Agenda item

Report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance).

Report of the Corporate Director (Public Protection, Planning and Governance) on the erection of two dwellings following the demolition of the existing dwelling.

Hanyards Lane is an established residential area characterised by large plots containing detached dwellings in a variety of architectural styles. There has been much redevelopment in the area, where large plots have been sub-divided or smaller dwellings have been extended or replaced by larger dwellings, as a result, architectural styles and materials vary considerably.

The application site is situated on the northern side of Hanyards Lane, close to the junction with The Ridgeway. The site comprises a detached dwelling and garage set within a large and spacious plot. The site slopes down from front to rear by a few metres and is well treed on its rear boundary.

Planning permission is sought for the demolition of the existing dwelling and the erection of two dwellings on the site. The forward-most dwelling would be sited in approximately the same location as the existing dwelling on the site, the rear-most dwelling would be sited approximately 48m further back within the plot, at a slight angle to the front dwelling and aligned with the dwellings at 50 – 56 Bradgate Close. The new dwellings would have the same sized footprint, measuring approximately 16.4m wide and up to 13m deep, incorporating a single storey, flat roofed, side and rear projection. The forward-most of the dwellings would be approximately 8.8m high at the ridge with accommodation in the roofslope. The rear-most dwelling would be approximately 7.6m high at the ridge.

The application is presented to the Committee as Northaw and Cuffley Parish Council has raised a major objection to the application on the following grounds:

“Major objection. This is a backland development in a garden for which there is no precedent in Hanyards Lane. There is precedent on Hanyards for two houses side by side where the plot is wide enough, but not for “Tandem Developments”. NCPC are not aware that any similar Tandem Developments have ever been approved in Cuffley. We are concerned that the access road is too narrow for refuse lorries and fire/ambulance vehicles and for shared vehicle/pedestrian access. There is no appropriate turning circle. It is unrealistic for house owner of House Type-02 to walk every week to place bins at the entrance. Refuse lorries must have access. The bulk and mass of the two properties represent an over development of the site (approximately 0.6 acres), in the context of a lane which has large single dwelling houses either side. This plot has previously been subdivided. The development is out of character with the local environment. The very small rear garden of House Type-02 will be north facing so represents poor design as the amenity is much reduced. The position of House Type-02 with the existing trees along the eastern boundary (and western boundary of the neighbouring garden) together with the proposed Acer campestre, means this house and garden will receive minimal sunlight in summer and almost no sunlight whatsoever in winter. A single larger dwelling would be far more appropriate in terms of its surroundings and reduced impact on the amenities and privacy of the neighbouring property. House Type-02 substantially reduces neighbour amenity and privacy for No 5 Hanyards. The rear of no 5 is mainly glazed and is set at an angle looking directly at the location of House Type-02. Due to the angle of the house, the bedroom windows of House Type-02 look directly into (children’s) bedrooms on the second and third floors, and into the living room and kitchen. Cars and pedestrians using the access road will have similar visibility of through the children's windows, further reducing privacy unless obscured glass is used. Should the development proceed the use of deciduous trees (Acer campestre), to reduce the impact on amenity/ privacy will be of insufficient height and will be ineffectual from Autumn until Spring. Irrespective of this, these trees will take decades - if at all - for them to reach any height that may offer privacy. NCPC requests that WHBC reject this proposal.”

Mr D.Fuller, spoke as an objector, saying that he is not against development of the site. He does strongly object to the type and design of the application. The application is uncharacteristic and does not match the appearances of the other buildings in the area. If the application was occupying the frontage, it would be more in keeping with the character and appearance of the area and at the same time being consistent with the policies in the plan.

Following discussion, it was proposed and seconded by Councillors S.Elam and M.Larkins and

RESOLVED:

(4 in favour and 3 against)

That planning permission be APPROVED subject to the conditions as set out in the report, but with amendments to condition 1 to read;

Prior to the demolition of any buildings on site, three dusk emergence and/ or dawn re-entry surveys shall be undertaken during May – August inclusive (possibly September if the weather remains warm) to determine with confidence whether bats are roosting in the buildings on the site. The results of the surveys shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Should roosting bats be found, the outline mitigation strategy (ref. Outline Bat Mitigation Strategy by Middlemarch Environmental, March 2020) should be modified as appropriate based on the results and then be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, prior to the demolition of any buildings on the site. Thereafter, the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details.

REASON: To ensure the continued ecological functionality of bats and their roosts are maintained in accordance with European and national legislation.

And the reason for condition 5 amended to:

REASON:  To protect the amenity of existing residential properties in the near vicinity to the development in accordance with Policy D1 of the Welwyn Hatfield District Plan 2005.

(Note:  This item was discussed after 7 Danesbury Lane, Welwyn, AL6 9SG during the DMC meeting due to technical difficulties).