ΠΛΑΝΝΙΝΓ ΣΕΡςΙΧΕΣ ΩΕΕΚΛΨ ΡΕΠΟΡΤ Νο. 1472 Ωεεκ ενδινγ 21στ ϑανυαρψ 2011 Τηε ατταχηεδ Ωεεκλψ Ρεπορτ ινχορπορατεσ τηε φολλοωινγ σεχτιονσ: ΧΟΝΤΕΝΤΣ ΠΑΓΕ ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 1 Reports on applications ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 2 Reports on enforcement cases ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 3 List of applications referred from Weekly Report No. 1470 ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 4 List of minor amendments to plans approved under delegated powers ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 5 List of appeals received ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 6 Reports on appeal decisions received ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 7 List of enforcement complaints where possible breach of planning control has been identified ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 8 List of enforcement complaints where NO breach of planning control has been identified OR where any breach of planning control has ceased or been remedied Weekly List 1472/1 Week Ending 21st January 2011
ΧΟΝΤΕΝΤΣ ΠΑΓΕ ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 1 ΡΕΠΟΡΤΣ ΟΝ ΑΠΠΛΙΧΑΤΙΟΝΣ Ρεφερενχε Αδδρεσσ Ωαρδ Παριση Παγε BRW/766/2010 BRW/788/2010 BRW/792/2010 BRW/794/2010 BRW/795/2010 BRW/802/2010 BRW/803/2010 COUNTY GROUND CLUB SHENFIELD ROAD 159 HATCH ROAD PILGRIMS HATCH ST. GEORGES CHURCH ONGAR ROAD 11 PRIESTS LANE ORCHARDENE FROG STREET KELVEDON HATCH 18 PINE CLOSE INGATESTONE FORMER FIELD LABORATORIES LAND ADJACENT TO WEALD PARK GOLF COURSE COXTIE GREEN ROAD NORTH PILGRIMS HATCH 9 NORTH SOUTH BRIZES AND DODDINGHURST INGATESTONE, FRYERNING & MOUNTNESSING Kelvedon Hatch Parish Council Ingatestone & Fryerning Parish Council 7 12 14 16 18 SOUTH WEALD 20 Weekly List 1472/1 Week Ending 21st January 2011
BRW/804/2010 BRW/805/2010 BRW/806/2010 KIND HEARTS FOXES GROVE HUTTON 34 SPRINGFIELD AVENUE HUTTON 7 CLAVERING GARDENS WEST HORNDON EXT/BRW/26/2010 19 PEAR TREES INGRAVE HUTTON EAST 24 HUTTON EAST 25 HERONGATE, INGRAVE & WEST HORNDON HERONGATE, INGRAVE & WEST HORNDON West Horndon Parish Council Herongate & Ingrave Parish Council 27 29 ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 2 ΡΕΠΟΡΤΣ ΟΝ ΕΝΦΟΡΧΕΜΕΝΤ ΧΑΣΕΣ Ρεφερενχε Αδδρεσσ Ωαρδ Παριση Παγε ENF/BRW/34/2010 UNITS 1 AND 3 CLAPGATE CHIVERS ROAD STONDON MASSEY ENF/BRW/13/2011 LAND REAR OF 81 THE GARDENS DODDINGHURST ENF/BRW/14/2011 LAND REAR OF 83 THE GARDENS DODDINGHURST ENF/BRW/15/2011 LAND REAR OF 85 THE GARDENS DODDINGHURST ENF/BRW/16/2011 LAND TO THE REAR OF 87 THE GARDENS DODDINGHURST TIPPS CROSS BRIZES AND DODDINGHURST BRIZES AND DODDINGHURST BRIZES AND DODDINGHURST BRIZES AND DODDINGHURST Stondon Massey Parish Council Doddinghurst Parish Council Doddinghurst Parish Council Doddinghurst Parish Council Doddinghurst Parish Council 32 33 34 35 36 Weekly List 1472/2 Week Ending 21st January 2011
ENF/BRW/18/2011 WINTERLEIGH HALL FARM GOATSWOOD LANE NAVESTOCK ROMFORD BRIZES AND DODDINGHURST Navestock Parish Council 37 ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 3 ΛΙΣΤ ΟΦ ΑΠΠΛΙΧΑΤΙΟΝΣ ΡΕΦΕΡΡΕ ΦΡΟΜ ΩΕΕΚΛΨ ΡΕΠΟΡΤ ΝΟ. 1470 Ρεφερενχε Αδδρεσσ εϖελοπµεντ A/BRW/27/2010 CHELMSFORD STAR CO-OP 1 FINGRITH HALL LANE BLACKMORE INGATESTONE BRW/748/2010 79, PRIESTS LANE SHENFIELD ONE EXTERNALLY ILLUMINATED FASCIA SIGN, ONE EXTERNALLY ILLUMINATED PROJECTOR SIGN AND ONE NON- ILLUMINATED INFORMATIVE SIGN CONSTRUCTION OF BUNGALOW (AMENDMENT TO PLANNING PERMISSION REFERENCE BRW/1143/2007) Ρεφερρεδ Βψ Cllr Mrs Henwood Παγε 38 Cllr Baker 38 ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 4 ΛΙΣΤ ΟΦ ΜΙΝΟΡ ΑΜΕΝ ΜΕΝΤΣ ΤΟ ΠΛΑΝΣ ΑΠΠΡΟςΕ ΥΝ ΕΡ ΕΛΕΓΑΤΕ ΠΟΩΕΡΣ None ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 5 ΝΟΤΙΦΙΧΑΤΙΟΝ ΟΦ ΤΗΕ ΦΟΛΛΟΩΙΝΓ ΑΠΠΕΑΛΣ ΗΑΣ ΒΕΕΝ ΡΕΧΕΙςΕ None Weekly List 1472/3 Week Ending 21st January 2011
ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 6 ΝΟΤΙΦΙΧΑΤΙΟΝ ΟΦ ΤΗΕ ΕΧΙΣΙΟΝ ΟΝ ΤΗΕ ΦΟΛΛΟΩΙΝΓ ΑΠΠΕΑΛΣ ΗΑΣ ΒΕΕΝ ΡΕΧΕΙςΕ Ρεφερενχε Αδδρεσσ εϖελοπµεντ Παγε BRW/238/2010 BOWER FARM TAN HOUSE LANE NAVESTOCKSIDE BRW/446/2010 135 HIGH STREET CONSTRUCTION OF THREE CAR GARAGE CONVERSION OF FIRST AND SECOND STOREY FROM OFFICE/STORAGE INTO 2 SELF CONTAINED FLATS WITH BALCONYS TO THE REAR 39 40 ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 7 ΛΙΣΤ ΟΦ ΕΝΦΟΡΧΕΜΕΝΤ ΧΟΜΠΛΑΙΝΤΣ ΩΗΕΡΕ ΠΟΣΣΙΒΛΕ ΒΡΕΑΧΗ ΟΦ ΠΛΑΝΝΙΝΓ ΧΟΝΤΡΟΛ ΗΑΣ ΒΕΕΝ Ι ΕΝΤΙΦΙΕ None ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 8 ΛΙΣΤ ΟΦ ΕΝΦΟΡΧΕΜΕΝΤ ΧΟΜΠΛΑΙΝΤΣ ΩΗΕΡΕ ΝΟ ΒΡΕΑΧΗ ΟΦ ΠΛΑΝΝΙΝΓ ΧΟΝΤΡΟΛ ΗΑΣ ΒΕΕΝ Ι ΕΝΤΙΦΙΕ ΟΡ ΩΗΕΡΕ ΑΝΨ ΒΡΕΑΧΗ ΟΦ ΠΛΑΝΝΙΝΓ ΧΟΝΤΡΟΛ ΗΑΣ ΧΕΑΣΕ ΟΡ ΒΕΕΝ ΡΕΜΕ ΙΕ Ρεφερενχε Αδδρεσσ Ωαρδ Παριση Παγε ENF/BRW/10/2007 OAKDENE DAYS LANE PILGRIMS HATCH ENF/BRW/139/2010 FELLY FARM LINCOLNS LANE PILGRIMS HATCH ENF/BRW/161/2010 SOW AND GROW NURSERY ONGAR ROAD PILGRIMS HATCH ENF/BRW/304/2010 LAND ADJOINING 14 THE TYBURNS HUTTON PILGRIMS HATCH 42 SOUTH WEALD 43 PILGRIMS HATCH 43 HUTTON CENTRAL 43 Weekly List 1472/4 Week Ending 21st January 2011
ENF/BRW/332/2010 MICHAELS 62, WOODLAND AVENUE HUTTON ENF/BRW/381/2010 146, ROAD HERONGATE ENF/BRW/386/2010 FIELD OPPOSITE 3 STONDON HALL COTTAGES ONGAR ROAD STONDON MASSEY ENF/BRW/393/2010 9, FROG STREET KELVEDON HATCH HUTTON NORTH 44 HERONGATE, INGRAVE & WEST HORNDON TIPPS CROSS BRIZES AND DODDINGHURST Herongate & Ingrave Parish Council Stondon Massey Parish Council Kelvedon Hatch Parish Council 44 44 44 Weekly List 1472/5 Week Ending 21st January 2011
ΣΕΧΤΙΟΝ 1 ΠΛΑΝΝΙΝΓ ΣΕΡςΙΧΕΣ ΡΕΠΟΡΤΣ ΟΝ ΑΠΠΛΙΧΑΤΙΟΝΣ Αππλιχατιονσ δελεγατεδ το τηε Ιντεριµ Βυιλτ Ενϖιρονµεντ Μαναγερ φορ δεχισιον συβϕεχτ το τηε χονχυρρενχε οφ τηε Χηαιρµαν ανδ ςιχε Χηαιρµαν οφ τηε Πλαννινγ εϖελοπµεντ Χοντρολ Χοµµιττεε. Decision Notices will be issued in accordance with the attached recommendations unless an application is referred to the Planning Committee by a ΜΕΜΒΕΡ ΟΦ ΤΗΕ ΧΟΥΝΧΙΛ for the Ward in which the application is submitted or by the appropriate ΠΑΡΙΣΗ ΧΟΥΝΧΙΛ. The referral of applications to the Planning Development Control Committee will be in accordance with the protocol agreed by the Committee in December 2008 and any application that is referred will be reported to the next available meeting of that Committee. Where a Member for the Ward within which the proposal is located or a Parish Council is considering the referral of an application the Member or a representative of the Parish Council must speak to the case officer, the Principal Planning Officer or the Interim Built Environment Manager in order to discuss the matter. Applications may be referred in writing or by E mailing the Planning Department (referrals@brentwood.gov.uk) giving a valid Planning Reason for referring the Application. Planning Services Administration Support must be notified of any application which is to be referred by 12 Νοον ον 31στ ϑανυαρψ 2011. You will receive an acknowledgement of any referral that is made. Copies of plans and all background documents (including letters of objection, supporting letters, consultation responses, Parish Council observations and other representations) are available for inspection at the Planning Office. Weekly List 1472/6 Week Ending 21st January 2011
