Page 1 of 12

Committee Date: 22/08/2013 Application Number: 2013/04291/PA

Accepted: 18/06/2013 Application Type: Full Planning

Target Date: 17/09/2013

Ward: Sutton New Hall

Rear of 27-37 Beech Hill Road, Sutton Coldfield, Birmingham, B72 1BY

Partial demolition of no. 35 Beech Hill Road and erection of 12 detached dwellings, associated access road and landscaping Applicant: Rosconn Group

Union House, 7-9 Union Street, Stratford Upon Avon, Warks, CV37 6QT

Agent:

Recommendation Approve Subject To Conditions 1. Proposal 1.1. Consent is sought for the demolition of part of No.35 Beech Hill Road, construction

of an access road through the subsequent gap between Nos.33 and 35 Beech Hilll Road and the erection of 12 detached houses (all 4 bedroom) around the new access road.

1.2. The alterations to No.35 Beech Hill Road would involve the demolition of the existing

garage and removal of the north west corner of the dwelling. The width of the dwelling would be reduced by 1.2m with the existing hipped roof remaining unaltered and overhanging the new side elevation. Internally the utility room would be reduced in size and the first floor reconfigured to increase the size of a bedroom and form an en-suite.

1.3. The access road would run west to east from Beech Hill Road into the site and

would then extend north running parallel with the boundary with Walmley golf course. The proposed dwellings would face onto the new access road.

1.4. The proposed dwellings would be two storey in height with a traditional design to

reflect the high quality interwar period houses along Beech Hill Road. Elevations are generally asymmetrical with a variety of fenestration and material palettes (brick, off-white render and tile hanging). Gable projections, porches and bay windows also give additional articulation and a high quality to the elevations. The appearance of the houses and quality architectural detailing and use of quality materials would ensure that the development would reflect the character of the area.

1.5. The general internal layout for the proposed dwellings would consist of a lounge,

kitchen, dining, study, WC, utility on the ground floor and 4 bedrooms (some with en-suites/ dressing rooms) and a bathroom at first floor. The proposed private amenity spaces and the retained garden at No. 35 Beech Hill Road would exceed your Committee’s minimum numerical guidelines set out in Places for Living. The

Page 2 of 12

proposed private amenity spaces and the retained garden at No. 35 Beech Hill Road would exceed your Committee’s minimum numerical guidelines.

1.6. All of the dwellings apart from plots 1, 6, and 7 would benefit from integral garages.

These plots would benefit from detached garages. All of the plots would benefit from two car parking spaces.

1.7. The access road for the first 12 metres from Beech Hill Road would be 4.5 metres in

width. Thereafter, the width of the access road would be 3.7 metres up to plot 1 after which the width of the road would be 5m until plot 9 where it would reduce to 4m for the remainder of the length of the access road.

1.8. A landscaping strip measuring between 0.6m - 1.2m wide is proposed along the

northern side of the access road. Landscaping is also proposed to the front of each dwelling and along the boundary with Walmley golf course, opposite plots 6, 7, 8, and 9. 55 trees would be removed.

1.9. A fire hydrant would be installed adjacent to plot 6 and domestic sprinkler systems

would be installed in each dwelling. 1.10. All of the dwellings would be constructed to Code Level 3 standard. 1.11. The following documents have been submitted in support of the planning

application:

Design and Access Statement Tree Survey Bat Survey Ecological Appraisal

1.12 Site density – 20 dwellings per hectare

Site Plan Proposed Street Scene

2. Site & Surroundings 2.1. The application site relates to the rear part of six large rear gardens belonging to

Nos. 27-37 Beech Hill Road, measuring approximately 39 - 66 metres west to east and 105 metres north to south. The application site includes the whole plot at No. 35 Beech Hill Road, which is approximately 100 metres long and contains a two-storey detached dwelling with an integral garage. The ground level of the site falls west to east, from 124 metres on Beech Hill Road down to approximately 115 metres on the rear boundary. There are 79 trees within and immediately adjoining the site, which are mainly fruit trees.

2.2. The surrounding area is residential in character. The site is bounded to the north,

south and west by residential properties. Part of the adjoining rear garden at No. 39 Beech Hill Road is under construction for 9 houses with access between the replacement dwelling at No. 41 and the existing dwelling at 43 (applications 2012/01800/PA and 2010/06265/PA). To the east of the site is Walmley Golf Club located within the Green Belt.

