-
Agenda item
Land south west of Newts Way (HS/FA/20/00715)
Minutes:
Proposal
Construction of a single dwelling house which will include 3 bedrooms, work from home space, gardens, parking and access to Newts Way
Application No.
HS/FA/20/00715
Conservation Area
No
Listed Building
No
Public Consultation
Yes - 22 letters of objection; 12 letters of support; 1 petition of objection; and 1 petition of support.
The Principal Planning Officer, Ms Zulu, presented the application for construction of a single dwelling house which will include 3 bedrooms, work from home space, gardens, parking and access to Newts Way.
Since publication of the report a letter was received from barrister Simon Bell advising the Planning Committee not to follow the officer’s recommendations for reasons including, the report shows a concerning level of unconscious bias.
The site is located at the junction of Newts Way and Darwell Close. To the north there is a stream and equipped play area owned by Hastings Borough Council. To the south there are dwellings which front onto The Sedges.
The application site contains underground attenuation drainage pipes and tanks. The footprint of the proposed dwelling takes a rectangular shape as the majority of the site cannot be developed due to the underground pipes and tanks.
The proposal is modern in design and rectangular in form, consisting of a playroom and car park on the ground floor; open plan kitchen/dinner, living room, library and en-suite bedroom on the first floor; and office/bedroom and two further en-suite bedrooms on the second-floor.
The loss of green space is an important determining factor. The application site was designated a green space in a previous application; however, this green space was not reserved for the lifetime of the development in the Section 106 agreement for permission HS/DS/88/1079. Over time the site has become a valuable open space which positively contributes to the appearance and character of the area. The loss of green space to housing would prejudice the open nature of the site and be detrimental to the visual and special character of the area, contrary to policy.
It is determined that the development as proposed would not fit well with the traditional character and appearance of the surrounding housing estate. This is not to say that modern proposals are wrong, but that the development has failed to take the context of the area into consideration and does not improve the aesthetic of the area.
The site area is uniform in design, plot type and plot depth. Front elevations of dwellings in the area address the street and linear development is the norm. Given this it is determined that the proposed development is out of character with the established character and appearance of the area and is not appropriate.
The proposed development poses a risk to the health of an established mature oak tree which currently makes a positive visual impact on Newts Way.
It is also concluded that the development as proposed would cause direct overlooking into the gardens of neighbouring properties in direct contravention of agreed policies.
In conclusion given that the council cannot demonstrate a 5-year housing supply, paragraph 11 of the National Planning Policy Framework is engaged and therefore the positives of the scheme are to be weighed against the negatives. The positives being the gain of an extra dwelling house and the sustainable and green credentials of the scheme. The negatives are the impact on tress and neighbours, and the fact that the design is not appropriate for the area.
The negatives are considered to outweigh the positives and therefore the scheme is considered to be contrary to policy and recommended for refusal.
Councillors were shown plans, photographs and elevations of the application site.
Mr Daly, the lead petitioner was present and spoke in favour of the application. Mr Daly said he met the applicant after contacting her about the project as he is involved in a sustainable building materials start-up looking at new building products to make construction less environmentally damaging. Mr Daly said he has no financial or commercial interest with the applicant and supports the application because of his belief in its intrinsic value. Mr Daly proposed the committee support the application for the following reasons, there is a need for new home building to cover an existing shortfall; the site is currently wasteland; and there is a need to increase the supply of homes to stop local people being priced out of the local housing market. The application also deserves support because of its sustainable credentials. Smaller developers are pushing boundaries in environmental sustainability in construction. Mr Daly concluded that the proposal offers an opportunity to present Hastings as a town thinking positively about its environmental credentials.