ΒΡΕΝΤΩΟΟ ΧΟΥΝΤΨ ΓΡΟΥΝ ΧΛΥΒ ΣΗΕΝΦΙΕΛ ΡΟΑ ΒΡΕΝΤΩΟΟ ςαριατιον ΟΦ ΧΟΝ ΙΤΙΟΝΣ 4 ΑΝ 6 ΤΟ ΑΛΛΟΩ ΧΑΡ ΠΑΡΚΙΝΓ ΣΠΑΧΕΣ ΤΟ ΒΕ ΛΕΑΣΕ ΥΡΙΝΓ ΩΕΕΚ ΑΨΣ ΩΗΕΝ ΤΗΕ ΒΡΕΝΤΩΟΟ ΧΟΥΝΤΨ ΓΡΟΥΝ ΧΛΥΒ (ΒΧΓΧ) ΙΣ ΝΟΤ ΒΕΙΝΓ ΥΣΕ ΦΟΡ ΣΠΟΡΤΙΝΓ ΕςΕΝΤΣ. ΒΡΩ/766/2010 Ward: NORTH Zoning: Metropolitan Green Belt Parish: Policies: CP1 GB1 GB2 Case Officer: Morne Van Rooyen (Tel: 8/13 Week Date: 20th January 2011 01277 312607) 1. Προποσαλσ Planning approval reference BRW/477/2010 granted permission for the extension and redevelopment of the existing pavilion and the provision of additional parking. Planning Permission granted under BRW/477/2010 imposed two conditions (Condition 4 and Condition 6) relating to the parking of vehicles on the application site. These conditions seek to control the use of the parking areas specifically for those persons using the Brentwood County Ground Club and to prevent the parking area being used for general purpose parking by members of the public visiting the Town Centre. 2. Ρελεϖαντ Ηιστορψ BRW/477/2010 - Extension and redevelopment of existing pavilion and additional parking - Approved 3. Χονσυλτατιον Ρεσπονσεσ Ηιγηωαψσ: The Highway Authority would not wish to raise an objection to the above application subject to the following condition, given the location and the times when the parking spaces are likely to be used, i.e. weekends and evenings. 4. Νειγηβουρ Ρεσπονσεσ None 5. Συµµαρψ οφ Ισσυεσ Planning approval reference BRW/477/2010 granted permission for the extension and redevelopment of the existing pavilion and the provision of additional parking. Weekly List 1472/7 Week Ending 21st January 2011
Planning Permission granted under BRW/477/2010 imposed two conditions (Condition 4 and Condition 6) relating to the parking of vehicles on the application site. These conditions seek to ensure that on street parking of vehicles in the adjoining streets does not occur in the interests of highway safety and that appropriate parking is provided. Subsequent to planning permission being granted the applicant indicated that the parking areas are only used to their full potential during weekends. For this reason the Brentwood County Ground Club have been leasing the parking areas during the week when the Club is not being used and the parking spaces are surplus to requirement. This represents an important source of income which covers the cost of policing the car parks while also providing a revenue stream for the club. The current application seeks to amend both Conditions 4 and 6 to allow the car park to be used for parking Monday to Friday during business hours by members of the public not specifically utilising the Brentwood County Club Ground while limiting the use during evenings and the weekend to those people attending the Ground for sporting activities. Having regard to the location of the car park in close proximity to the retail Centre of Brentwood it is considered that the parking spaces could make a substantial contribution to the parking pressure currently experienced within the Town Centre by providing conveniently located off street parking. It is considered that unlawful use of the car park during weekends could be controlled through a suitably worded condition. The above views are supported by the comments from the Highways Officer. For the above reasons it is considered that a new condition replacing Condition 4 and 6 of BRW/477/2010 that would not prevent the leasing of surplus car parking spaces to members of the public not directly utilising the County Ground facilities during office hours Monday to Friday, but limiting the use on Saturdays and Sundays to the parking of vehicles specifically utilising the Brentwood County Club, would satisfy the relevant Policies of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan. 6. Ρεχοµµενδατιον Approve 1) T1 - Standard time 2) R11 - Approval to amendments only 3) The parking spaces to be constructed under planning approval BRW/477/2010 shall not be used for any purpose other than the parking of vehicles that are related to the use of the development site, except between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. Monday to Friday. (Ρεασον: To ensure appropriate parking is provided to serve the development site in the interest of highway safety and amenity.) Weekly List 1472/8 Week Ending 21st January 2011
Informatives 1) Reason for approval: The proposal would accord with the development plan policies relevant to this proposal, that are set out below. 2) The Applicant is advised that, notwithstanding other details shown on the submitted plans, this permission relates solely to a variation of Conditions 4 and 6 of planning approval reference BRW/477/2010 to vary the way in which the car park is used and not to any physical alterations to the building whatsoever. 3) I11 - Policies related to approval 4) I8 - Accordance with approved plans 159 ΗΑΤΧΗ ΡΟΑ ΠΙΛΓΡΙΜΣ ΗΑΤΧΗ ΒΡΕΝΤΩΟΟ ΧΟΝςΕΡΣΙΟΝ ΟΦ ΧΗΑΛΕΤ ΙΝΤΟ ΤΩΟ ΣΤΟΡΕΨ ΗΟΥΣΕ ΒΡΩ/788/2010 Ward: PILGRIMS HATCH Zoning: Residential Parish: Policies: CP1 Case Officer: Helen Bealey (Tel: 01277 8/13 Week Date: 1st February 2011 312604) 1. Προποσαλσ First floor extensions to convert a chalet bungalow into a two storey house. The overall height of the proposed property would be 7.6m. The first floor addition is not proposed to extend the full depth of the existing property, a single storey element of 3m in depth is proposed to extend beyond the two storey element, this single storey element incorporates an existing extension. The existing conservatory to the rear is proposed to remain and will extend beyond the single storey element. 2. Ρελεϖαντ Ηιστορψ PD/49/63: Kitchen extension- Permitted Development. BRW/379/2004: Extension at the rear incorporating an extension of the roof, extension of the roof at the front, together with the erection of dormer windows at the side- Approved. BRW/507/2005: Conservatory at the rear- Approved. BRW/644/2010: First floor extension, incorporating increase in height of the property by 1.9m to a total height of 7.6m to convert a chalet bungalow into a two storey house- Refused. Weekly List 1472/9 Week Ending 21st January 2011