Page 3 of 12

2.3. The site has good level of accessibility to public transport with less frequent bus services accessible from Penns Lane which is within 250 metres from the site and frequent bus-services accessible from Birmingham Road which is within approximately 500 metres from the site.

Location Map Street View

3. Planning History 3.1. Planning history for Nos.31 – 37 Beech Hill Road

27th September 2012 – 2012/05405/PA Partial demolition of 35 Beech Hill Road including demolition of garage, erection of 7 detached dwelling houses with associated access road and landscaping – Approved with Conditions.

Planning history for Nos. 39 - 43 Beech Hill Road:

4th March 2011 - 2010/06265/PA Demolition of 41 Beech Hill Road and erection of 7 no. detached dwelling houses and construction of associated access road. Refused on the following grounds: Due to its poor relationship with the existing built form and impact on the public realm, the proposal is out of character with the surrounding area and contrary to Policy 3.14D of the adopted Unitary Development Plan, 'Mature Suburbs' SPD and PPS3 (Housing) Insufficient information has been provided to enable a full assessment of the application against the three tests of the Conservation of Habitats Regulations. Further survey work is required to determine the population and status of the bats roosts and the consequent level of mitigation that will be required to ensure there are no adverse ecological impacts. On this basis, because uncertainty remains over whether or not harm can be avoided, and whether the three tests can be met, the proposal is contrary to Policy 3.37 of the adopted Unitary Development Plan, PPS9 (Nature Conservation) and 'The Conservation of Habitats Regulations 2010'.

20th September 2011 – APP/P4605/A/11/2150763 - Appeal allowed

Planning history for rear gardens of Nos. 39 - 43 Beech Hill Road and the rear gardens of Nos. 65 and 67 Penns Lane, including plot 5 in the previous application 2010/06265/PA: 24th May 2012 - 2012/01800/PA Erection of 3 no. 5 bedroom dwellings with integral garages, together with car parking and landscaping in association with approved planning application 2010/06265/PA for the erection of 7 dwellings and new access road from Beech Hill Road, subject to conditions – Approved with Conditions. This planning application replaced the dwelling in plot 5 (approved under planning application 2010/06265/PA) with a different dwelling style and provided two additional dwellings around the head of the access road.

4. Consultation/PP Responses

Page 4 of 12

4.1. Site notice displayed and local residents, residents associations, local Councillors

and MP notified.

7 objections received from local residents and Councillor Barrie expressing the following concerns:

Congestion and parking problems; Access road narrow and inadequate for emergency vehicles; The bat and tree surveys are not up to date; The ecological assessment is inaccurate; The development would not be in keeping with the character of the area; There is no further local services capacity to cope with additional residents; The development would increase flooding; The development will damage the environment; The development would affect property prices in the area.

Councillor Barrie objects on the grounds the development is over intensive, would cause highway problems, and access road is too narrow for the number of dwellings proposed.

Regulatory Services – no objection. Transportation – no objection subject to conditions to ensure all works relating to public highway including new bell-mouth access are carried out to departmental specifications, satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian visibility splay and a construction traffic management plan. Seven Trent – no objection subject to condition for sustainable drainage. West Midlands Fire Service – no objection. West Midlands Police – no objection.

5. Policy Context 5.1. The following local planning policies are applicable:

Birmingham UDP Draft Birmingham Development Plan Mature Suburbs SPG Places for Living Car Parking Guidelines SPD The following national planning policy is applicable: The National Planning Policy Framework

6. Planning Considerations 6.1. The proposal should be assessed against the objectives of the policy context set out

above.

History

Page 5 of 12

6.2. By way of history consent has already been granted for 7 dwellings on part of the site to the rear of Nos.31 – 37 Beech Hill Road. The applicant has now acquired part of the rear gardens of a further 2 properties (Nos. 27 and 29 Beech Hill Road) and is now seeking consent for a residential scheme for 12 dwellings.

Policy

6.3. The NPPF states that one of the Government’s key objectives is to increase

significantly the delivery of new homes that are well designed and located in sustainable locations. The NPPF encourages the reuse of land that has been previously developed (brownfield land) and advises that private residential gardens are excluded from the definition of previously developed land. The NPPF does not prevent development from taking place on residential gardens providing it satisfies policies contained within the development plan and relevant planning documents which resist inappropriate development of residential gardens, for example where development would cause harm to the local area.

6.4. The Birmingham UDP requires new developments to protect and enhance what is

good in the environment and to improve what is less good. Proposals, which would have an adverse effect on the quality of the built environment, would not normally be allowed. Paragraph 3.14D identifies good urban design principles which new development must comply with. Policy 5.20 requires all new residential developments to have a good standard of design to ensure that they do not detract from the character of the surrounding area.