The applicant, Ms Owusu, was present and spoke in favour of the application. Ms Owusu said the site was purchased on the open market and as previously mentioned was never registered under Section 106. The council arboriculturist has issued a note, available on the planning portal, which says he agrees with the applicant that tree T1 will not be damaged by the construction. Ms Owusu says she has engaged in a long process with the independent Design Review Panel (DRP). They have looked at the scheme and deemed it to be excellent. Fifty new drawings have been produced since May 2021, now available on the planning portal. The independent Chair of the DRP was so concerned about the recommendation to refuse that he wrote to say he and the panel were in support of the scheme. When the initial application for a family house was submitted Ms Owusu says it was intended to be her family home, however this will no longer be the case. In conclusion Ms Owusu said although there have been 34 objections, there are 40 signatures in favour.
Councillor Karl Beaney addressed the meeting as Ward Councillor. Councillor Beaney said that he wished to address the committee on behalf of local residents who are against development on this site. The applicant is trying everything they can to overcome local objections and the concerns of planning officers. The site is not suitable for development, the letters of support are all from friends, associates and colleagues of the applicant who do not live in the town and are unlikely to have visited the site. Local residents have said the imposing design is totally out of character with the local estate and street scene. The proposal removes the privacy of residents in The Sedges and there will be massive disruption to walkways, the local playpark and access roads. The applicant complains of anti-social behaviour yet a recent FOI request on Sussex Police reveals that no such crimes have been supported and there are no reports of fly-tipping or anti-social behaviour at this location. Councillor Beaney concluded by asked the Committee to accept the officer’s recommendation.
The Principal Planning Officer clarified that the involvement of the Design Review Panel was restricted to the proposal for 4 dwelling houses, not the application under consideration. It was also confirmed that no amendments were submitted for the application under discussion.
Councillor Bishop proposed that full planning permission be granted, seconded by Councillor Scott. The proposal was not carried (by 6 against, to 4 for).
Councillor Marlow-Eastwood proposed approval of the recommendations, seconded by Councillor Cox.
RESOLVED (by 6 for, to 4 against) that full planning permission be refused for the following reasons:
1. The application site is a valued open space based on its social, recreational value and visual appearance and with the adjoining equipped play space, together with the open space at the junction of Newts Way and Darwell Close, it makes a positive contribution to the appearance and character of this part of an established housing estate. This open space provides an important relief or break within the townscape thereby providing an important balance between open space and built development within the area as a whole. It also provides a valuable contribution to the green space provision as part of the wider estate development, which if lost, would be detrimental to the overall character of the area as a whole. Given this, the loss of this open space to housing development as proposed would prejudice the open nature of this area, its biodiversity and accessibility and would be to the detriment of the visual and spatial character of this part of the area with no exceptional circumstance being met, contrary to policies. Whilst an area of open space will be left following the construction of the dwelling, and whilst this area is proposed to be planted as a meadow, its size will be limited and will be compromised by the existence of the proposed three storey dwelling. Given that this area of land is proposed to be used as a residential garden and will be occupied by residential clutter and paraphernalia associated with the residential use of this dwelling, its amenity and recreational value will be compromised and a development as proposed will make a negative contribution to the visual and spatial character of this part of the area, with no exceptional circumstance being met. As such, it is not considered that the applicant has sufficiently demonstrated that there is a local need for a house in this location that outweighs the harm that would be caused to the nature conservation (Local Wildlife Site) and visual amenity interests of this site. As such a development as proposed would be contrary to NPPF policies and Local Plan Policies HN8, HN10, DM1, DM3, and DM4 of the Development Management Plan 2015, Policy EN2, EN3, EN6 and EN8 of the Hastings Planning Strategy 2014, and the National Design Guide 2019.
2. Given the siting of the development hard up against the plot boundaries to the north and east of the application site, coupled with the shape of the plot, its plan depth and form, and the fact that most of the application site is undevelopable, a development as proposed would run counter to the established plan plot depth characterising this area and would detract from the established grain of development found in this area. This is uncharacteristic of the layout of dwellings in this area as there is evidence of spacing in-between dwellings and plot boundaries, and all dwellings are a linear form of development that address a street, have good size plots with spacing in-between plot boundaries, and all front elevations of dwellings address a street and all dwellings have a front door that addresses a street. This application proposes a detached dwelling which does not address a street, and its front elevation does not address a street but faces a garden. As such, it is considered that a development as proposed would fail to have regard to the site’s context or the established pattern and grain of development in the area, would be an incongruous form of development that is out of keeping with, and harmful to the established visual and spatial character of the area, appearing as an alien and incoherent development within this established settlement, contrary to the NPPF policies and Local Plan Policies DM1, DM3, of the Development Management Plan 2015, and the National Design Guide 2019.
