly in two-light casement form, but with a feature 2-storey staircase window on the north-west elevation. The dwelling would be accompanied by a double garage and store with a ridge height of 5.5 metres.

10.3

Background Of relevance, planning permission for a proposed replacement dwelling and outbuilding was refused in January this year, for reasons of the floorspace of the dwelling and due to the scale and impacts of the development. Conservation Area Consent was however granted for the demolition of the existing dwelling.

25

10.4 Compared to the previous proposal, the main changes to the current scheme are: marginal re-siting of dwelling closer to existing building; a slight reduction in eave height and increase in ridge height; omission of a front canopy and rear balcony from the dwelling; altered design and scale of the outbuilding; plus arguments put forward in favour of the revised scheme and its compliance with policy.

10.5

Key issues The main issues to consider are policies DP1 and DP10 of the Core Strategy, including issues of floorspace, size, design, appearance and impacts on local character.

10.6 When comparing the proposed dwelling to the existing, it is clear that the structure would have a larger impact at the site due to its size and scale. The ridge height of the existing dwelling, for comparison, is 4.1 metres. Policy DP10 states that replacement dwellings must be of the same size as the dwelling as it existed in 1982, yet bearing in mind the scope for a 30% increase above this baseline via extensions, some flexibility can be applied in implementing policy DP10 on replacement dwellings, in particular where subservient 'extension' elements were incorporated into the replacement dwelling scheme. The proposed dwelling would not however be on a 'like for like' floorspace basis, but would instead utilise the potential for an increase in floorspace within the core element of the dwelling, as well as within a single storey side element.

10.7 In visual terms the main mass of the proposed dwelling would be considerably larger and more imposing than the existing dwelling. It would be unreasonable to insist upon a dwelling which has no additional height or impact than the existing, because the existing dwelling is in many ways substandard and of little aesthetic quality. However it is considered that in this context that a dwelling of such as size as that proposed would be too great a deviation away from the modest proportions of the house in this remote location within the Conservation Area. As such it would not comply with policy DP10.

10.8 The design of the proposed dwelling features a steeply pitched roof, modern gable feature windows and a traditional palette of materials. The modern window feature on the northern elevation would allow light into the building but would not be widely visible within the Conservation Area as it would face into the sloping garden hillside. The south facing two-storey gable window would be more visible from the fields to the south. Due to the topography the house would not be prominent when viewed from the north or east. The house would be visible from the south, and from the adjacent public footpath along the western boundary. The accompanying outbuilding would be of proportionate scale with the steep roof pitch proposed for the house. Again this would be visible from the south and west of the site. The development would be particularly visible within the landscape of the wider countryside.

10.9 The existing dwelling has a floorspace of 118 sq metres (excluding the restricted head height areas of the first floor room). This includes the single storey adjuncts of the property which were likely in place when the building was first established as a dwelling in 1955. The main mass of the proposed dwelling has been calculated as 123 sq metres, and the 'extension' area of the proposed dwelling would be an additional 23 sq metres, resulting in a replacement dwelling with a floorspace of 147 sq metres - a 24% increase over the existing building. In addition to quantitative considerations regarding

26

floorspace and size of dwelling, it should be noted that in any case the dwelling would have a clear additional - and it is argued harmful - impact on the rural character of the area due to its additional scale and impacts.

10.10

Siting Policy DP10 states that a replacement dwelling may be sited other than in the same position as the dwelling to be replaced, providing there are clear environmental benefits. The applicant proposes that re-siting of the dwelling would be beneficial as it would move the house away from the adjacent trees. The Authority's Tree Officer agrees that the trees would benefit from the proposed re-siting. There is therefore no objection to re-siting the dwelling so as to reduce its impact. However, moving the dwelling away from the site of the existing dwelling would require a S106 agreement to ensure that the original dwelling were demolished. This could not be achieved by planning condition. Although the dwelling would be re-sited, it would have additional impact over the existing dwelling due to the significant increase in size and scale.

10.11

Ecology The present dwelling has an extensive badger sett underneath it and within the curtilage. An ecological report has been included with the application which proposes stopping up the sett and providing a mitigation sett elsewhere at the site. The Authority's ecologist has assessed the proposal and concluded that this would be a satisfactory alternative so there would be no net harm to this protected species. No other protected species are likely to be affected by the proposal - suitable mitigation measures for barn owls and reptiles have been included, provided that the recommendations of the survey are adhered to.

10.12

Neighbouring amenities The closest property, The Well Ground, is over 40 metres away from the site of the proposed house, so there would be no specific impacts upon residential amenity. It is proposed that trees at the site would be protected during construction works.

10.13

Conclusion Overall it is considered that the proposed replacement dwelling would not respect the modest existing building, would still have too great an impact in terms of its size and scale and would thus be out of keeping with generally more modest dwellings in less prominent positions which typify the Conservation Area. The proposal is considered to be contrary to the Core Strategy and Development Management Policies due to the size and resultant impacts associated with the proposed dwelling and additional outbuilding, and refusal is therefore recommended.