6.5. Mature Suburbs SPD states that new housing can have a significant impact on local

distinctiveness and the character of an area and that new development must be of 'good design' resulting from a good understanding of the local character and circumstances. It states that design should determine density and not vice versa. It concludes that proposals that undermine and harm the positive characteristics of a mature suburb will be resisted.

6.6. Places for Living requires new residential developments to respond well to the local

context to ensure that the unique identity of a place is not harmed.

Principle 6.7. The application site would provide a suitable place to live for future occupiers within

an existing residential area and with good accessibility to local services and amenities including public transport services. I therefore consider that the proposed development would make efficient use of land and is acceptable in principle, in line with the Birmingham UDP and the NPPF which seeks to deliver new homes in sustainable locations.

Impact on Character

6.8. Mature Suburbs SPD identifies 7 factors which can be used to assess whether a

proposed development is in keeping with the character of an area. These factors are; built form, spatial composition, architectural style, enclosure, density, degree of landscaping and the character of the public realm.

6.9. Beech Hill Road is located within an established residential area comprising

detached and semi-detached houses set on a linear building line and with generous sized and well established gardens. Within the wider area there are a number of cul-de-sac developments. Previous appeal decisions have noted that there is “no overall

Page 6 of 12

consistency or prevailing layout type of cul-de-sac developments in the area which should be relied on to provide a blueprint for other backland cul-de-sac schemes in the area”.

6.10. The proposed development would create a cul-de-sac form of development similar

to the recent schemes along Beech Hill Road and Penns Lane) in terms of layout, access point, house types and density.

6.11. The siting of the dwellings would provide a coherent building line and a sense of

enclosure around the access road. There would be glimpses of the proposed dwellings from Beech Hill Road which would help to create a visual connection with the houses on Beech Hill Road to ensure the development does not appear isolated and unrelated from the residential development on Beech Hill Road. A satisfactory gap between each dwelling would be provided to ensure an appropriate spatial separation and the finished site level of the dwellings would follow the sloping topography of the site.

6.12. Also, the proposed scheme would retain the attractive building at No. 35 Beech Hill

Road, albeit with a small reduction in its width involving rebuilding of part of the gable end.

6.13. I therefore consider that the proposed development would provide a high quality

residential development, which would reflect the cul-de-sac development immediately to the south of the application appeal at 39-43 Beech Hill Road and would not undermine or harm the positive characteristics of the local area, in accordance with the local and national planning policy.

6.14. I note that the Council’s City Design Officer and Landscape Officer support the

proposed development subject to appropriate conditions. Residential Amenity 6.15. Places for Living states that there should be a minimum set back of 5m per storey

where proposed habitable room windows would face existing private amenity space. The rear facing habitable room windows in the proposed dwellings would be more than 10 metres from existing rear gardens of neighbouring properties which accords with your Committee’s guidelines. Therefore I am satisfied that there is adequate distance between the proposed dwellings and existing rear gardens to ensure there is no adverse impact on the amenities of adjoining occupiers in terms of loss of privacy.

6.16. The majority of bedroom sizes would exceed your Committee’s guidelines set out in

Places for Living. I note that the main bedroom and the second double bedroom to plots 1 and 7 would fall short of these standards by 1sq.m and 0.1sq.m respectively, and the second double bedroom to plot 6 would fall short by 1.2sq.m. The applicant has submitted furniture layouts which demonstrate that the bedrooms could adequately accommodate furniture (such as a bed, bedside cabinets, wardrobe, and desk). It is noted that all of the bedrooms would have a satisfactory outlook and all of the private amenity areas would exceed minimum guidelines for family dwellings. I therefore consider that overall the dwellings would provide future occupiers with a satisfactory standard of residential accommodation.

6.17. I have attached a condition to prevent the proposed houses being enlarged with

extensions, as this would reduce the size of their gardens and potentially have a detrimental impact on the amenities of adjoining occupiers in terms of overlooking.

Page 7 of 12

A condition is also attached to ensure the side facing non-habitable windows within each of the new houses are installed with obscure glazing to avoid overlooking.

Highway Issues

6.18. Transportation Development have not objected to the proposed development. The car parking provision (300% to 400%) would exceed the minimum guidance outlined in Car Parking Guidelines SPD and the turning circle for refuse and other heavy goods vehicles is considered acceptable. I consider that the additional traffic generated by the proposal would not adversely affect highway safety and free flow of traffic on Beech Hill Road or surrounding roads.