3. Χονσυλτατιον Ρεσπονσεσ Ηιγηωαψσ: The Highway Authority would not wish to raise an objection to the above application as the area available for parking within the site, will comply with the Highway Authority, Essex County Council, parking standards, for the proposed extended dwelling. 4. Νειγηβουρ Ρεσπονσεσ None 5. Συµµαρψ οφ Ισσυεσ The proposal would transform the dwelling from a chalet bungalow to a two storey house, through the addition of a first floor extension. The first floor extension, to create a two storey property, is proposed to a detached chalet bungalow. The property is located in a residential road. There is a mix of styles of properties in the road, including houses, chalets and bungalows of different ages. The proposed two storey property would be between a detached bungalow and a detached chalet bungalow and opposite a row of two storey houses. Although the overall height of the property would be greater than the properties either side, give that the property is set slightly further back in its plot compared to the neighbouring properties and given the varied design of the neighbouring properties, it is considered that the proposal would not result in the property appearing dominant or out of character with the surrounding area. The application property has already had a number of extensions to the rear and it is already deeper than both the neighbouring properties. The first floor extensions, however, are proposed to extend over the original property only, and the extended part of the property will be single storey. Both neighbouring properties have also had extensions, however these do not extend the full width of their properties. 157 Hatch Road benefits from a side and rear extension, which incorporates a garage to the side and a lounge extension to the rear. This extension is close to the side boundary with the application property, the proposed first floor extension would be slightly deeper than the rear lounge extension at 157 Hatch Road. There are no side windows which would face the extended property. The extended property would be approximately 2m from the side boundary with 157 Hatch Road. Given the distance from the neighbouring property and the presence of an existing extension, it is considered that the proposal would not have an overbearing effect, or cause unacceptable loss of light or shadowing, or unacceptable loss of outlook to the property or garden area of 157 Hatch Road. The other neighbouring property, 161 Hatch Road, also has an extension, this does not extend the full width of the property and has resulted in an unextended area of approximately 3m in width between the boundary with the application property and the single storey extension at 161 Hatch Road. There is a distance of approximately 1.5m between the two properties. Weekly List 1472/10 Week Ending 21st January 2011
The un-extended part of the neighbouring property has a ground floor window and door, which serve a bedroom. The first floor extensions are proposed to extend beyond the un-extended part of the neighbouring property, by approximately 2.7m in depth. However the 45 degree guidance has been complied with when taken from the nearest ground floor window of 161 Hatch Road. Given the distance between the two properties, the proposed depth of the extension and the presence of existing extensions on both properties, it is considered that the proposal would not have an unacceptable overbearing effect on the general amenities of the neighbouring properties. It is considered that the proposed side facing windows could give rise to unacceptable overlooking into the rear gardens of the neighbouring properties. Two of the side windows serve the bathroom and the third is a secondary window to a bedroom. It is considered that overlooking could be overcome by imposing a condition to obscure glaze and partially fix shut the windows. The first floor windows to the rear of the property are slightly bigger and closer to the side boundaries than the existing first floor rear window. However, there will already be some degree of overlooking from the existing window and given the residential location, it is considered that some degree of overlooking from these windows is acceptable. In light of the above, it is considered that the proposal would comply with Policy CP1 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan. 6. Ρεχοµµενδατιον Approve 1) T1 - Standard time 2) The first floor side windows which serve the bathroom, en-suite and second bedroom, shown on the approved plans returned herewith shall be obscure glazed and the parts of the window that are below 1.7m above the floor of the room in which the window is installed shall be fixed shut and shall be permanently retained as such notwithstanding the Town & Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995 or any subsequent re-enacting Order, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Ρεασον: In the interest of the privacy and amenity of adjacent occupiers.) 3) The materials to be used in the construction of the external surfaces of the extension hereby permitted shall match in colour and texture to those used in the existing building, unless otherwise agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority. (Ρεασον: In the interests of amenity.) 4) M10 - Retention of window pattern 5) The following plans are relevant to this permission: drawing numbers, 1896:00, 1896:01 and 1896:02. (Ρεασον: For the avoidance of doubt.) Weekly List 1472/11 Week Ending 21st January 2011