11. RECOMMENDATION

Refuse Reason(s)

1. The proposed dwelling and outbuilding would have an unacceptable impact on the rural character and visual amenities of the countryside of the National

27

Park. In particular this is due to the increase in scale and impact in the local landscape compared to the existing situation, including impacts associated with light pollution caused by the extent of fenestration in the replacement dwelling. The proposal would not therefore preserve or enhance the character and appearance of the Western Escarpment Conservation Area, and it would be contrary to policies DP1, DP10, CP6, CP7 and CP8 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD (December 2010) and Government policy in PPS5 and PPS7.

28


Tel: 01590 646600 Fax: 01590 646666 Date: 02/06/2011

SCALE: 1:5000

Ref: 11/96244/FULL


00m72

41

74 76

00m78

41

417200m

74 76

417800m

00m4211

44

46

48

50

00m5211

114200m

44

46

48

50

115200m

29

ann.wood

Text Box

Item 4


Application No: 11/96297/FULL Full Application Site: Land Of Waldens, Newgrounds, Godshill, Fordingbridge, SP6 2LJ Proposal: Outbuilding (replacement of existing)

Applicant: The Executors of the late Mrs D M Betambeau

Case Officer: Deborah Slade

Parish: GODSHILL




Conservation Area


CP2 The Natural Environment DP1 General Development Principles CP7 The Built Environment CP8 Local Distinctiveness DP6 Design Principles DP12 Outbuildings NATIONAL PLANNING POLICIES PPS5 Planning for the Historic Environment

5. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received


Godshill Parish Council: Support application subject to securing appropriate finishes by planning condition.

7. CONSULTEES

7.1 Tree Officer: No tree objections. The garage falls within the unmodified root protection area of a good Oak to the north. However, existing site conditions are such that the area could reasonably be adjusted and no adverse impact to trees is anticipated.

7.2 Environmental Services - Conservation Area: No comments.

30

8. REPRESENTATIONS

No representations received.

9. RELEVANT HISTORY: 9

9.1 No recent planning history

10. ASSESSMENT

10.1 The site comprises a small, characterful agricultural barn of somewhat dilapidated appearance. It is sited within a small enclosure on the open forest and is surrounded on all sides by a designated Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) and a Special Area of Conservation (SAC). It is half-surrounded by a designated Ramsar Site and Special Protection Area (SPA).

10.2 In front of the building is an informal accessway from the sole road through Newgrounds, comprising an unmade track denoted by ruts in the ground. The land is owned by the nearby property, 'Waldens', and the area in front of the building is utilised as an informal parking space for two cars. The land does not benefit from planning permission for this use, nor has the building ever been granted planning permission for use in conjunction with residential activities. The existing building is not likely capably of fulfilling a garaging function due to its dilapidated state.

10.3 Consent is sought for a double garage and log store in lieu of the building in question. The proposed structure would be 3.4 metres wider than the existing barn which would necessitate cutting into the surrounding sloping bank. Following discussion with the Parish Council, the building would be finished in dark stained timber cladding, a slate or clay tile roof, and timber or aluminium windows.

10.4 Policy DP12 of the Core Strategy states that domestic outbuildings will be permitted where they are located within the residential curtilage. Residential curtilage is generally defined as "a small courtyard, girth or piece of ground attached to a dwellinghouse and forming one enclosure with it or so regarded by the law the area attached to and containing a dwellinghouse and its outbuildings”. This building would therefore not be located within the residential curtilage of Waldens and the proposal is contrary to policy DP12. The applicant contends that the land in question is residential curtilage but there is no evidence submitted to demonstrate this point and the land in question does not have the appearance of residential land. Nor does it adjoin the curtilage of the dwelling.

10.5 The proposal would result in a residential incursion into the open forest where there is no established residential use. The change of use of land from agricultural to residential is contrary to policy CP12. The New Forest suffers from great pressure for the use of grazing land for residential purposes and policy CP17 seeks to prevent the loss of grazing land to other land uses. This proposal would result in the domestication of the open countryside and which would adversely affect the character and appearance of the open forest.

10.6 In visual terms, the proposed domestic garage would appear isolated from any dwellinghouse and would appear out of character with its otherwise natural surroundings. The addition of a domestic garage to the forest landscape

31

would not be considered to preserve or enhance the Conservation Area. As such the proposal is contrary to Policies CP7 and CP8 of the Core Strategy.

10.7 Whilst it is considered that the proposal would have no direct impact upon nearby trees or conservation interests, the domestication of the site and resultant residential use would be harmful to the rural character of the area and visual amenity of the open forest periphery and therefore it is recommended that permission should be refused.

11. RECOMMENDATION

Refuse Reason(s)

1. The proposal for a domestic garage on agricultural land on the open forest would result in the domestication of the character of the area and visual intrusion within the rural landscape, as well as the loss of open countryside. As such the proposal would be contrary to policies CP12 , DP12, DP1, CP7 and CP8 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (DPD) (December 2010).