6.19. The access road would be a shared surface road for vehicles and pedestrians. It

would allow two-way traffic for most of the road with the exception of a narrow section where the road reduces to 3.7 metres in width for just 23 metres. Transportation Development advises that it is a short length where vehicles could not pass one another and vehicles would be able to wait to either side of this short section to allow other cars to pass. I therefore consider that the proposed access road is acceptable.

6.20. West Midlands Fire Service have not objected to the proposed development

providing a fire hydrant and domestic sprinklers are installed in accordance with BS 9251. An appropriately worded condition has been attached.

Trees and Ecology

6.21. The Tree Officer raises no objection to the application. I concur with this view and

note that the trees identified to be removed are not subject to a tree preservation order and have a very limited public amenity value because they are not significant or visible from Beech Hill Road or from the Golf Course to the rear of the site. I have attached conditions to ensure appropriate tree protection for the 24 retained trees, to secure replacement trees (the site plan shows 13 proposed trees), and to prevent any further tree works without the prior written approval from the local planning authority.

6.22. Notwithstanding the comments received from local residents the applicant has

submitted an updated Ecological Assessment (March 2013). The assessment identifies that the site does not include any habitats or features of particular significance. The habitat enhancement measures recommended in the applicant’s original ecological appraisal report to reduce the potential impact on nesting birds during site clearance works has been secured by condition. I also note that the landscaping condition includes measures to secure suitable native and “wildlife-friendly” plant species. I therefore do not consider that the proposed development would significantly affect the wildlife in the local area.

7. Conclusion 7.1. The proposed development would provide 12 well designed new dwellings within an

existing mature suburb close to local amenities and services including public transport services. It would reflect other cul-de-sac developments in the local area in terms of design, layout, access point and density and would not undermine or harm the positive characteristics of the area. The proposed development would not have an unacceptable impact on the amenities of adjoining occupiers, highway safety, trees or wildlife.

Page 8 of 12

7.2. I therefore consider that the proposed development would comply with Mature Suburbs, Places for Living, the Birmingham UDP and the NPPF, which all seek to make efficient use of land and to deliver new houses in sustainable locations that do not harm the built and natural environment.

8. Recommendation 8.1. Approve subject to the following conditions: 1 Requires the prior submission of hard and/or soft landscape details

2 Requires the prior submission of hard surfacing materials

3 Requires the prior submission of boundary treatment details

4 Requires the prior submission of sample materials

5 Requires the prior submission of level details

6 Requires the prior approval of details to prevent mud on the highway

7 Requires the prior submission of a construction method statement/management plan

8 Requires the prior submission of a drainage scheme

9 Requires the prior submission of details of fire hydrant and domestic sprinkler systems

10 Requires the prior submission details obscure glazing for specific areas of the

approved building

11 Requires the prior installation of means of access

12 Prevents occupation until the turning and parking area has been constructed

13 Requires vehicular visibility splays to be provided

14 Requires pedestrian visibility splays to be provided

15 Requires the implementation of tree protection

16 Protects retained trees from removal

17 Prevents variations to approved tree works

18 Requires tree replacement within 4 years post development

19 Requires the implementation of the submitted mitigation/enhancement plan

20 Removes PD rights for extensions

21 Requires the scheme to be in accordance with the listed approved plans

22 Limits the approval to 3 years (Full)

Page 9 of 12

Reason for Approval 1 Birmingham City Council grants Planning Permission subject to the condition(s) listed

below (if appropriate). The reason for granting permission is because the development is in accordance with: Policies 5.7 - 5.40 of the Birmingham Unitary Development Plan 2005; Places for Living (2001), which has been adopted as Supplementary Planning Guidance; and the National Planning Policy Framework.

Case Officer: Bhupinder Thandi

Page 10 of 12

Photo(s)

Figure 1 – Part front elevation and garage of No.35 Beech Hill Road

Page 11 of 12

Figure 2 - Part street scene along Beech Hill Road

Page 12 of 12

Location Plan

127.4m

107

25

5

14

79

25

12

24

35

10

BE

EC

H H

ILL

RO

AD

123.1m

124.4m

This map is reproduced from the Ordnance Survey Material with the permission of Ordnance Survey on behalf of the Controller of Her Majesty's Stationery Office © Crown Copyright. Unauthorised reproduction infringes Crown Copyright and may lead to prosecution or civil proceedings. Birmingham City Council. Licence No.100021326, 2010