Informatives 1) Reason for approval: The proposal complies with the development plan policies that are set out below. 2) I11 - Policies related to approval 3) I8 - Accordance with approved plans ΣΤ. ΓΕΟΡΓΕΣ ΧΗΥΡΧΗ ΟΝΓΑΡ ΡΟΑ ΒΡΕΝΤΩΟΟ ςαριατιον ΟΦ ΧΟΝ ΙΤΙΟΝ 5 (ΧΟςΕΡΕ ΧΨΧΛΕ ΠΑΡΚΙΝΓ) ΑΤΤΑΧΗΕ ΤΟ ΠΛΑΝΝΙΝΓ ΑΠΠΛΙΧΑΤΙΟΝ ΒΡΩ/608/2008 ΒΡΩ/792/2010 Ward: NORTH Zoning: Residential Parish: Policies: T14 T2 Case Officer: Morne Van Rooyen (Tel: 8/13 Week Date: 3rd February 2011 01277 312607) 1. Προποσαλσ Planning Permission granted under BRW/608/2008 allows for the erection of a single storey replacement lobby extension between the existing church and the church hall. Condition 5 of this planning permission requires, "Secure and weather protected cycle parking facilities shall be provided in accordance with the Highway Authority, Essex County Council, standards. The location and layout of the cycle parking facilities shall be approved by the Local Planning Authority prior to the commencement of the development. The cycle parking facilities shall be provided prior to the first use of the proposed extension and thereafter permanently retained. Reason: To encourage and facilitate more sustainable modes of transport." This application seeks to vary Condition 5 as the applicants are concerned that an external covered cycle parking facility would be vulnerable to vandalism while also being a financial burden in terms of construction and maintenance. The applicants are willing to erect two or three individual bars or wheel racks bolted to the ground along the western edge of the car park. 2. Ρελεϖαντ Ηιστορψ BRW/608/2008 - Erection of a single storey replacement lobby extension between the existing church and the church hall - Approved 3. Χονσυλτατιον Ρεσπονσεσ Ηιγηωαψσ: No Comments at time of writing report. Weekly List 1472/12 Week Ending 21st January 2011
4. Νειγηβουρ Ρεσπονσεσ None 5. Συµµαρψ οφ Ισσυεσ Planning Permission granted under BRW/608/2008 allows for the erection of a single storey replacement lobby extension between the existing church and the church hall. Condition 5 of this planning permission requires secure and weather protected cycle parking facilities to be provided to encourage and facilitate more sustainable modes of transport. The applicants are concerned that a covered cycle parking facility would be vulnerable to vandalism while also resulting in a financial burden in terms of its construction and maintenance. In addition the applicants have stated that they would be utilising the larger west lobby for the temporary parking of bicycles. They are also willing to provide individual bars or wheel racks along the western edge of the car park. Having regard to the above it is considered that sufficient cycle parking could be provided on site while the requirement for a covered and weather protected area could be met through the use of the larger west lobby. For the above reasons it is considered that a new condition replacing Condition 5 of BRW/608/2008 allowing for the secure parking of bicycles on site would satisfy the aim of encouraging sustainable modes of transport and would be compliant with the relevant Policies of The Local Plan. 6. Ρεχοµµενδατιον Approve Informatives 1) T1 - Standard time 2) Cycle parking facilities shall be secure, convenient and provided prior to the first use of the extension approved under BRW/608/2008 and shall be retained at all times. (Ρεασον: To ensure appropriate cycle parking is provided in the interest of highway safety and amenity.) 3) R11 - Approval to amendments only 1) Reason for approval: The proposal would accord with the development plan policies relevant to this proposal that are set out below. 2) The Applicant is advised that, notwithstanding other details shown on the submitted plans, this permission relates solely to a variation of Condition 5 of planning approval reference BRW/608/2008 to vary the Cycle parking facilities and not to any physical alterations to the building whatsoever. Weekly List 1472/13 Week Ending 21st January 2011
3) The applicant is advised that details of the design and layout of the cycle parking facilities shall be in accordance with the Highway Authority, Essex County Council, parking standards. 4) I11 - Policies related to approval 5) I8 - Accordance with approved plans 11 ΠΡΙΕΣΤΣ ΛΑΝΕ ΒΡΕΝΤΩΟΟ ΡΕΤΕΝΤΙΟΝ ΟΦ ΒΡΙΧΚ ΠΙΕΡΣ ΤΟ ΦΡΟΝΤ ΩΑΛΛ ΒΡΩ/794/2010 Ward: SOUTH Zoning: Residential Parish: Policies: CP1 Case Officer: Mandeep Chaggar (Tel: 8/13 Week Date: 3rd February 2011 01277 312608) 1. Προποσαλσ Brick piers to front wall 1.5m high made up of a brick section with grey capping and red clay tiles. 2. Ρελεϖαντ Ηιστορψ ΒΡΩ/294/2010 - Reduce height of brick piers. Refused 21/06/10. ΒΡΩ/536/2000 - Erection of 1.7m to 2.1m high wall and railings at the front. Refused 14/08/2000. ΒΡΩ/89/2009 - Erection of seven 2.5m high brick piers (retrospective) Refused 30/03/09. Appeal dismissed September 2009. ΕΝΦ/ΒΡΩ/333/2008 - Erection of wall in excess of 1m in height adjacent to the highway. ΒΡΩ/89/09 - Retention of brick piers to garden wall - refused 30/03/09, appeal dismissed 19/08/09. 3. Χονσυλτατιον Ρεσπονσεσ Ηιγηωαψσ: Although not ideal in terms of visibility onto Priests Lane from the vehicle accesses to the site, the Highway Authority would not wish to raise an objection to this application given the width of the footway outside the site, the existence of the accesses and those to adjacent sites with similar deficiencies. Ηιστοριχ Βυιλδινγσ ανδ Χονσερϖατιον: o The boundary wall is somewhat ostentatious/pretentious and certainly out of keeping with the soft predominant boundary treatment in the area, i.e., hedges and timber fencing, the inbuilt lighting within the wall exacerbates matters. Weekly List 1472/14 Week Ending 21st January 2011
o However, the application is in relation to the brick piers to the front wall only, and I believe that these, considered in isolation of the entire boundary wall construction, will have negligible impact upon the setting of the listed building opposite. I therefore have no objection. 4. Νειγηβουρ Ρεσπονσεσ Two letters of objection have been received on the following basis: o Whilst the height has been reduced somewhat, they will remain obtrusive and detrimental to the visual amenity of passers by and the amenity of local residents. o They remain unnecessarily overpowering and in excess of the guidelines for front boundaries and are not in keeping with the local street scene. o In August 2009, the inspectorate in Bristol decided that the 2.5m pillars at 11 Priests Lane were inappropriate for "this modest house" and that there was no right of appeal. Pillars 1.5m high are not appropriate, particularly in a leafy lane where green hedges predominate. Just before the court case against him, the applicant did reduce the pillars to 1.5m and they still looked preposterous. They have now been reduced to one metre and there is no need for further discussion. I object to the architect's claim that "the height of the piers is diminimus in regard to impact". 