3. Due to the unsympathetic modern design of the proposed development with dominant angular form and scale, the modern design detailing with window arrangements that largely reinforce the building’s horizontal emphasis, together with the modern glazing that is proposed to the centre of the principal façade, it is considered that the proposed scheme is an incongruous form of development that is out of keeping with the established character of buildings in this local area and does not positively respond to the context of the surrounding site, contrary to policies. Whilst it is acknowledged that good design is more than visual impact, the policy specifically requires proposals amongst other things to take into account protecting and enhancing local character, to appreciate the surrounding neighbourhood, scale, height, massing and materials and that development should be of a scale, height and form that is appropriate to the location. In this case the proposed scheme does not positively respond to the context of the surrounding site. In addition, whist the proposed development would represent change and a degree of innovation, a development as proposed is not considered to be appropriate in this context. The proposed scheme is not considered to be of architectural merit, it is not sophisticated, not distinctive, has no interest, no rigour and is not delightful to viewers. Given the prominent location of the proposed development at the junction of Darwell Close and Newts Way, and where the gable end elevation of the development is important in views and would be clearly noticeable at the junction of Newts Way and Darwell Close, it is considered that a development as proposed fully visible from public vantage points would be a dominant form of development that is clearly noticeable and contrasts uncomfortably with the traditional buildings of the existing neighbouring properties thereby increasing the incongruity of the development within the street scene and the local area. As such, a development as proposed would fail to have regard to the site’s context and would be an incongruous form of development that is harmful to the visual amenities of the area and would detract from the established traditional character and appearance of this part of Darwell Close and Newts Way, contrary to the NPPF policies and Local Plan Policies DM1 and DM3 of the Development Management Plan 2015 and the National Design Guide 2019.
4. Due to the proximity of the proposed detached dwelling to a mature Oak Tree T1 and a group of Hazel Trees G2, it is considered that a development as proposed will put pressure on these trees to be pruned or felled in the future thereby having a detrimental impact on the health and life of these important mature trees, contrary to NPPF policies and Policy EN3 of the Hastings Local Plan – Planning Strategy 2014 and DM1 of the Development Management Plan 2015. In addition, given the proximity to the proposed detached dwelling to the existing mature trees, it is considered that a shade will be caused to the residential occupiers of this dwelling thereby resulting in a harmful impact on their residential amenities, contrary to the NPPF Policies and Policies DM1, DM3, of the Development Management Plan 2015.
5. Given that the application site adjoins the rear gardens of nos. 2-7 The Sedges, that the proposed development has principal windows facing these neighbours and that a balcony is proposed that will directly face the garden of no.7 The Sedges, and given the proximity of the proposed development to these neighbours, it is considered that the future occupants of the proposed dwelling will directly overlook these neighbours to the detriment of the enjoyment of their gardens, and detrimental to the enjoyment of their residential amenities, contrary to policies in the NPPF, and Policy DM3 of the Hastings Development Management Plan 2015.Note to the applicant:
Statement of positive engagement: In dealing with this application Hastings Borough Council has actively sought to work with the applicant in a positive and proactive manner, in accordance with paragraph 38 of the National Planning Policy Framework.
Supporting documents:
- MAP HS-FA-20-00715 Land South West Newts Way, item 303a PDF 393 KB
- HS-FA-20-00715 Land south west of Newts Way, item 303a PDF 226 KB
-
My council
Contact
Got a question about democratic services?
Content
The content on this page is the responsibility of our Democratic Services team.