32


Tel: 01590 646600 Fax: 01590 646666 Date: 02/06/2011

SCALE: 1:5000

Ref: 11/96297/FULL


00m74

41

76 78 8000m

8241

417400m

76 78 80

418200m

00m4011

42

44

46

00m4811

114000m

42

44

46

114800m

33

ann.wood

Text Box

Item 5


Application No: 11/96299/FULL Full Application Site: Forest Corner Farm, Morgans Vale, Bramshaw, Lyndhurst, SO43 7JG Proposal: Single storey link block with first floor gallery (Demolish existing link block)

Applicant: Mr & Mrs Smith

Case Officer: Laura Harry

Parish: BRAMSHAW




Conservation Area


DP1 General Development Principles CP7 The Built Environment CP8 Local Distinctiveness DP11 Extensions to Dwellings NATIONAL PLANNING POLICIES PPS5 Planning for the Historic Environment

5. MEMBER COMMENTS

None received


Bramshaw Parish Council: Recommends permission - no comments to make on this application.

7. CONSULTEES

No consultations required

8. REPRESENTATIONS

8.1 One comment received from the occupiers of a neighbouring property which states that the windows in the proposed extension would overlook their garden. 34


9.1 Ground floor extension (55695) refused 11 January 1995; appeal allowed 23 November 1995.

9.2 Alterations and addition of a kitchen with bedroom and bathroom over (24146)

granted 30 June 1983.

10. ASSESSMENT

10.1 Forest Corner Farm is one of a group of three houses forming a small enclave of development set back from an adjoining lane at the north-western edge of the scattered village of Bramshaw and within the Forest Central (North) Conservation Area. It is understood that the property was formerly a shop with a separate part two-storey bakehouse adjoining and permission was granted in 1983 for a two-storey extension linking these two buildings.

10.2 Consent is sought for a single storey link block with a first floor gallery (demolish the existing link block). The extension would be faced in rendered brickwork and roofed with natural slate. The windows and doors would be constructed of softwood joinery and painted.

10.3 The dwelling as it existed on 1 July 1982 had a floorspace of 142 square metres. The proposed development, coupled with previous enlargements and the conversion of the bakehouse, would increase the floorspace of the property to 371 square metres, which amounts to a 161% (229 square metres) increase in floorspace. This increase in floorspace would be some five times that permitted by policy DP11. The existing cellar has not been calculated as original floorspace despite a previous appeal decision (55695). Under Policy DP11 floorspace is measured as the total internal habitable floorspace of the dwelling and thus a cellar would not be included. Essentially the proposal involves a replacement link with a porch, but incorporates a new first floor element which adds an additional 12 square metres to the existing floorspace.

10.4 Policy DP11 seeks to control the cumulative impact of proposals to extend dwellings using a 30% upper limit on increases in habitable floorspace. If such development was allowed, it would in the long-term lead to the gradual erosion of the rural character of the New Forest area. In some cases, this would occur through the visual impact of the development in terms of scale, massing and the impact on the existing dwelling, its curtilage, its neighbours and the wider environment, although it is acknowledged that in this case the proposed link would not erode the character of the area by way of visual impact. However, the issue in this particular case relates to the greater effects of increased activity and pressures associated with larger dwellings, which would damage the unique character and quality of the National Park.

10.5 A material planning consideration is an appeal decision for Brackenway,

Hangersley Hill, Hangersley. The proposed development was the erection of a single storey extension and demolition of an existing smaller extension. The extension linked the house and garage and it was calculated that there would be a cumulative increase in floorspace of 280%. The Inspector recognised that the surplus above the floorspace limit in policy was already very substantial and would still be further exceeded by the appeal proposal. The Inspector concluded that if he were to allow the appeal with its huge differential between the aggregate floorspace and the policy limit, it would inevitably undermine the NPA's ability to control the cumulative extension of the other properties. The appeal was dismissed. 35

10.6 The proposed link extension would conflict with the aims of policy DP11 which seeks to prevent this cumulative erosion of the character of the New Forest and also to maintain a balance within the housing stock. Furthermore, granting permission would make it more difficult for the Authority to resist proposals for similar inappropriate developments. For these reasons it is recommended that planning permission should be refused.

11. RECOMMENDATION

Refuse Reason(s)

1. In order to help safeguard the long term future of the countryside, the Local Planning Authority considers it important to resist the cumulative effect of significant enlargements being made to rural dwellings. Consequently Policy DP11 of the New Forest National Park Core Strategy and Development Management Policies (DPD) (December 2010) seeks to limit the proportional increase in the size of such dwellings in the New Forest National Park recognising the benefits this would have in minimising the impact of buildings and activity generally in the countryside and the ability to maintain a balance in the housing stock. This proposal, taking into account previous enlargements, would result in a building which is unacceptably large in relation to the original dwelling and would undesirably add to pressures for change which are damaging to the future of the countryside.

36


Tel: 01590 646600 Fax: 01590 646666 Date: 02/06/2011

SCALE: 1:5000

Ref: 11/96299/FULL


00m64

42

66 68 70

00m72

42

426400m

66 68 70

427200m

00m5211

54

56

58

00m6011

115200m

54

56

58

116000m

37

ann.wood

Text Box

Item 6

planning development control committee - 21 june 2011 ...€¦ · compromised. policy cp5 confirms...

Documents