5. Συµµαρψ οφ Ισσυεσ 11 Priests Lane is in a prominent location close to a major junction and the centre of Brentwood. It is also a sensitive location opposite a pair of listed buildings. Priests Lane is a narrow road bordered for the most part by high hedges, that retains an attractive semi-rural character despite its urban location. The detached property has an existing 1 metre high front boundary wall, which in isolation would fall within "permitted development". However seven brick piers have been built without the necessary permission. The brick piers were originally 2.5m in height and in dismissing an appeal against their refusal the Inspector commented that they would be very large and prominent in the street scene and would be unsympathetic to the character of Priests Lane. The piers as now proposed would be reduced to1.5m in height but they would remain bulky and uncharacteristic structures in this semi-rural lane that would detract from the character and appearance of the street.. It is considered the proposed brick piers would appear as an incongruous feature within the street scene contrary to Policy CP1 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan. Weekly List 1472/15 Week Ending 21st January 2011
6. Ρεχοµµενδατιον Refuse 1) The brick piers at the front boundary 1.5 metres high would be bulky and uncharacteristic structures that would be unsympathetic urbanising features within this lane that would detract from the character and appearance of the area contrary to Policy CP1 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan. Informatives 1) I12 - Policies related to refusal ΟΡΧΗΑΡ ΕΝΕ ΦΡΟΓ ΣΤΡΕΕΤ ΚΕΛςΕ ΟΝ ΗΑΤΧΗ ΒΡΕΝΤΩΟΟ ΟΥΒΛΕ ΧΑΡΡΙΑΓΕ ΗΟΥΣΕ ΒΡΩ/795/2010 Ward: BRIZES AND DODDINGHURST Parish: Kelvedon Hatch Parish Council Case Officer: Mandeep Chaggar (Tel: 01277 312608) Zoning: Metropolitan Green Belt Policies: CP1 GB2 GB7 8/13 Week Date: 3rd February 2011 1. Προποσαλσ Open fronted double garage with a pitched tiled roof. 2. Ρελεϖαντ Ηιστορψ ΒΡΩ/115/90 - Change of use to childcare nursery. Refused 26/03/90. ΒΡΩ/1152/89 - Erection greenhouse, shed and formation of car park together with formation of vehicular access to Frog Street. Refused 26/03/90. ΒΡΩ/793/89 - Erection of greenhouse and formation of car park. Refused 17/10/89. ΒΡΩ/430/78 - Double garage. Approved 23/06/78. ΒΡΩ/359/2001 - Use of existing garage as a games room. Approved with conditions 11/06/01. o Condition 3 states: Notwithstanding the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 1995, or any re-enacting Order, no building designed wholly or in part to accommodate motor vehicles shall be erected on the site, without the prior approval in writing of the Local Planning Authority. Weekly List 1472/16 Week Ending 21st January 2011
o To ensure long term compliance with the Local Planning Authority's strict policies for control of development in the Metropolitan Green Belt and in the interests of the amenities of the area. 3. Χονσυλτατιον Ρεσπονσεσ Ηιγηωαψσ: The Highway Authority would not wish to raise an objection to this application given the existing area available for parking within the site and the Highway Authority, Essex County Council, parking standards. Κελϖεδον Ηατχη Παριση Χουνχιλ: We note that the property falls within the Metropolitan Green belt. However, we feel that the proposed design and materials for the carriage house are in keeping with this rural setting. In raising no objection we would add the comment that we hope that the surrounding mature trees are left in situ and without any major pruning. 4. Νειγηβουρ Ρεσπονσεσ None. 5. Συµµαρψ οφ Ισσυεσ The application site is a detached dwellinghouse in the Metropolitan Green Belt. The proposed carriage house is proposed to the south east corner of the curtilage of the property. Planning permission was approved to convert the existing garage into a games room, and as part of the approval, Permitted Development rights were removed for the construction of building designed wholly or in part to accommodate motor vehicles. It was considered necessary to remove Permitted Development rights to protect the Green Belt and in the interests of the amenities of the area. Policy GB7 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan states garages and outbuildings will only be granted where they would be within the domestic curtilage and would be considered against Policy GB2 concerning the effect of the proposal of the Green Belt. Policy GB2 states that when considering proposals for development within the Green Belt, the Local Planning Authority would need to be satisfied that they do not harm the openness of the Green Belt. The proposed building would be 6m by 6.18m and a maximum height of 4.58m with a pitched roof. It is considered that by reason of the bulk of the carriage house it unacceptably harms the openness of the Green Belt, contrary to Policy GB2 and GB7. The carriage house by reason of its position would only be seen at an angle from the street and is screened by mature trees. It is considered it would not harm the character and appearance of the area and would not conflict with Policy CP1. It is considered that the garage amounts to inappropriate development in the Green Belt. No information has been included within the application that would clearly outweigh the harm as a result of inappropriateness and the effect on openness. It is therefore recommended for refusal. Weekly List 1472/17 Week Ending 21st January 2011
6. Ρεχοµµενδατιον Refuse 1) The application site lies within the Metropolitan Green Belt and it is considered that the carriage house would unacceptably detract from the openness of the Green Belt contrary to Policies GB7 and GB2. The proposal would be inappropriate development and there are no other matters of sufficient weight to overcome the harm due to inappropriateness and the effect of the proposal on openness. Informatives 1) I12 - Policies related to refusal 18 ΠΙΝΕ ΧΛΟΣΕ ΙΝΓΑΤΕΣΤΟΝΕ ΒΡΕΝΤΩΟΟ ΦΡΟΝΤ ΑΝ ΡΕΑΡ ΟΡΜΕΡ ΩΙΝ ΟΩ, ΤΩΟ ΣΤΟΡΕΨ ΡΕΑΡ ΕΞΤΕΝΣΙΟΝ ΒΡΩ/802/2010 Ward: INGATESTONE, FRYERNING & MOUNTNESSING Parish: Ingatestone & Fryerning Parish Council Case Officer: Catherine Williams (Tel: 01277 312617) Zoning: Residential Policies: CP1 H17 8/13 Week Date: 7th February 2011 1. Προποσαλσ This application is a for a front pitched roof dormer window A two storey rear extension. 2. Ρελεϖαντ Ηιστορψ None. 3. Χονσυλτατιον Ρεσπονσεσ Ινγατεστονε ανδ Φρψερνινγ Παριση Χουνχιλ: Objection - over development of the site. 4. Νειγηβουρ Ρεσπονσεσ None. Weekly List 1472/18 Week Ending 21st January 2011
5. Συµµαρψ οφ Ισσυεσ The application property is a semi detached bungalow located in a residential area. The neighbouring property no. 20 Pine Close has had a similar extension. The rear addition would extend immediately adjacent to the boundary with no. 16, it is considered that by reason of its depth it would not have an adverse affect on the living conditions of the neighbouring occupiers by way of being overbearing. The first floor extension would be set off the boundary with no.16 and although it would be a bulky addition, it is considered that it would not result in a detrimental affect on the living conditions of the neighbouring occupiers by way of being overbearing. The two storey element would be a similar depth to that of next door and would be set off the boundary and it is considered that it would not have a detrimental affect on the living conditions of the occupiers of no.20. The front dormer window would, by reason of its scale and distance from the eaves, satisfactorily relate to the existing roof. The Parish Council has objected to the proposal on the grounds that it is overdevelopment. However, there is a similar extension at the adjacent property and having regard to the size of the site a refusal on this basis would not be justified. Having regard to the above it is considered that the proposal would comply with policies CP1 and H17 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan. 6. Ρεχοµµενδατιον Approve Informatives 1) T1 - Standard time 2) M2 - Matching materials 3) The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with drawing nos. 18PC/03, 18PC/04, 18PC/05. (Ρεασον: For the avoidance of doubt.) 1) Reason for approval: The proposal would accord with the development plan policies relevant to this proposal, that are set out below. 2) I11 - Policies related to approval 3) I8 - Accordance with approved plans Weekly List 1472/19 Week Ending 21st January 2011
ΦΟΡΜΕΡ ΦΙΕΛ ΛΑΒΟΡΑΤΟΡΙΕΣ ΛΑΝ Α ϑαχεντ ΤΟ ΩΕΑΛ ΠΑΡΚ ΓΟΛΦ ΧΟΥΡΣΕ ΧΟΞΤΙΕ ΓΡΕΕΝ ΡΟΑ ΒΡΕΝΤΩΟΟ ΕΞΤΕΝΣΙΟΝ ΤΟ ΦΟΡΜΕΡ ΦΙΕΛ ΛΑΒΟΡΑΤΟΡΙΕΣ ΑΝ ΧΗΑΝΓΕ ΟΦ ΥΣΕ ΤΟ ΦΟΡΜ Α ΧΑΡΕ ΗΟΜΕ ΦΟΡ ΤΗΕ ΕΛ ΕΡΛΨ ΩΙΤΗ ΑΣΣΟΧΙΑΤΕ ΧΑΡ ΠΑΡΚ, ΑΧΧΕΣΣΩΑΨ, ΦΟΟΤΠΑΤΗ ΑΝ ΡΕΦΥΣΕ ΣΤΟΡΕ. ΒΡΩ/803/2010 Ward: SOUTH WEALD Zoning: Metropolitan Green Belt Parish: Policies: C8 CP1 CP2 GB1 GB15 GB2 PC1 T2 Case Officer: Kathryn Mathews (Tel: 8/13 Week Date: 7th February 2011 01277 312616) 1. Προποσαλσ Extension to existing building to provide an office, two lounge areas and a dining room: 19.2m in length x 6.8m in width and 3.85m high; glazed pitched roof and flat roof link to existing building. Link between existing buildings to provide entrance hall: 2.3m wide x 6.4m deep and 2.9m high; flat roof. Change of use of extended buildings to a care home for the elderly with 13 bedrooms. 2no. additional windows would be added to one of the elevations of the existing building. The materials to be used to construct the external surfaces of the extension would be stained timber cladding to the walls to match the existing building and a flat and glazed roof. A new 1.2m high close boarded fence would be erected along the boundary with the existing golf course. An existing greenhouse would be demolished and replaced with a parking area for 11 vehicles which would be provided with bollard lighting along with the access road proposed. The existing buildings have a combined internal floorspace of 278sq.m. The proposed care home would employ a total of five full-time equivalent employees. The application is accompanied by a Design and Access Statement. It is stated that the use of the building as a field laboratory ceased in 1998 and that the application relates to previously derelict buildings which would be brought back into use. In support of their application, the applicant states that the proposal would be a complimentary use within its surroundings, would result in the demolition of the existing, 'dilapidated unsightly greenhouse on the site' and would 'tidy the area up'. The application site is adjacent to the Weald Park Golf Course but was not included within the original planning permission for the golf course (reference BRW/758/91). Weekly List 1472/20 Week Ending 21st January 2011
2. Ρελεϖαντ Ηιστορψ ΒΡΩ/203/2009 - change of use of existing building (former field laboratories) to form new clubhouse and changing facilities for golf club - refused on the basis that 1) the development was inappropriate development within the Green Belt and no very special circumstances existed, 2) one of the buildings required extension and major reconstruction and both buildings required major alteration to their external appearance to accommodate the uses proposed contrary to Policy GB15 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan, and 3) as the golf course already has ancillary facilities including a golf club and changing rooms, there was no justifiable need for the proposed development contrary to Policy GB23 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan. 3. Χονσυλτατιον Ρεσπονσεσ Ηιγηωαψσ: Objects given the location of the proposed site, adjacent to Coxtie Green Road, which is a classified road, where there are no street lights nor footways, access to public transport is limited and where traffic is subject to no special or local speed limit other than that nationally imposed for single carriageways road, would mean that the majority of all journeys generated by the proposal would be by private vehicles. The proposal is not considered to be sustainable due to the reliance on this mode of transport which is contrary to the aims and objectives of Appendix G - Highway and Transportation Development Control Policies. Ενϖιρονµενταλ Ηεαλτη & Ενφορχεµεντ Μαναγερ: No objection subject to the imposition of a condition requiring the site to be investigated for contamination land, and if found, decontaminated. 4. Νειγηβουρ Ρεσπονσεσ One letter of objection has been received on the basis that the applicant does not own the adjoining Weald Park Golf Club, the proposed use is inappropriate due to the risk of injury to residents/visitors from stray golf balls and the risk of audible output from the use of the golf club for entertainment at numerous events (tournaments, functions and parties), they would not allow use of the golf club car park or vehicular access associated with the proposed use, and the building would be aesthetically out of place in a parkland setting. 5. Συµµαρψ οφ Ισσυεσ The application site is located within the Metropolitan Green Belt and a Special Landscape Area. Weekly List 1472/21 Week Ending 21st January 2011
The buildings which exist at the site and which are the subject to this application are not those which originally existed at the site as one of the buildings appears to have been significantly extended and both buildings have been the subject of major alterations to their external appearance including new windows and doors, new roofs and new cladding. These works required planning permission which was not obtained and therefore was a breach of planning control. As part of the previous planning application (reference BRW/203/2009), the applicant claimed that these works had been substantially completed for more than four years and, as such, were immune from any enforcement action this Authority may have chosen to take but no application for a Certificate of Lawfulness has been made. Notwithstanding this, it is considered that the proposed development is contrary to Local Plan Policy GB15 which relates to the re-use of rural buildings for commercial purposes, in particular, as: o the buildings require further major alteration to their external appearance (criterion ii); and, o the new use requires further extension to the buildings (criterion iii) As a result of non-compliance with the criteria contained within Local Plan Policy GB15, the proposed development constitutes inappropriate development within the Green Belt and so is contrary to Local Plan Policy GB1. Furthermore, the extensions to the buildings would reduce the openness of the Green Belt and harm the character and appearance of the Special Landscape Area within which the site is located. There may also be a need to erect netting along the southern boundary of the site to prevent stray golf balls entering the application site which would further reduce the openness of the Green Belt. Based on the advice of the Highways Officer it is considered that the proposal does not represent a sustainable form of development and would therefore conflict with Policy CP2 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan. However, given the existing use of the vehicular entrance to the golf club and the nature and scale of the development proposed, it is considered that the proposed development would not harm highway safety and so complies with Local Plan Policy T2 and the relevant criteria of Policy CP1. Based on the advice of the Environmental Health Officer, it is considered that the proposal would not harm the amenity of any nearby residential property. In response to the issues raised in the letter of objection received that have not been addressed above, it is understood that the applicant is still the owner of the adjoining Golf Club but has leased the site to a third party and retained a right of vehicular access to the application site. It is considered that, given the distance of the proposed care home from the existing golf club house (around 100m), any potential noise or general disturbance would not be significant and could be minimised through the imposition of appropriately worded conditions on the use of the golf club whilst the golf club and application site are within the same ownership. Weekly List 1472/22 Week Ending 21st January 2011
Χονχλυσιον o The matters advanced by the applicant in support of their application i.e that the proposal would be a complimentary use within its surroundings, would result in the demolition of the existing, 'dilapidated unsightly greenhouse on the site' and would 'tidy the area up', would not clearly outweigh the significant harm the development would cause through inappropriateness or the effect of the proposal on openness and the character of the countryside. For these reasons there are no very special circumstances to justify the granting of permission for inappropriate development. 6. Ρεχοµµενδατιον Refuse Informatives 1) The site lies outside the areas allocated for development in the Adopted Brentwood Local Plan and, furthermore, forms part of the Metropolitan Green Belt. The Adopted Replacement Brentwood Local Plan indicates, inter-alia, that in order to achieve the objectives of the Green Belt, planning permission will not be given, except in very special circumstances, for development for purposes other than those appropriate to a Green Belt. The proposal does not fall within those categories of development considered to be appropriate. 2) The proposed development relates to buildings which have been unlawfully extended and/or altered. The proposed development would require further extension to the existing buildings. The existing and proposed extensions would reduce the openness of the Green Belt and harm the character and appearance of the Special Landscape Area within which the site is located contrary to Policies GB2, GB15, CP1 and C8 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan. 3) The matters advanced by the applicant in support of the application would not clearly outweigh the harm the development would cause through inappropriateness or the adverse effect of the proposal on openness and the Special Landscape Area. Therefore, no circumstances exist which clearly outweigh the harm as a result of inappropriateness and the other harm identified and, therefore, very special circumstances do not exist to justify the grant of planning permission for the development proposed. 1) This decision is based on the plans which accompany the planning application: drawing nos. 752/LL1/350, 351, 352, 353, 354, 355, 356, 357, 358. 2) I12 - Policies related to refusal Weekly List 1472/23 Week Ending 21st January 2011
ΚΙΝ ΗΕΑΡΤΣ ΦΟΞΕΣ ΓΡΟςΕ ΗΥΤΤΟΝ ΒΡΕΝΤΩΟΟ ΡΕ ΧΛΑ ΠΡΟΠΕΡΤΨ ΩΙΤΗ ΩΕΑΤΗΕΡΒΟΑΡ ΙΝΓ ΒΡΩ/804/2010 Ward: HUTTON EAST Zoning: Metropolitan Green Belt Parish: Policies: CP1 Case Officer: Catherine Williams (Tel: 8/13 Week Date: 8th February 2011 01277 312617) 1. Προποσαλσ This application is to weatherboard the existing house. 2. Ρελεϖαντ Ηιστορψ None relevant. 3. Χονσυλτατιον Ρεσπονσεσ None. 4. Νειγηβουρ Ρεσπονσεσ None. 5. Συµµαρψ οφ Ισσυεσ The application property is a detached bungalow located on a large plot within the metropolitan green belt. The application would not increase the size of the property. The area comprises bungalows, with various facades but none of the properties are weatherboarded. Having regard to the varied nature of the street scene, it is considered that the proposal would not have an adverse affect on the character and appearance of the street scene and would comply with policy CP1 of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan. 6. Ρεχοµµενδατιον Approve 1) T1 - Standard time 2) M4 - No alteration to materials shown on plans 3) The development hereby approved shall be carried out in accordance with drawing no. REVO/650. (Ρεασον: For the avoidance of doubt.) Weekly List 1472/24 Week Ending 21st January 2011
Informatives 1) Reason for approval: The proposal would accord with the development plan policies relevant to this proposal that are set out below. 2) I11 - Policies related to approval 3) I8 - Accordance with approved plans 34 ΣΠΡΙΝΓΦΙΕΛ ΑςΕΝΥΕ ΗΥΤΤΟΝ ΒΡΕΝΤΩΟΟ ΧΗΑΝΓΕ ΟΦ ΥΣΕ ΦΡΟΜ ΜΙΞΕ Α1/Α3 (ΒΑΚΕΡΨ) ΤΟ ΧΟΜΠΛΕΜΕΝΤΑΡΨ ΗΕΑΛΤΗ ΣΤΥ ΙΟ ( 1) ΒΡΩ/805/2010 Ward: HUTTON EAST Zoning: Residential Parish: Policies: CP1 LT10 LT11 LT12 T2 TC19 Case Officer: Morne Van Rooyen (Tel: 8/13 Week Date: 7th February 2011 01277 312607) 1. Προποσαλσ Change of use from A1/A3 (Bakery) to D1 (Complementary Health Studio). The shop unit is currently empty and is one of a parade of six shop units. There are flats at first floor level above the parade of shops. 2. Ρελεϖαντ Ηιστορψ BRW/943/2006 Change of use from dry cleaners (use class A1) to a mixed use comprising bakers shop (use class A1) and café (use class A3) Approved 3. Χονσυλτατιον Ρεσπονσεσ Ηιγηωαψσ: The Highway Authority would not wish to raise an objection to the above application given the location, the previous use of the site and the Highway Authority, Essex County Council, parking standards. Ενϖιρονµενταλ Ηεαλτη: No comments at time of report 4. Νειγηβουρ Ρεσπονσεσ None Weekly List 1472/25 Week Ending 21st January 2011
5. Συµµαρψ οφ Ισσυεσ The proposal seeks the change of use of an A1/A3 bakery shop and ancillary café which is situated at 34 Springfield Avenue. The proposed use of the property would be as a complementary health studio (D1). Local Plan Policy S4 states that within the ground floor of premises in local shopping centres and parades, a further A2, A3, A4 or A5 use will be permitted subject to certain criteria being met where it would result in no more than two adjacent non-retail uses and it would result in no more than 40% of units being used for non-retail uses. The Policy goes on to state that, apart from changes of use to A2, A3, A4 or A5 in accordance with the Policy, change of use to any other non-retail uses will not be permitted. To assess this application the parade has been identified as No s. 18, 22, 26, 30, 34 and 38. Only ground floor premises are used in the calculation. The proposed use (Complementary Health Studio) falls within Class D1 of the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 2005. As the parade of shops currently exists the application site is bounded by an A3 and an A1use respectively and for this reason the proposed change of use to D1 would not result in more than two non-retail uses immediately adjacent each other and would comply with this part of Policy S4. The change of use would however result in 3 of the 6 units being non-retail which equates to 50% of the units being non-retail. This would be in excess of the 40% limit set out in Policy S4. In favour of the proposal, Local Plan Policies including LT10, LT11, LT12 and TC19 recognise that medical and health uses provide important local community facilities which is acknowledged as an exception to the general rule. Local Plan Policy LT11 states that the change of use or redevelopment of local services, including shops, will not be permitted unless it can be clearly demonstrated that the use is not viable and that there is no interest from an alternative similar use or it is to be replaced by more suitable facilities elsewhere within the local area. It is however considered that the applicant has failed to clearly demonstrated that retail use is not viable and that a similar alternative use could not be found. No evidence that the unit has been marketed for potentially acceptable alternative uses has been provided. As a result, it is considered that the proposal would result in the loss of retail floor space or other local community facility to the detriment of the attractiveness and the viability of this parade of shops contrary to Local Plan Policies S4 and LT11. The proposed change of use would by reason of its nature and scale not cause harm to the amenity of the occupiers of neighbouring residents. There are no dedicated parking spaces provided with the property, however, based on the comments received from the Highways Officer, it is considered that the proposal would not give rise to highway safety concerns. Weekly List 1472/26 Week Ending 21st January 2011
Having considered the above details it is concluded that the proposal complies with Local Plan Policies CP1 and T2. It is however contrary to Local Plan Policies S4 and LT11 and it is considered that there are no material considerations of sufficient weight to justify the grant of permission contrary to the development plan. 6. Ρεχοµµενδατιον Refuse 1) The proposed change of use from A1/A3 (Bakery store with ancillary Café) to D1 (Complementary Health Studio) would result in more than 40% of units in the parade of shops being occupied by non retail uses which would detrimentally effect the vitality and the character of the area, contrary to policies S4 part (ii) of the Brentwood Replacement Local Plan. Informatives 1) I12 - Policies related to refusal 7 ΧΛΑςΕΡΙΝΓ ΓΑΡ ΕΝΣ ΩΕΣΤ ΗΟΡΝ ΟΝ ΒΡΕΝΤΩΟΟ ΛΟΦΤ ΧΟΝςΕΡΣΙΟΝ ΧΟΜΡΠΙΣΙΝΓ ΝΕΩ ΡΟΟΦ ΩΙΤΗ ΦΙΡΣΤ ΦΛΟΟΡ Α ΙΤΙΟΝ ΑΝ ΦΡΟΝΤ ΟΡΜΕΡ ΩΙΝ ΟΩ. ΡΕΠΛΑΧΕΜΕΝΤ ΣΙ Ε ΕΞΤΕΝΣΙΟΝ ΒΡΩ/806/2010 Ward: HERONGATE, INGRAVE & WEST HORNDON Parish: West Horndon Parish Council Case Officer: Catherine Williams (Tel: 01277 312617) Zoning: Residential Policies: CP1 H17 H7 8/13 Week Date: 7th February 2011 1. Προποσαλσ This application is for a pitched roof front dormer window; First floor rear extension; Replacement side extension. 2. Ρελεϖαντ Ηιστορψ None. 3. Χονσυλτατιον Ρεσπονσεσ Ωεστ Ηορνδον Παριση Χουνχιλ: No objection. Weekly List 1472/27 Week Ending 21st January 2011